| 1 | https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1459011957.jpg
and which ones look the best and which ones are the worst looking
if they were all the same price? trade4us2 - 2020-12-26 18:22:00 |
| 2 | This message was deleted. gunna-1 - 2020-12-26 18:32:00 |
| 3 | In e the pitch looks wrong for an old build, could actually be linea or similar. tony9 - 2020-12-26 18:39:00 |
| 4 | tony9 wrote:
In e the pitch looks wrong for an old build, could actually be linea or similar. It was built in 1859 and is Kauri. Most cottages of that era had a pitch like that. trade4us2 - 2020-12-26 18:45:00 |
| 5 | gunna-1 wrote:
Old weather board houses, one looks slightly victorian, i would pick c but thats just my taste, i saw an old house done up to a mint hidden behind some trees and shrubs, that had a weird looking porch and some round oval windows, it was a similar era to those ones but it looked stunning, i only got a quick look at it.
C was built in the 1930s and has a higher value than the others, but it has more land than the others. trade4us2 - 2020-12-26 18:49:00 |
| 6 | This message was deleted. gunna-1 - 2020-12-26 18:53:00 |
| 7 | F would be my first, followed by C. apollo11 - 2020-12-26 18:57:00 |
| 8 | C is a California bungalow style and different era from the others. E is the only one I do not like. It may be old but the renovations have turned it into something you see every day. F D B A are my favourites.
I would have to check the location of C as some are prone to borer on inside exposed timber. Some have a bit of a US feel about them.
if you want to see some bargains, meaning you have to go to Covid-land though, see here
https://circaoldhouses.com/ Edited by shanreagh at 7:47 pm, Sat 26 Dec shanreagh - 2020-12-26 19:45:00 |
| 9 | A and F are my picks. B is plain, C is budget version of the style, D is a hideous modern half arse attempt, E is ugly with internal gutters. tweake - 2020-12-26 19:56:00 |
| 10 | tweake wrote:
A and F are my picks. B is plain, C is budget version of the style, D is a hideous modern half arse attempt, E is ugly with internal gutters.
C really needs a decent paint scheme, but I like the shape. apollo11 - 2020-12-26 20:05:00 |
| 11 | tweake wrote:
A and F are my picks. B is plain, C is budget version of the style, D is a hideous modern half arse attempt, E is ugly with internal gutters. D is Albert Einstein's house and was built sometime before 1876.
112 Mercer Street in Princeton. I like it, but then I like old houses. Edited by trade4us2 at 8:20 pm, Sat 26 Dec trade4us2 - 2020-12-26 20:19:00 |
| 12 | trade4us2 wrote:
D is Albert Einstein's house and was built sometime before 1876.
112 Mercer Street in Princeton. I like it, but then I like old houses.
i've only seen modern versions of that style and it still sucks. just horrible. tweake - 2020-12-26 20:31:00 |
| 13 | apollo11 wrote:
C really needs a decent paint scheme, but I like the shape.
some of the features like the bay window and two big green parts are fairly common, but the window awnings are awful, the entrance is awful.
lacking a lot of the nice details of that era and no veranda.
not my taste at all. tweake - 2020-12-26 20:36:00 |
| 14 | shanreagh wrote:
C is a California bungalow style and different era from the others. E is the only one I do not like. It may be old but the renovations have turned it into something you see every day. F D B A are my favourites.
I would have to check the location of C as some are prone to borer on inside exposed timber. Some have a bit of a US feel about them.
if you want to see some bargains, meaning you have to go to Covid-land though, see here
https://circaoldhouses.com/ From that site, here is an 1861 house similar to E
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1459057020.jpg trade4us2 - 2020-12-26 21:02:00 |
| 15 | tweake wrote:
some of the features like the bay window and two big green parts are fairly common, but the window awnings are awful, the entrance is awful.
lacking a lot of the nice details of that era and no veranda.
not my taste at all.
Yeah on closer examination you are right. The old girl is a bit plain. But I'm biased toward bungalows, and against more formal layouts like villas- purely on an internal flow perspective. apollo11 - 2020-12-26 21:17:00 |
| 16 | F has had a second storey added. My villa I owned had an almost identical bay window (2 actually). Thank goodness I got cheap paint at the time......never again. Lol. D looks American to me. lakeview3 - 2020-12-26 21:28:00 |
| 17 | trade4us2 wrote:
From that site, here is an 1861 house similar to E
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1459057020.jpg[
/quote]
nothing remotely like E ???? tweake - 2020-12-26 21:28:00 |
| 18 | shanreagh wrote:
C is a California bungalow style and different era from the others. E is the only one I do not like. It may be old but the renovations have turned it into something you see every day. F D B A are my favourites.
I would have to check the location of C as some are prone to borer on inside exposed timber. Some have a bit of a US feel about them.
if you want to see some bargains, meaning you have to go to Covid-land though, see here
https://circaoldhouses.com/
Yes, bungalows were often built with softer timber because the heart natives were pretty much used by then, so architraves and other interior finishes had copious borer. bryshaw - 2020-12-26 22:12:00 |
| 19 | I would likely pick B, depending on actual location and views, condition inside, and if the garage underneath has internal access from house(or could be done). Easily made look better from street, with shrubs and paint.
