Forum
« Ditmas Victorian really for sale? Water Meter Broken »
February 20, 2008
Renovating a house in terrible shape???
hi, we are considering purchasing a brownstone in terrible condition. It is, in fact, quite scary - you would NOT want to live there in its current state.... But, most (if not all) of the original detail is present - fireplaces; plaserwork; moldings; woodwork; etc... We understand how expensive this undertaking can/will be. However, I guess we lack "vision" and are concerned that we could make a truly beautiful house out of it given the current state of disrepair. As for the current state - the floor has been mostly covered with nasty lineloeum; the bathrooms look like something out of a bus stop; there are holes (water damage) in the ceiling; the staircase (original) feels a bit rickety at places.... Putting aside the cost of renovation which we know will run the range of $500 -$750K), we just want to make sure that this place is "salvageable". In that regard, I was hoping someone could post "before" and "After" pictures of their homes that looked the way I describe this one prior to their renovation.
I guess my concern is the following - we have seen beautiful homes that need a full renovation, but the homes looked like they just needed a bit of sprucing up. (Ie, painting, minor repairs, new kitchens/bathrooms). But because those homes also needed all new plumbing/electric, they needed a major renovation. This house, however, looks like it needs much more than sprucing up and we just were hoping to see confirmation that such a house could be rescued.
thanks!
Comments
Haven't you seen the pictures from the reno blogs? I would say that you might want to proceed slowly and get the place cleaned up to the point where you can live in it before doing anything. Sometimes it's helpful to live in it before embarking on a major reno. We did the opposite and I have some regrets.
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 10:27 AM
I looked at the renovation blogs, but I was hoping for something more like a shutterfly or flicker link showing pics of the house before and pics after.
10:27 - why do you suggest living in the house first? Why idd you have regrets?
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 10:31 AM
Assuming an engineering report does not show structural problems that make this house untenable, the difference between this scary-looking house and one that nicer looking ones you mention [that need all new plumbing, electric, etc,] are not as great as you'd think.
Posted by: Bob Marvin at February 20, 2008 10:31 AM
Because sometimes what you think you want is not what you actually want. I can give you pictures of our house pre and post reno but our house wasn't in the "Scary" category.
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 10:33 AM
If there are holes in the ceiling and a rickety stair, this place needs serious help. Your prediction for how much it will cost makes it sound like a huge job. Can it be done? Sure. It's not very common here for places to just be razed and a new building created.
However, that doesn't mean you want to be the one doing it. If it's that big a job, you should only take it on if this is the kind of work you love. Anyone here who does enjoy this will tell you it sucks and they were miserable along the way, but they like that sort of thing. From what you write, it seems you don't have the experience. If you have that much money, I'd say look for a place where someone with vision already got part of the work done and created a livable place.
There are places out there if you have some cash. Why take on a place that obviously needs so much and may not be worth it? What about this place seems so attractive?
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 10:40 AM
If it has ceiling and stair problems, the engineering report will show structural problems.
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 10:41 AM
You should check the renovation blogs. You'll get a good look at some before and after photos.
If you're talking $500K-$750K in renovation costs, that money should be able to repair ANY BK brownstone in ANY condition.
That said, you need to know that the house has good "bones"
i.e. no termite damage, good, solid foundation. Solid, straight joists, etc.
Get yourself a good inspector and take a careful look.
Aesthetically, the house doesn't need to look perfect. Sheet rock and plaster are not the things you should be making decisions on if you're thinking of putting more than $200k of renovations in.
Hope this helps.
Posted by: PutnamStoner at February 20, 2008 10:42 AM
You seem to be doing this a bit backwards. You want to rebuild the house up under the details. It's usually better to add the missing details to a sound house.
You say you lack vision. I guess that's ok if you have serious construction and engineering skills. You can use those to build up to the details already there. I think for most brownstone fans, they have the vision of the details and need a sound house to put them on. Maybe you're different. Are you? Can you take on this job? You can always get a designer to finish the details, if you can do the building work.
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 10:54 AM
"Sure. It's not very common here for places to just be razed and a new building created." Are you crazy? It very rare for a brownstone to be razed. - Gutted to a shell maybe, but rarely torn down and rebuilt.
