New Home or Pre-existing Home? (Scranton, Denver: neighborhood, inspections, to live in)

[Katiana]

Yes, school districts are often a deciding factor in where to buy.

[go phillies]

Originally Posted by pittnurse70

A 30 yr old house can be a headache, not a charm. My house is 27 yrs old (have lived in it 18 yr) and it just needed new windows, will soon need a new furnace, on and on. We'll stay here b/c we like it here, but if we ever have to move, I'll go new or at least under 10 yrs old, which this one was when we bought it. The only thing older homes have better, IMO, is mature landscaping. Nothing beats a big old tree.

The in some ways, a very old house is better than a 20-40 year old house. Houses between 20-40 years old will need lots of things replaces....furnaces, etc. But so will all houses at some point. My 80 year old house really doesn't need much...there is a new furnace, new roof, new windows, new bathroom fixtures and newer wiring.

Anyways, its still cheaper and easier to replace things like a furnace or a roof than to just keep buying/building new houses.

[go phillies]

Originally Posted by ScrantonWilkesBarre

is about as aesthetically-appealing as Janet Reno in an edible thong, .

Great post overall, but you just ruined my breakfast with that one...

[Ohiogirl81]

Originally Posted by pittnurse70

The population of the US is increasing, and average family size is decreasing.

And the average size of a new home is increasing. That is waste.

but if we ever have to move, I'll go new or at least under 10 yrs old, which this one was when we bought it.

And 10 years after you move into that house, you'll need a new furnace, a new water heater, etc. I don't see the difference. All homes are going to need repairs and replacements eventually.

Originally Posted by SWB

I'm sorry I'm seemingly the only one on this thread that sees merit and value to infilling our established residential neighborhoods

Dude. You're not the only one.

[CosmicWizard]

SWB wrote:

I'm sorry I'm seemingly the only one on this thread that sees merit and value to infilling our established residential neighborhoods before automatically retreating to a "new frontier."

Sounds like you didn't read my posts!



Pittnurse79 wrote:

Most people don't like being told they are socially "irresponsible" for one thing.

Sorry if I ruffled your feathers with the social irresponsibility judgement. I really should have prefaced it with IMO.

blessings....Franco

[Katiana]

And 10 years after you move into that house, you'll need a new furnace, a new water heater, etc. I don't see the difference. All homes are going to need repairs and replacements eventually.

Too true, as my British friend used to say. However, sometimes it's what you can afford in the here and now that is important. When we bought our first house, we looked at many older homes (say 60+ years old) with much 'charm'. What we found was that these homes that looked so charming on the outside needed a LOT of work on the inside, not just new carpets and paint, but new kitchens and baths. They did not have insulation or double pane windows. Such repairs are expensive and in the case of insulation, difficult to retro-fit. For about the same price, we bought a 4 yr old house that needed none of the above. We did things to it that we wanted to do, such as replace carpets, build a shed, finish a bathroom, etc. We didn't have to rewire the place or put in new windows.

I agree there are many differences of opinion on this issue, but I don't think it is a moral issue to buy new or used.

[CosmicWizard]

Pittnurse70 wrote:

For about the same price, we bought a 4 yr old house that needed none of the above.

Regardless of its age, you bought an EXISTING HOME. Hat's off to you for being socially responsible IMO. That felt good!

blessings.....Franco

[JayJay]

Originally Posted by karen_s

While it's fine that you don't want to buy "used," the way you stated this sounds a bit elitist to me. Most folks in my town who live in less-than-maintained houses either (a) are tenants and have no control over this (we have no landlord licensing or stringent inspections in our municipality), or (b) simply cannot afford the maintenance on their home due to the rising taxes - and most of these are elderly people and my heart breaks for them.

I am far from being an elitist. For crying out loud, I'm a middle class blue-collar working American. If you misunderstood me, I was referring to my own experiences while visiting some open houses. Most of the homes that I saw on sale were owned by people who were still quite young in my eyes. I am not so naive to think that some homes are being neglected and put on the market due to rising property taxes. And also, I'm not so naive to understand that some of these neglected homes are owned by seniors.

[JayJay]

Originally Posted by toobusytoday

Karen, I don't think the other poster was being elitist.

Thank you for clarifying that. I was just making a point from my own observations and experiences while visiting some open houses.

[go phillies]

Originally Posted by greentown

I was waiting for the Bush bashing and name calling to begin. Thanks, you didn't disappoint!

I liked Bush at first. I'm pro-life and will only vote for pro-life candidates. I was pleased with Bush's Supreme Court appointees. However, I am deeply troubled by this war. Its senseless at this point.