"A" would be second choice.
Not keen on E, F, or D in that order, but last place honors' go to C, by a country mile IMO, revolting style, regardless of the awful colours. Edited by gpg58 at 10:22 pm, Sat 26 Dec gpg58 - 2020-12-26 22:16:00 |
| 20 | B is soon to be knocked down and replaced by a modern house. The Chinese owners won't save any of it.
A is original and very nicely painted. I don't like the additions on F.
D and E are very old, from the time when they didn't put ornate frilly bits on houses. I don't like C at all.
So there we have it, everybody has different likes and hates. trade4us2 - 2020-12-26 22:39:00 |
| 21 | The member deleted this message. gunna-1 - 2020-12-26 23:02:00 |
| 22 | A B and F are my style. D is very much East Coast USA, I thought New England sort of thing before you said who's it was. E is quite colonial, not my style, C doesn't do it for me at all. |
| 23 | Three of the houses are in this photo. Most were built in 1912
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1459211083.jpg trade4us2 - 2020-12-27 10:46:00 |
| 24 | trade4us2 wrote:
B is soon to be knocked down and replaced by a modern house. The Chinese owners won't save any of it.
A is original and very nicely painted. I don't like the additions on F.
D and E are very old, from the time when they didn't put ornate frilly bits on houses. I don't like C at all.
So there we have it, everybody has different likes and hates. how old is B? tweake - 2020-12-27 11:01:00 |
| 25 | trade4us2 wrote:
Three of the houses are in this photo. Most were built in 1912
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1459211083.jpg[
/quote] thats interesting, my villa was built in 1912 and had the exact same details on the bay window as your photo F. Where are these villas? Mine was in Auckland. I streetviewed it and it’s still the same but someone has now removed the finial and repainted it. lakeview3 - 2020-12-27 11:39:00 |
| 26 | E almost looks earlier than 1912, I would pick late 1890s. lakeview3 - 2020-12-27 11:41:00 |
| 27 | tweake wrote:
how old is B? B is 1912 I think. I have a photo of it brand new on my computer with the date. I have spent hours looking for it. I have a million photos, and clearly it does not have a sensible name. trade4us2 - 2020-12-27 11:55:00 |
| 28 | lakeview3 wrote:
E almost looks earlier than 1912, I would pick late 1890s. As I said, it was built around 1859. It is on an 1863 map. All the houses apart from Einstein's house are in Arney & Shore roads. Edited by trade4us2 at 11:58 am, Sun 27 Dec trade4us2 - 2020-12-27 11:56:00 |
| 29 | trade4us2 wrote:
B is 1912 I think. I have a photo of it brand new on my computer with the date. I have spent hours looking for it. I have a million photos, and clearly it does not have a sensible name.
i'm surprised at that. i would have thought it would have been a lot later. however how much of it has been replaced over the years makes a big difference. tweake - 2020-12-27 12:01:00 |
| 30 | trade4us2 wrote:
As I said, it was built around 1859. It is on an 1863 map. All the houses apart from Einstein's house are in Arney & Shore roads. ok thanks interesting. Probably the same builder as my villa for that one in F then. I will find a photo of my one and post it here later. My villa was the grandest one on the street, there were a few of the earlier more simple ones from the late 1800s further along at the other end, but originally it would have been the only house with quite a bit of land around it. I was only the 3rd ever owner. The people we bought off had lived in it for over 50 years. Edited by lakeview3 at 12:13 pm, Sun 27 Dec lakeview3 - 2020-12-27 12:09:00 |
| 31 | Here's the photo of 29 Shore Road. Apparently built around 1911.
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1459271457.jpg trade4us2 - 2020-12-27 13:38:00 |
| 32 | trade4us2 wrote:
Here's the photo of 29 Shore Road. Apparently built around 1911.
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1459271457.jpg[
/quote] love these photos, my villa had the coloured glass window at the end of the veranda as well. It wasn’t a return veranda, just on the front, but I had another identical bay window around the side. The bay windows in mine had that square double hung window feature as well like the house in photo F. The windows on the front and at the side could be opened. Edited by lakeview3 at 1:42 pm, Sun 27 Dec lakeview3 - 2020-12-27 13:41:00 |
| 33 | trade4us2 wrote:
Here's the photo of 29 Shore Road. Apparently built around 1911.
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1459271457.jpg[
/quote]
notice the difference in size of the windows compared to A and B.
i would guess B had new windows installed maybe 60-70's. btw thanks for the pics, its interesting to see. tweake - 2020-12-27 13:52:00 |
| 34 | trade4us2 wrote:
Here's the photo of 29 Shore Road. Apparently built around 1911.
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1459271457.jpg[
/quote] Is that one B? shanreagh - 2020-12-27 14:00:00 |
| 35 | tweake wrote:
notice the difference in size of the windows compared to A and B.
i would guess B had new windows installed maybe 60-70's. btw thanks for the pics, its interesting to see. There were two identical houses like (B) built around 1911, and four identical houses like (A) built around 1912. (E) looked like this in 1990. It was too damn small, so a lounge was put on top.