Things to note: lineloeum may have protected the wood floors underneath and can be removed. Staircase - is it the treads or bannister or really the staircase that has problems?
I would agree with Bob Marvin, but get an engineer in to inspect. I would also ask lifestyle questions - is this a labor of love, that I want to invest some time in creating a home, or just a smart investment that will yield a nice place to live as a bonus. This should help you in making those sheetrock vs. plaster kinds of decisions.
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 10:54 AM
I think one real advantage of taking on this kind of project is that you can get exactly what you want since you have to replace so much anyway...you aren't paying for another's renovation or taste.
Like others have said, as long as the bones are good you should be fine.
Posted by: tinarina at February 20, 2008 11:00 AM
"Are you crazy? It very rare for a brownstone to be razed. - Gutted to a shell maybe, but rarely torn down and rebuilt."
That was exactly my point. I said "Can it be done? Sure." Because it is NOT common for people to raze a house. Then I went on to say just what you did: that this is a project to take on "if this is the kind of work you love."
What did you think I meant?
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 11:06 AM
The decription of the house you are considering seems to be exactly what our house was like when we purchased it. My blog has photos.
If you have $750K to renovate, thats a hell of a lot of money. You should be able to pretty much whatever you like.
That said, no amount of money totally relieves the stress/aggravation/time/energy you have to put into a renovation like this. You have to really want it and you have to have a vision of what your end game is.
Posted by: Mrs. Limestone at February 20, 2008 11:37 AM
Anything can be done.
You need the money and time.
Hire an architect for the vision.
I'm finishing up a renovation of a townhouse that we completely gutted. We took it down to the brick. We took out the old staircase, floors. We stripped it of all it's details. (There was nothing great - it was an SRO).
We re-built a new stair, put in an elevator, new floors, new everything. We're wrapping it up after 2 years of construction, being shut down by the DOB several times for monthes and a tenant still living in what would be the living room (couldn't be bought out).
So, hire an architect, tell them what you'd like and what your budget is.
Good luck.
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 11:53 AM
When we bought our house it had great details and virtually no mechanics. We did it bit by bit hiring a lot of people and a lot ourselves -- after 7 years we had kids and then the rest really had to be completely hired out. We are both designers and loved figuring out the aesthetics. We also learned that architects bring a level of discipline to a project that is critical. We have done beautiful work and learned a lot. My husband questions everyday whether it is worth it. I don't.
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 1:34 PM
With that kind of reno budget, you should just buy a house that's ready to live in.
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 2:07 PM
Where's the house and how much is it?
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 2:32 PM
From my own experience researching a house that needs a lot of work, your budget sounds generous - though I'm not sure how big it is, a critical variable. Also, restoring and working around detail is more expensive than being able to get rid of it if that's more cost effective. I've also learned that most brownstones have issues that an inspection turns up, so that's par for the course. My advice would be: if the purchase price is low enough to make it worth it to you, and if you relish the chance to make this yours despite the trade-offs of many headaches and stress, go for it. Otherwise, others may be right that you probably have the cash to buy a house in move-in condition.
Posted by: housesearcher at February 20, 2008 2:42 PM
Holes in the ceiling, and even rickety stairs do not necessarily mean structural damage. As mentioned above, a thorough inspection is needed. If you are serious about this, and have the funds to consider up to $750K for a reno, then spend the money to have an inspector who specializes in brownstones and/or old houses. They will tell you what is really important, and what is only a degree of cosmetic repair.
If you love the house, and think you can go through this process, go for it. Unless you are going high end for almost everything, you won't need $750K.
I've seen so many houses that I have fallen in love with, because of the details, the general layout. If you have the vision to see you and your family there, go for it.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at February 20, 2008 2:48 PM
"spend the money to have an inspector who specializes in brownstones and/or old houses."
Can anyone recommend such an inspector? Where does one find an expert brownstone inspector?
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 2:56 PM
OP here - if $500-750K seems high for a full renovation, what would be a better estimate? Note that it is four floors, needs electric/plumbing; new kitchen; new bathrooms; flooring; some plaster/ceiling repairwork; etc....
This would not be super-high end renovation, but not a cheap one either. Something along the lines of Mrs. Limestone's work.
thanks
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 4:05 PM
I don't think $500-750k is high. It's probably realistic.
