Why do people on dcum hate on new builds?

[Anonymous]

I like high quality. Not always easy to find in old or new homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Confirmation bias. They can't afford them and therefore, what they have must be superior.

LOL that isn’t confirmation bias

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because a lot of them are cheaply and quickly built monstrosities? If you can afford a truly custom home - from the site work to the planning and design to the finishes - more power to you. But I was appalled at the sloppy site prep and poor quality of the new build neighborhoods we toured...not to mention the fact that they all seemed to prioritize square footage over livable design or *gasp* a yard...

+1 All the new builds I see look the same. Big, ugly McCraftsmans in the same shade of blue with the smallest possible lawn. It's like people who buy those homes fear greenery.

+2 I don't like the enormous house on the small lot. And they all look the same inside.

Except that most posters who spew this kind of crap 1.) will never live in a new home and 2.) do their own shoddy DIY for their add-ons. Which is fine, but don't hate on what you can't have, just because you can't have it.

Incorrect. Some of us don't want it even though we can afford it. I need a yard.

Always with the "you're just jealous". Lamest possible response to someone disagreeing with you.

+1 We bought a more expensive house that had a tasteful smaller home and a beautiful yard instead of a huge ugly newer home with no backyard. We have kids, and one of the big benefits of living in the suburbs is for them to have room to run around outside.

You bought a more expensive smaller home? For a big yard to kids to play in?

You sound like you have 1 kid who's an infant. Once a kid hits 5, they don't want to be limited to their yard.

But glad you have an excuse to justify your expensive purchase.

The value of the money is the land in close in areas of DC. You can fill that land with a McMansion or a normal sized house with a yard. What buyers prefer is a matter of preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because they can’t afford them.

+1
Done. And done.

This doesn't make sense to me because aren't they mostly cheaper?

Like within a certain location maybe an infill new house would be more expensive, but most new construction is farther out on cheaper land, and most new construction is surrounded by other new construction.


I suspect the actual bricks and mortar of housing goes through a price curve where it's most expensive when it's new to 10 years and then it drops for 10 - maybe 40 and then it is likely to be torn down or renovated. But I'm sure it's impossible to separate that effect from general appreciation and swings in neighborhood desirability.

+1 Location. Location. Location. Anything else is secondary.

Not for everyone. I need to love the house first. I live and sleep in the house. Can't live in a shithole house just to be close to some strip mall.

I completely agree, but location means short commute to work/school to many people, not necessarily being close to a mall. I am debating between an original choice built before 1970 and a rebuild built after 2000 but with a 10-minute-longer commute... I understand some originals used better materials than rebuilds, but do the originals (especially those renovated ones) also tend to have more hidden problems such as old wires and rats?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because they can’t afford them.

+1
Done. And done.

This doesn't make sense to me because aren't they mostly cheaper?

Like within a certain location maybe an infill new house would be more expensive, but most new construction is farther out on cheaper land, and most new construction is surrounded by other new construction.


I suspect the actual bricks and mortar of housing goes through a price curve where it's most expensive when it's new to 10 years and then it drops for 10 - maybe 40 and then it is likely to be torn down or renovated. But I'm sure it's impossible to separate that effect from general appreciation and swings in neighborhood desirability.

+1 Location. Location. Location. Anything else is secondary.

Not for everyone. I need to love the house first. I live and sleep in the house. Can't live in a shithole house just to be close to some strip mall.

I completely agree, but location means short commute to work/school to many people, not necessarily being close to a mall. I am debating between an original choice built before 1970 and a rebuild built after 2000 but with a 10-minute-longer commute... I understand some originals used better materials than rebuilds, but do the originals (especially those renovated ones) also tend to have more hidden problems such as old wires and rats?

True. I think it's all about personal preferences.

There are many who work in DC who commute from West Virginia daily and they're perfectly happy with their long commute, they just listen to audio books on their drive and leave early. It's hard to hate on someone who chooses to get more house for their money, and vice versa. Always about personal preferences.

