This is not my beautiful house.

[constance]

I went on my blind date yesterday. In fact, it was really more like one of those 20-minute dating round-robin nightmares than an afternoon of coffee and window-shopping, and I saw three houses and peeked into the windows of another and didn't see a fifth at all. The three houses were each of them mighty fine, in their own way, but because I have a yen for May-December romances, it was the turn-of-the-century houses that were the most seductive.

I still like the red one best. It's a Craftsman, which as we all know is an open obsession of mine. It's a bit on the shabby side, but appears to me to be in fairly decent shape. 1750 or so square feet. Five fireplaces, some of which have been stripped in preparation for staining. It has a wide front porch (albeit a porch inexplicably COVERED IN ASTROTURF OMG). It has a kitchen and a butler's pantry, both of which retain their beautiful glass-front original cabinets. The bathroom is pedestrian, but serviceable. Big, slightly overgrown fenced backyard. Floor furnace heat, no central air. It has glittery ceilings. The floors are in decent shape, with no soft or rotten spots that I could see. The neighborhood is like the house, shabby but decent, and it deserves to make a comeback because the houses in it are genuinely charming. It's $10000 cheaper than

, which, objectively speaking, is by far the best buy. It's priced low because it's corporate owned, and that and the fact that the former owners were partway through a major renovation are the only things that pull it into my price range. It's in a comfortably middle-class to upper-middle-class neighborhood, full of well-kept homes. It's got some major sex appeal. It sits on a slightly larger lot than Bachelor No. 1 does, and it is also fenced. It's one of those Late Victorian/Craftsman Hybrids. The kitchen has been completely modernized. There are three fireplaces. It has what the realtor calls three bedrooms and I call two, and it's huge, around 2200 square feet, and all the rooms are big--I worry that it will be a little too much. It has a back deck, with positively dangerous steps that will have to be replaced before anyone can use them. Central air and heat. There are a couple of spots where the ceiling plaster will have to be patched, and the owners had knocked out a wall between a bedroom and the butler's pantry and finished the walls but the floors are still a mess, though the tile they'd planned on using is stacked neatly against the wall. It's got a wraparound porch and lots of windows (both houses have lots of windows, actually). The bathroom's big but awkwardly laid out, and the fixtures are pink, and the wall tile is pink and bright new-leaf green O_o.

It's a good thing to have two houses to crush on, right? I could seriously love either one. And so now I have to decide which one I'd most want to commit to and fight the onset of a major panic attack and set everything in motion.

*takes deep breath*

:::

Of course you have seen neither of these houses personally. But I'm curious to know: which do you like best?

Comments

[aubrem.livejournal.com]

One if fantastic but two is a keeper. OMG I love two. Are you really home shopping? If yes, more details! Is this you alone? Are you planning on staying there the rest of your life? A very long time at least? Will you have money to do the work that needs to be done? (pink fixtures! what were they thinking?)

oh god this is exciting. Beautiful liveably sized houses set in much greenery. Lovely, lovely, lovely.

[tofty.livejournal.com]

I really am home shopping! :D:D:D It was my original goal to own a house at 35. I won't make that one, but I might possibly manage 36. It is just me, yes, on a bit of a shoestring budget. (This is one of the reasons I'm preferring No. 1, right now; No. 2 is a little intimidating, project-wise, though in the end it is by far the more beautiful house. I think I will have enough money to do the work required for No. 2 if I hire the contractors sparingly--that is to say do most of the work myself, and only hire people to do the things I could not possibly do myself. Like the bathroom. And I do like doing home projects, so it might work out, but I would have to plan very, very carefully.)

As for how long I'm going to live in it: to be honest, I don't know. I am a nester by instinct, and tend to want to stay in places a long time if circumstances allow it, and really, I could see living in either house for the long haul. But circumstances do sometimes intervene, and my job situation is a little uncertain ATM, so I might end up having to sell out and move to a new city, eventually.

I would venture to say, though, that as long as I would be in my current town, I would be in the house I end up choosing. I am not the sort of person who'd want to trade up every few years.

It is exciting, isn't it?! But terribly scary, too.

[coco-palmolive.livejournal.com]

No. 2 is undeniably lovely, but it is not in move-in condition, and it would be easier, wouldn't it, just to move in and have time to sort out your belongings and not worry about fixing the floors or the ceilings? I imagine if I bought a house, I would immediately spend all my free time on home improvement, but I'd want that to be stuff like painting the walls or installing shelving or something.

There is nothing wrong with No. 1 (minus the Astroturf, and I was delighted yesterday when I realized that there's a house around the corner from me with an Astroturf porch), and it is adorable, and the neighborhood suits you more. I'm sticking with No. 1.

I wish I had a pretty house icon to use.

[tofty.livejournal.com]

WRT home improvement on move-in: yes! I can install shelves and paint with the best of them (or with the middlingly mediocre of them, anyway), but tiling a floor and building a flight of stairs for the back deck (it is a full flight, in back--the lot slopes down from the street) seem like a lot to have to have to tackle right away.