You MUST hire a good structural engineer to give the house a thorough going over. There are many references on this site. Search the archive.
Our house was in the "scarey" category. No major upgrades in 45 years and severely neglected for much of that time. We renovated from the bottom up, creating a garden rental apt where we lived for a year while work continued upstairs. It was like living in THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE.
I strongly agree with Mrs Limestone that a major renovation is not for the faint-hearted.
You also need to consider that neither an engineer nor an architect nor a GC will be able to anticipate all the structural repairs that a house in this condition may need. I'm talking about replacing beams and joists, rebuilding the staircase etc. They can't always be assessed until you own the house and start opening up the walls and floors. So you need to budget for these contingencies. If you think you might not be up to that, no-one will think the worse of you and you may also be dodging a bullet.
Good luck with your decision.
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 5:26 PM
Let me guess,... 181 Adelphi?
Posted by: guest at February 20, 2008 5:42 PM
if you need everything new, probably cost you about 150-300k.
Posted by: armchairwarrior at February 20, 2008 6:30 PM
The renovation of a brownstone can easily take over your life--it becomes all you think about-all you dream about-all you work for. Some may find that reality is a beautiful thing-others their worst nightmare> The hard thing is figuring out which one will be the case for you--which is vitually impossible until you are already in it.
Posted by: HomeSweetstuy at February 20, 2008 6:37 PM
You definitely can spend less but having a larger budget to allow for contingencies is always a positive thing.
As an aside, Ive spoken to many people who tell me they aren't planning on doing a high end renovation and but then realize the things they thought would be average is actually really expensive. Im not sure if you are one of those people or not but before you say you don't plan on a high end reno, you really need to understand what your expectations are vs. what things cost.
Posted by: Mrs. Limestone at February 21, 2008 8:02 AM
$100-$300k is too low! It's EASY to spend $100k on a kitchen that's not particularly large or high-end. More than fancy finishes, the cost of labor has really skyrocketed in recent years.
Structural stuff that comes up only after the walls are open (like rotted beams or joists) sounds scary but it's not--there are straightforward solutions and the cost is generally reasonable.
Would you live in this house or rent nearby during the reno? The latter is less stressful but gets expensive very quickly. Especially since the reno will take longer than anticipated!
Posted by: tinarina at February 21, 2008 10:16 AM
Tinarina, I'm so glad I'm not in your income bracket, with its extraordinary expectations.
100k on a kitchen borders on obscene ostentation.
Posted by: cmu at February 21, 2008 10:26 AM
cmu--
Your assumptions about my income bracket are presumptuous to say the very least.
Have you recently bid out a kitchen requiring a complete mechanical upgrade, architectural services, and licensed contractors?
If so, you would know that $100k does not buy you "obscene obstentation." In my experience, it gets you mid-priced cabinets, appliances and a certain amt of DIY, like doing all the painting yourself.
Posted by: tinarina at February 21, 2008 1:59 PM
I'm trying to be...aaah...polite. So...you'd spend 100k on a kitchen and PAINT it yourself? Talk about penny-wise, pound foolish. How much does it cost to paint a room?!
Yes, I know exactly what I'm speaking of. I can quote youprices for all kinds of cabinets, appliances, etc. And labor.
I did specify non-structural, since obviously if you're including blowing out the entire back wall and making a 2-level loft space, you might, and I say might, reach 100k.
My assumption about your income is hardly something to get upset over! If anyone thinks 100k is anywhere *near normal* for a kitchen, they are, shall I say way, out of my league. And I make quite a decent living.
Posted by: cmu at February 21, 2008 4:15 PM
You can always rent a booth this spring at the Brooklyn Flea Market to sell off all your "details".
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 1:04 AM
We just made an offer on a 4 story, 3 family in south slope that needs an overhaul, but has good bones. We plan on living in the duplex and renting out the 2 units (2 small 2 bedrooms). I was under the impression that a gut renovation would run about $80 a sq foot, and with this 2,500 house I'd be looking at 200k. Am I being realistic? overprojecting? underprojecting? Any info would help! Thanks -Sara
Posted by: guest at March 2, 2008 10:36 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.