Forum
« Cell Phone Antennas and rooftop installations Does anyone know of someone who immigrated to NYC before 1925? »
October 19, 2007
200+ year old homes
We talk alot about the 100+ yr old brown/limestone homes here in NY. I drank the koolaid and now own one.
How many homes in NYC are 200+ yrs old (or outside of NYC for that), that have sustained the test of time? The significant investments into our homes that many of us are making, I would presume suggests we think our homes (with good maintenance) will live to tell a story for another century or so.
What locations or properties can I/we reference to compare the potential lifespans (or at least my) of our properties (all things being equal of course)? Or are well just medium term investors?
Comments
Have you ever been to Europe?
There are lots of buildings that people still use every single day that are six hundred years old!
Brownstones are built to hold eachother up, and take a lot of neglect to completely destroy.
The reason you are, at best, a medium term investor, is because you are living on an island, and the sea levels are rising and the hurricane belt is headed Northward.
Your building will stand for a long time. If you are thinking 100 years out, I'd worry about the sea level.
http://flood.firetree.net/?ll=43.3251,-101.6015&z=13&m=7
Posted by: guest at October 20, 2007 7:41 AM
My old co-op on State Street was built in 1833. Structurally sound, but the floors were, ahem, slightly slopey.
Water is certainly an issue as above, but I think you'll find a lot of really old buildings facing some significant damage as AY is built. Lots more (and much, much heavier) trucks coming through our side streets that weren't meant for those purposes.
Posted by: Johnny at October 20, 2007 10:39 AM
oh please.
And you can't compare a 200 year old house to a one hundred year old one. Different construction, etc.
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at October 20, 2007 11:27 AM
There are types of architects that are consulted when banks give mortgages on large commercial and residential buildings, who tell the banks what kind of repairs will be needed 5 years later, 10 years later, 20, 30 etc. Perhaps find one of those guys to help you with your question.
There are 200 year old houses in other parts of NYC. Staten Island has some and the Queens and Bronx have some. I read in some paper a year or two ago about the couple who own and live in the oldest house still in use in NYC. They have a cemetary in their backyard. It's in Queens I believe. But their house is wood-frame. Not brick. There are stone houses and brick houses upstate that date back 200 years. Perhaps check out old old houses upstate instead.
Posted by: guest at October 20, 2007 11:54 AM
Also, the reason there aren't many 200 year old houses in NYC still in use or still standing is not about their longevity. But rather because they were all torn down to fit the population growth in NYC. All through Manhattan, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island and Brooklyn there used to be large mansions and farms. Which were torn down and parceled off to build office and apartment buildings and the rows of brownstones.
I just remembered the Lefferts farmhouse that was moved to Prospect Park. It is over 200 years old. It's wood frame. It's on Eastern edge of the park just below the zoo entrance. You can go inside and see it.
http://www.prospectpark.org/dest/main.cfm?target=../dest/leff_hist
It's the Lefferts family farm that was parceled off to create Lefferts Manor.
Posted by: guest at October 20, 2007 12:11 PM
In Manhattan two of the oldest homes are maintained by the Park Service and you can visit them. Although one, Hamilton Grange, is currently closed for renovation and moving to another location, the second is the Morris Jumel mansion. Both in upper Manhattan -- Google them for more info but at least you can get inside and see them.
Posted by: guest at October 20, 2007 12:48 PM
The Lefferts Homestead was originally built in the 17th century at what is now Flatbush Ave., between Maple and Midwood Streets. However it was burned by American troops during the Battle of Long Island in 1776 and rebuilt c.1783. I think the 17th century foundation must have been lost when it was moved to Prospect Park in 1918.
The Wyckoff farmhouse in East Flatbush, c. 1652, is the oldest house in NYC:
http://www.historichousetrust.org/item.php?i_id=14
Posted by: Bob Marvin at October 20, 2007 1:18 PM
Wait a minute... I don't think the OP is asking us whether or not 200 year old homes exist in NYC in general as much as she is asking after the general tendency for 100 year old homes to turn into 200 year old homes--whether or not we are "medium-term investors..."
Which is a totally silly question that I am having a really hard time wrapping my mind around!
How the f*** do any of us know what will happen in 100 years, and what on earth does that have to do with a realestate investment that should be thought about in terms of a lifetime, sure, but over a century????
The first poster had it right--better to wonder whether the land your house sits on will still be here in 100 years!!!
Posted by: guest at October 20, 2007 5:57 PM
OP here, 5:57 - let me try to clarify..
Some folks buy homes with the intention of passing it along to future generations (keeping it in the family) - putting down roots... Fully aware of the risks of environmental changes; societal changes, natural disasters, war, economic downturns etc. (that's why I said "all things being equal" - which I recognize is a stretch.)
Just really wanted to get a sense of the longevity of this housing stock, given so much of it is already so old. (Maybe I should have just put it in those words in the first place..)
7:41 and 12:11 provided some great perspective for me.
Posted by: guest at October 20, 2007 7:33 PM
For god's sake the Subway system is 100 years old... get out more often, and try taking a flight to europe.
Posted by: guest at October 21, 2007 6:38 AM
Although many people get pissed when anything European is compared to NYC, the answer to your question has to lie in Europe. Homes of all descriptions have been lived in there, some since the 14th century, and even older. Cottages, farmhouses, and houses in towns and cities, not just the large castles and mansions of the aristocracy. War, natural disaster, etc notwithstanding, there is no reason why a well built building cannot be maintained and be in use for hundreds of years.
NYC rowhouses, and 18th and 19th century homes in general, are youngsters compared to something built and continuously lived in since the Henry VIII was trolling for wives. If a home is maintained and taken care of properly, there is no reason for it not to last for centuries, barring aforementioned wars, etc. You have more to fear from eminent domain than from a well cared for historic home not being able to last for centuries.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at October 21, 2007 12:45 PM
Thanks MM
Posted by: guest at October 21, 2007 6:56 PM
I grew up in an English house that was built in the 1600s. With no foundations, no less -- pull up a quarry tile in the kitchen and see the earth beneath your feet! It was added on to in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. The most badly constructed part of the house? Without doubt, the 1920s extension. But really, it's all to do with maintenance. Although modern building techniques exist to create energy efficient, long-lasting structures, in reality most contemporary construction is rife with cut corners and poor finishes. 19th century rowhouses houses should far outlast the majority of low end buildings being thrown up nowadays.
Posted by: guest at October 22, 2007 5:12 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.