I can recognize why everyone loves No. 2. I mean, seriously, what's not to love? But from a practical standpoint--and even, if you take my reverse-snobbery into consideration, from an aesthetic one--No. 1 just works better for me.

[aubrem.livejournal.com]

I'm going to put in another pitch for bachelor #2 even though I know my argument isn't going to go over well in this crowd. : )

#2 sounds like a better investment.

It's generally a better idea to buy the lower house in a better neighborhood rather than one of the better houses in a more questionable neighborhood when it comes to resale. At least, that's what I've heard.

Also, the larger house is one you could grow into over the years. Money is tight when you first move into a house, especially your first, but it does get better. You don't need to do all that remodelling at once but over time, when it gets done, you'll have quite a gem on your hands - to either live in and enjoy or sell and make a tidy amount on.

The craftsman is lovely, and I can see its appeal for a single person of taste : ) (I myself am having fantasies about living there in some alternative life) but bachelor #2 ... more ambitious and more potential.

I know, investment is probably not your priority here but I felt the question had to be raised. Also, are the neighborhoods changing at all? Getting worse? Better?

All that aside, CONGRATUALATIONS!!! Yes, exciting. Do you have a cushion so you can sleep easily at night? Someone you could borrow a few mortgage payments off of just in case? My brother bought his first place recently and was a wreck - a year later though he's saying "why didn't I do this sooner??" It will be fine. : ) Whichever you choose you HAVE to keep posting lots of pictures re remodelling, decorating etc. I live in a newish, boring, completely characterless California home. I envy you deeply. : )

[tofty.livejournal.com]

No, investment is definitely not a priority of mine in the natural way of things. But as I said to font below, I can't escape the fact that I need to make it be, whether it comes naturally or not, and there is absolutely no denying that as far as dollars per square foot, overall condition of house, and character of neighborhood go, this is much, much the better house. Which is why it is definitely still in the running.

Especially, and I hate to say this, in a place as openly racist as Macon, where a mere racial mix in a neighborhood, all other things being exactly equal, can bring down the value of a house. I think the fact that this matters is completely obscene. But it does matter, here.

The neighborhoods: No. 1's neighborhood was quite nice when it was built, very similar in demographic to No. 2. It's come down in the world since then, but it was never terrible, and evidence shows that it's coming back, as "adventurous" people buy houses for their character and fix them up.

Your point about the financial struggle easing up within a few years is well taken, and I will definitely keep it in mind when I'm thinking more carefully about what I want to end up with. (And probably after that as well!)

[dahlia-777.livejournal.com]

Especially, and I hate to say this, in a place as openly racist as Macon, where a mere racial mix in a neighborhood, all other things being exactly equal, can bring down the value of a house. I think the fact that this matters is completely obscene. But it does matter, here.

I winced horribly when I read this - not at you but at the sucky world we live in. If it was me I would put this consideration completely out of my mind, and just pretend it didn't exist as a factor. But then, I live in an overwhelmingly "black" neighbourhood myself (albeit one with dozens of trendy bars and restaurants, and a fab cinema...).

I hear what you said below about practicality versus following your heart . But I think if all the practical essentials are met you're free to give your heart to a house. My sister bought a practical, boxy family house, and although she's content enough living there she'll never love it the way I love my little Victorian converted flat.

I've really enjoyed reading all the comments to this post. The London property market is such a tired old topic for me - I know it all backwards. But it's fascinating to follow a discussion about the US house market.

[tofty.livejournal.com]

I know what you mean about my comment about Macon. I mean, the neighborhood I live in, while not overwhelmingly black, is certainly majority black, and it makes me really angry, the things that people say to me, assuming I will agree with them because I'm a white girl. And while I would certainly not care one way or the other for myself about the demographics of the neighborhood--I mean, I do live where I do--in this case, I don't think I'll be living here for the rest of my life, and I have to consider how the house will sell, five years or however far out.

I am not going to go so far to the practical that I buy a house I can't love. I really think that both these houses are entirely lovable, and so my heart will play in either.... Okay, if I set the practical/lovable to a percentage, I think Bachelor #1 would be 40%/60% and Bachelor #2 would be 60%-40%. So it's just a matter of letting my head or my heart rule, while knowing that at the same time the other will get some say as well.

I am new-ish to the US housing market too! I have the feeling that we will all be experts by the time this is over, if I don't learn to curb my enthusiasm.

[dahlia-777.livejournal.com]

Someone at a party once made a crack about me "living in the ghetto" when I lived in a corner of this posh little town which, unlike the rest of it, had a high Asian population. I said to him "don't be so fucking racist!" and walked off. People told me later he was really embarrassed. I was glad :-).

Btw I just noticed my site is down. I didn't break it, mom, I promise!

[tofty.livejournal.com]

Oh, gosh! Will get on researching the website right away. It is down, man--as in gone.

As for reactions to racist comments: ahhhh, I have perfected my I-am-completely-horrified-but-much-too-shy-to-tell-you-so look. I had cause to use it just the other day, as a matter of fact, and it worked like a charm.