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1459278788.jpg trade4us2 - 2020-12-27 14:07:00 |
| 36 | shanreagh wrote:
Is that one B? Yes
Why people would rip out stained glass windows is a mystery.
Up to 1860 houses were very plain. Then people added ornate metalwork and woodwork for many years. Around 1950 people removed most ornamentation. Now it's coming back again. Weatherboard houses are now in demand, since they are less likely to leak than the houses built in the 1990s that leak like sieves and are now being rebuilt. Edited by trade4us2 at 2:27 pm, Sun 27 Dec trade4us2 - 2020-12-27 14:21:00 |
| 37 | Where was house F? Shore or Arney Road? lakeview3 - 2020-12-27 14:40:00 |
| 38 | trade4us2 wrote:
Why people would rip out stained glass windows is a mystery.
. I'm guessing to let more light in as some stained glass windows block a lot of light.
Our cottage was built in the 1890's and it was very interesting seeing where bits had been added on when the weatherboards were replaced a few years ago. Was also a window above the front door which we had recovered as no need for it when we have plenty of light coming in that side of our home. Edited by shelleigh at 2:48 pm, Sun 27 Dec shelleigh - 2020-12-27 14:47:00 |
| 39 | lakeview3 wrote:
Where was house F? Shore or Arney Road? 116 Arney Rd. I nearly bought 108 Arney Rd for $35,000 in 1978 but I was outbid by a bank worker. I think someone ruined that house. trade4us2 - 2020-12-27 15:00:00 |
| 40 | trade4us2 wrote:
Yes
Why people would rip out stained glass windows is a mystery.
Up to 1860 houses were very plain. Then people added ornate metalwork and woodwork for many years. Around 1950 people removed most ornamentation. Now it's coming back again. Weatherboard houses are now in demand, since they are less likely to leak than the houses built in the 1990s that leak like sieves and are now being rebuilt.
a lot of those early ones any ornamentation was hand made, very expensive time consuming. so not many had any.
then came along machine tools that meant mass production which made it far more available and cheaper.
weatherboard may be in more demand but a lot of homes being built are still very minimalistic, modern boring boxes. tweake - 2020-12-27 15:11:00 |
| 41 | trade4us2 wrote:
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/ful
l/1459011957.jpg
and which ones look the best and which ones are the worst looking
if they were all the same price?
They're all gorgeous, I'd love any one of them! melagray - 2020-12-27 20:49:00 |
| 42 | trade4us2 wrote:
B is soon to be knocked down and replaced by a modern house. The Chinese owners won't save any of it.
A is original and very nicely painted. I don't like the additions on F.
D and E are very old, from the time when they didn't put ornate frilly bits on houses. I don't like C at all.
So there we have it, everybody has different likes and hates. It's a crying shame B is going to be demolished, I hate that. Why can't people just buy an empty section and leave these old houses for people who love them? melagray - 2020-12-27 21:10:00 |
| 43 | melagray wrote:
They're all gorgeous, I'd love any one of them! They are valued between $2 million and $3 million. Land in northern slopes Remuera is very expensive.
E has the best view from the top of its section:
https://trademe.tmcdn.co.nz/photoserver/full/1454600441.jpg trade4us2 - 2020-12-27 21:29:00 |
| 44 | melagray wrote:
It's a crying shame B is going to be demolished, I hate that. Why can't people just buy an empty section and leave these old houses for people who love them? The house the same as, and next to B, was taken away whole. But many of the weatherboards were rotten. It had no insulation, and very old wiring and plumbing. I think it was sold for $20,000. It had a new kitchen and bathroom. trade4us2 - 2020-12-27 21:33:00 |
| 45 | The member deleted this message. gunna-1 - 2020-12-28 01:24:00 |
| 46 | The member deleted this message. gunna-1 - 2020-12-28 01:55:00 |
| 47 | B the balustrading does not comply with the current building code.
Strongly advise you to screw the vendor down in price and steal the property. hammer23 - 2020-12-31 00:34:00 |
| 48 | hammer23 wrote:
B the balustrading does not comply with the current building code.
Strongly advise you to screw the vendor down in price and steal the property. The owner will be demolishing it soon. I don't think there is anything worth saving. The weatherboards are rotten. I don't like B C or F!
The balustrading in E was built just before the building code was changed, and it is not high enough. Edited by trade4us2 at 11:15 am, Thu 31 Dec trade4us2 - 2020-12-31 11:13:00 |
| 49 | trade4us2 wrote:
The owner will be demolishing it soon. I don't think there is anything worth saving. The weatherboards are rotten. I don't like B C or F!
The balustrading in E was built just before the building code was changed, and it is not high enough.
F is cute, what about it don't you like? apollo11 - 2020-12-31 11:19:00 |
| 50 | apollo11 wrote:
F is cute, what about it don't you like? I don't like the additions on the roof. trade4us2 - 2020-12-31 11:26:00 |
