Reply to New vs old homes, what problems with you old vs brand new, they don't build them like they used to?

Forum Index » Real Estate

Reply to "New vs old homes, what problems with you old vs brand new, they don't build them like they used to?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I live in Glover Park, which was developed in the late 20s / early 30s.  It seems to me that, while the builders didn't seem to have used the very best materials available at the time, they made those rowhouses fairly solidly and built to last, not forever, but for a long time.  I doubt that a lot of old but post WWII construction will last as long as those pre-WWII homes.  [b]I think there was a structural break with WWII.[/b]  Before that, and particularly during the Depression, you have lots of unemployed good workers and relatively plentiful good materials, hence the good quality.  During WWII, good materials were much less abundant due to the war efforts, and bulders began to develop less stringent standards.  Upon the return of the soldiers and subsequent baby boom -- and housing bubble that began in the second half of the 1940s, the unfortunate trend of using poor quality materials to quickly build crappy homes took hold.

[b]I think there is a big difference in developments in the 20s and 30s, and developments in the 50s and 60s and later.[/b]

And, last but not least, while you can say that homes in a place like Glover Park are definitely not as charming as older homes in Capitol Hill or Georgetown or the like, they are markedly more charming that many of the cookie-cutter post-WWII developments  -- and more charming than the McMansions of current times.[/quote]

+1.  
"Character" and "post-WWII old homes" are mutually exclusive words.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics