Construction customs and outcomes

In a recent post, House Prices and Quality: 1971 vs. 2023, Jeremy Horpedahl points out the difference in house prices by time values, which I really like for comparison purposes. He notes, “As you can see, in 2023 it took 31 percent more hours of work to buy a square foot of the median home, compared with 1971.” Furthermore, he makes the adjustments for the extra footage most homes offer today versus when the Brady Bunch lived in their swanky multi-level Californian home.

Then he goes on to say the quality of construction in the 1970s was modern and hence met a certain threshold of acceptability. I would argue that’s not the case. The 70s was a time of experimentation with new methods driven by a desire to enhance eco-friendliness. These materials and techniques did not provide the same longevity of use as the old country techniques from earlier in the century. This article cites a variety of issues. Focusing on a few mechanical components of a home will best exemplify how the norms and standards of the time affect the durability of the product, which is internalized in price.

Homes are expensive to buy and to maintain. One justification for paying the premium for new construction is that all major mechanicals are warranted for ten years, and most, on average, will last more than that. Heating and cooling systems have an average lifespan of fifteen years and cost $12-14K. Roofs keep homeowners dry for twenty-two years or so ($15K). Windows and siding can vary significantly depending on the quality of the materials.

For instance, in the photo on the right, the windows are original to the 1912 apartment building. They are wooden double-hung sashes that protected the lower level laundry and storage area from the weather for a century, serving the purpose intended. The windows on the left are vinyl replacement windows that were installed less than fifteen years ago. The dirty-looking glass is called a broken seal. Moisture has found its way through the double-paned structure, dictating that they are a failed mechanical by industry standards.

Window repair and replacement are among the more costly repairs in a home. The insert on the left probably costs about $3,500 in our market, just for one window.

The 1970s were full of experimentation with lower-quality materials. Hardwood flooring was replaced with plywood and then covered with carpet. Whereas wood floors are sanded and refinished for a beautiful crisp feel once every twenty years, carpet wears out in about a third of the time, seven years. My hardwood flooring guy tells me they have been back to refinish quarter-inch oak in one-hundred-year-old homes. There is the esthetic appeal to this home feature but it also translates to lower upkeep.

Solid stucco exteriors (stucco is a cement-like product that lasts for thirty years or more) are another application prevalent in homes built prior to the 1970s. Exteriors were instead clad in inexpensive plywood. This fibrous product does not necessarily fail in functionality after twenty years but no longer takes paint well and hence looks thrifty. Woodpeckers tend to find it appealing for sharpening their beaks as well.

By the late 1980s, homes built in the 1970s were highly unpopular. In part, their split entry style and vaulting with dark beamed ceilings had lost their cosmetic appeal to younger buyers. Buyers also longed for quality craftsmanship. The seventies homes were built cheaply, and consumers felt it. Most people wouldn’t have verbalized their selection as a commentary on an experiment in housing gone wrong, but they showed it in their choices.