Can an old home be saved? Are you the kind of person who gets ultra excited about a "fixer-upper" any chance you get to see one? Do you become insatiably thrilled whenever you see the opportunity to renovate an antique home Like there's just a new rush of energy because you know that this means untapped potential, and that you're likely to get value for your wisely and frugly spent dollar on this "relic"? Fact is, homes age, just as people do, and it becomes noticeable in elements such as creaking stairs, dusty, cracked furniture, and discoloured curtains. But, what I want to know is: are you the kind of person that can see the potential that is hidden beneath the facade of an "old home"? Or do you believe that an old home overall cannot be saved?
It really depends on the situation - old style homes can be beautiful - but renovations are certainly expensive - but for me it would really depend on how much structural damage is there and what needs to be done to it to restore it to a livable condition. While I love a fixer up - there is such a thing as a lost cause.
Most homes can be saved and definitely should be. Newer homes are beautiful too, but they aren't built to last like they used to. Depends where though, of course. Old homes are a picture of the past and should be respected and kept. Where I come from, the city was very proud of it's history and tried to maintain that. But people got greedy and made money from their old homes by renting them out to people that didn't care for them. Then they just got too expensive to keep up and now they're all getting run down and look horrible. It's sad. The areas where the people respected the homes and their history, look fantastic and the houses are stunning, with tons of old character. I lived in one for years with my husband, but no.. I wouldn't buy a fixer upper. I wouldn't be able to do them justice with what I really want to be doing with my days. But I would live in one again in a heart beat.
I live in one of those older homes that has been renovated so extensively over a long period of time that it would have been wiser to buy or build a new house. But there's that overpowering sense of being obligated to do what others have done before you and yeah . . . you just must fix what must be fixed no matter what it costs. Because it can be in some cases, more costly to renovate an older house and having practically witnessed it, I never would buy such a house, cheaper though it might be.
I believe that it is a wonderful idea for those people who have the time and resources for it. I think it is really useful that they can be creative and try out different stuffs with those home. I believe that one can have a wonderful time doing the renovation.
First, I find out how old is the completed construction date of a particular building. Then I see if there are any possible leaks, molds, flooding marks, animal infestation(s), rotting wood, breaking concrete, wall cracks, faulty foundation, and other things that do not make a quality home. After doing my own check up, if I'm still interested, I would hire a professional building inspector to further check what I had missed or glazed over. When all of this has been done, maybe then I can have a more specific perspective if this home is a beneficial asset or not. Most of the time, a simple self check of a building is more than enough to determine if one should purchase a real property or not, because there's no need to waste time on something that's not beneficial and move onto the next as soon as possible. Most homes I've seen that have not been abandoned for more than a year or so, are still good to renovate so long as it had proper ventilation, no water leaks, and mold did not infest the inside of the house or main support structures of the structure.
