Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
At least where I live, new homes are considerably more expensive than "used" ones. I'm sure that all the materials used to build the new ones is more expensive. Whereas many if not most of the houses in one neighborhood (I know, this is a low income city) sell for average $152.00/sq ft., the new ones are well over $200.00 likewise. Most of these houses I'm referencing that are the cheaper ones were built back in the 1970s.
Oh. If you want your house built the right way, you are going to have to contract it out yourself and watch every step, every operation, every purchase. I know in this day and time that's a hard thing to do. But with the experience I had 20 years ago, I wouldn't do it any other way. Doubtfully I will move again as the house is pretty good now. I'm commenting on the post about the materials being cheap on new houses.
In the areas of Mass and CT that I've lived in, the older houses are more in demand than the new ones. The older ones have style, are well built, often have unique features like a sun porch or a well landscaped yard and have stood the test of time. They're often in better neighborhoods too.
NOT in demand are big boxy, cheaply built McMansions. Around here we value older homes and we also value the true antique homes that are a few hundred years old. Much more interesting and unique than these cheap modern boxes.
That's not universally true, but if the older homes are more expensive, they are better built, in established neighborhoods so you can see what the neighborhood is like, and they have mature landscaping and fencing, maybe decks and other improvements that are worth money. Sometimes they are on larger lots so your neighbor isn't quite so close.
Also, the older neighborhoods sometimes have a much more desirable location, with the new subdivisions pushed out further from town and sometimes in marginal areas.
Anyone who had bought a couple of times, figures out that landscaping and fencing are a big expense and sometimes it is nice that someone else has planned it and paid for it, and those neighborhoods often look more attractive.
There is nothing wrong with buying new if you want a brand new house. Maybe it will be cheaper, or maybe not.
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
10,352 posts, read 8,578,998 times
Reputation: 16698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlock140
I haven't seen that in our area. Our median price is at $1.6 million, but the new homes start at about $2.1 million. One big difference, though is that most of our existing homes are on 12,000 sf lots, while the new ones are bigger homes but on little 5,000 sf lots. Our house for example is 3,000 sf on 12,000 sf lot, by in the nearest development the new homes are running 3,800-5,752 sf on lots as small as 3,500 sf.
I’ve seen the same. New houses being built have much smaller lot sizes. Also more cookie cutter.
I don't think that that's the case, anywhere in the country really, with a few very narrow exceptions. It all comes down to "location, location, location."
I'll give an easy example. My in-laws built their home 25 years ago. There is one in-fill lot "available" in their neighborhood, "available" in the sense that it hasn't been built on. The lot is owned by the neighboring homeowner who didn't want his view to be impeded, as the riparian rights could allow the lot owner to build a dock that cut across the view out of his back yard (the riparian rights are at a 135 degree angle from the edge of the rectangular lots.) At some point, that owner will pass away or sell. The reality is that the likelihood of someone putting in a pier that extends to the channel is highly unlikely; it would cost $200K and when you're through, you'd still be limited to a boat of very limited draft and height.
Whatever the house sells for, will be less than whatever the builder that buys the adjoining lot sells the new house for.
Existing homes seem to cost more because the dirt they sit on is more valuable. The location is more convenient, the schools are better, the yards are bigger, something makes it more desireable as a place to live, and it isn't the sticks and stones and shingles.
Pfft. Far too many 'custom' homes are using the same ready-to-assemble cabinetry and cheap LVT as tract-built homes.
Right.people think that just because you are custom building you get super high quality. Not true. It's all about what yoar willing to pay for it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