[Anonymous]

Some people are fine with shoddy craftsmanship, fake flooring and hollow core doors others hate it.

[Anonymous]

Not all new construction is the same. I think the new homes people crap on are the cookie cutter ones (pick one of four floor plans) with pretentious European wannabe neighborhood names OR conversely, the hideous McMansion monstrosities that are slapped up nearly to the lot line and totally out of character with the rest of the homes on the street.

Personally, I would love a new construction home, but a truly custom home on a large lot with yard space and in a desirable area is way out of my budget.

So I’d much rather have a nicely updated, even if modest, older home in a great location than some cheesey faux mansion.

[Anonymous]

Also, when someone buys a shack in a good location, I assume they value top notch education, short commute, and access to amenities, etc. and have to buy what they can afford.

But when someone CHOOSES to buy a house out in Devonshire or Wimbly Gate Estates (not real names, but you know those types of neighborhoods), I’m like wow, you actually picked this home for the house.

[Anonymous]

I want a yard. At least in Arlington, all of the new builds are disproportionately large for the lot. They look ridiculous. And the owners look especially ridiculous when they host a BBQ and all of the guests congregate in the 3' of space between their 8,000 sq ft house and the neighbor's fence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, when someone buys a shack in a good location, I assume they value top notch education, short commute, and access to amenities, etc. and have to buy what they can afford.

But when someone CHOOSES to buy a house out in Devonshire or Wimbly Gate Estates (not real names, but you know those types of neighborhoods), I’m like wow, you actually picked this home for the house.

When someone buys a shack, they become a shack-dweller in the eyes of 99% of the public, and no amount of rationalization is going to change that. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, when someone buys a shack in a good location, I assume they value top notch education, short commute, and access to amenities, etc. and have to buy what they can afford.

But when someone CHOOSES to buy a house out in Devonshire or Wimbly Gate Estates (not real names, but you know those types of neighborhoods), I’m like wow, you actually picked this home for the house.

Wrong. Usually, the schools in these Devonshire or Wimbly Gate Estates neighborhoods are rated higher than the ones in your shitshack DC neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, when someone buys a shack in a good location, I assume they value top notch education, short commute, and access to amenities, etc. and have to buy what they can afford.

But when someone CHOOSES to buy a house out in Devonshire or Wimbly Gate Estates (not real names, but you know those types of neighborhoods), I’m like wow, you actually picked this home for the house.

Wrong. Usually, the schools in these Devonshire or Wimbly Gate Estates neighborhoods are rated higher than the ones in your shitshack DC neighborhood.

PP was probably talking about Whitman and water Johnson?

[Anonymous]

We sold our lovely but small and outdated older home and bought a new build in the suburbs. Not a McMansion, 3000 sq feet, 3rd acre lot, track built not custom. I thought I would hate it - you know, no old home character and mature landscaping. Here’s the thing: I love it. Kids love it. Friends in the neighborhood, no constant house projects, enough outdoor space but no huge yard to consume weekends, great floor plan, closet space! Garage! I even love the prefinished hardwoods (gasp! I know) that are low maintenance and lovely. I’m so happy we did it.

[Anonymous]

It cracks me up when the responses are “you’re jealous,” or “you can’t afford it”....you’re talking to a stranger on the internet. You have no idea what they can afford. These responses are what a teenager or a middle school girl would say. There’s no substance to the argument. It makes me question your intellectual wherewithal when it came to choosing your house and its details and materials.

[Anonymous]

I don't like new builds because it seems like none of the designers went to architecture school. New builds today often have multiple styles going on and the homes don't seem balanced - they just seem "off" and it's not aesthetically pleasing to the eye. I also strongly dislike the trend of making the houses so large that the 3-car garage must go in the front of the home, dwarfing any entryway. That's just my opinion and why I don't like new builds. I grew up in a real Craftsman, so I'm a little biased!

I would love to build my own home, but I honestly do not trust any designers out there!