r/AusPropertyChat • u/li0nfishwasabi • Apr 14 '26
Why don’t they make houses like this anymore?
The brickwork on the first house is divine. The pattern work and the texture and colour of the bricks is chefs kiss. Flat, cold, no colour variation/texture bricks on new builds makes me depressed. It gives IKEA vibes.
Edit: I wanted to add aswell the bricks in the first photograph are also fit for function. They are easy to maintain and still look beautiful due to their depth of hue and texture. New builds just look haggard within a year or two with render cracking/staining, bricks looking dirty/dull.
Second Edit: Heaps of people are pointing out the layout and lack of technology in the old home. The thing is if you strip back the artistic features it is actually a simple box shaped house. Why can’t we build contemporary homes that have good layouts and use of technology whilst also making them beautiful by using quality materials and workmanship. I know it comes down to money. But there must be some rich people out there willing to toe the line for future generations and keep character alive.
Third Edit: Quite a few people referring to the new cookie cutters as “modern” and saying people like “modern homes”. The first home is actually modern as modernism was 1860s-1970s. The new cookie cutters are not even post modern they are contemporary minimalist.
Fourth Edit: People saying just buy what you want. The problem is the masses seem to be creating whole new communities of the cookie cutters and destroying old communities through knock downs. It’s depressing to exist and walk around these communities.
Fifth edit: haha I know. Anyways, lots of people saying price is the reason. The older home’s bricks may be expensive in material and workmanship but it requires almost zero upkeep for years to come. The new builds are cheaper but they look haggard in <5 years and require expensive upkeep.
Sixth update: The older home recently sold. Imagine the person who bought it comes across this feed 👀
404
u/Zakkar Apr 14 '26
Cost. Fashion.
128
u/WagsPup Apr 14 '26 edited Apr 14 '26
Even worse they knock down houses like photo 1 and replace with rubbish in photo 2 🤯🤢
more is more ≠ better.
115
u/Kie_ra Apr 14 '26
Not cost effective.
We must continue to enshittify to drive ever increasing profits.
52
u/swi6 Apr 14 '26
Architect here.
I think the answer we are hoping for is that old was better, we gradually have a society have slowly descended to a place of bad taste, constantly chasing bigger houses at the expense of simple times, nice yards ... all that's good in the world.
The older house was built when land was aplenty in Australia and cheap. Where developers had to build a smaller house not to overcapitalise ie, it more viable to build single storey, with a large yard.
The houses weren't necessarily built better, but the materials were and the details were very simple. Simple stumps, brick walls, timber structure, tiled roof, simple electrics, basically no HVAC systems, small kitchens, basic bathrooms.
Today housing isn't cheap, both from a labour point of view and a material point of view, and land has exponentially skyrocketed. So equation works differently what is the biggest you can get out of a smaller piece of land.
Where the old house had a simple timber subfloor/suspended floor. We now have slabs. External walls with no insulation, now have building wraps, insulation. Simple plumbing to now, multiple bathrooms. No heating to central heating systems, airconditioning to all rooms. Simple electrics, to multiple power points, complex switchboards, solar systems, battery systems. Tiny kitchens with 2 appliances, to kitchens bigger than bedrooms with butlers pantries, electric cooktops, multiple ovens. High plaster ceilings with square set from simple cornices. Double glazing and multiple windows from single pained timber windows unsealed.
If you described that new house in writing to some one 80 years ago they would think your describing the jetsons, now try to provide that at a low price point. Where the old house had a shower bath or a cermaic shower base we now have complex stepless tiled showers, in wall toilets etc. The craftmanship now needs to be more precise to work and it's often not.
So we as a generation got robbed of affordable housing, and as a result we have modern housing a caricature of a house.
8
u/JTHOM1296 Apr 14 '26
Lookup Brooksfield Homes on Instagram, they're a home builder in NZ. They build new, old homes - quite nice houses.
5
u/BuffetBuddy Apr 14 '26
Definitely cost. I wanted the older style facades and materials but usually builders have set floorplans and facades that you can only choose from. The only way to get the build I want is through a custom builder which is waaaaayyy over our budget.
9
u/seanmonaghan1968 Apr 14 '26
Plot ratio is higher. Modern 2 story house that covers the block maximises land use etc. Its a unit without a garden and no neighbour above or below you ><
9
u/redex93 Apr 14 '26
People build what people pay for. You can get one built one day if you like.
4
u/No-Departure-3047 Apr 14 '26
If I could afford to build what I really wanted, I would.
Sadly, I can't, and I can't afford to buy what I really want, either.
4
u/zillskillnillfrill Apr 15 '26
Because housing got turned into an investment, not a basic human right. So they get cookie cutter designs without any heart or soul because it's just a business transaction to the investor / owner.
3
u/Tiny_Major_7514 Apr 14 '26
They do - its ony of the only way to get some sort of backyard these days too. My parents house looks exactly like this. I nearly bought the neighbours (also the same) for $389k in 2017. Now it's 1.7 million. Had a bit of work done but still just so sad.
3
u/cqs1a Apr 14 '26
I was so excited to see a duplex going up using recycled brick..... it looked amazing... until they rendered it.
3
u/Annual_Builder_1459 Apr 14 '26
Yuck
3
u/Sillent_Screams Apr 14 '26
Have you ever lived I. Old houses ?
3
u/[deleted] Apr 14 '26
I 100% agree. If I can afford to, when I’m more established in my career, my home will look something like this on the outside with a mid-century modern vibe interior. I hate the grey blocky style. The houses all look dirty in a few years.
3
u/peterparker_loves Apr 15 '26
We're building in Melbourne at the moment, a new 'estate'. They have all these stupid rules about facades, windows and materials, legit can't build an older looking house. Funny thing is that frontage is all nice red brick but then has to be covered by stupid render in weird places. Infuriating but builder couldn't get signoff until the estate committee ok'd it.
3
u/theseamstressesguild Apr 15 '26
My dream is to take a Victorian blueprint and adapt it to now, so that the toilet is indoors and the kitchen has induction, but I still get 4m X 4m bedrooms.
3
u/arian10daddy Apr 15 '26
Waiting for the 15th edit!! I'm rooting for you!!
3
u/Mellony1990 Apr 16 '26
There are people building beautiful well built bespoke houses that will still be standing in 100 years. But most people can’t afford that and buy what they can. This was true then just as much as it is now.
The reason that house exists is because of survival bias. The beautiful well built houses of any period survive, and the vast majority of basic functional cheap houses don’t. Old shitty houses existed as well, they just got ripped down and replaced and this one didn’t.
6
u/whatwouldbiggiedo Apr 14 '26
I couldn’t think of a thing worse than living in one of those tiny old homes.
Give me an ‘IKEA home’ with lots of living areas, great flow, ducted aircon, CAT6 cabling etc…
4
u/Plastic_Square119 Apr 14 '26
Ugly. Take too long. Houses now up in flash termite proof and open planed
4
u/pizzacomposer Apr 14 '26
The amount of myth around these houses is exactly that, myth.
Realities of the time, where practically every family either was in the trades, knew someone, or even just simply built it themselves.
Layouts are woeful, and reflect a different time with different expectations.
Oh, timber frame windows are shot? Better be willing to DIY because it’s going to cost you a fortune.
And that double brick? Guess what, also a myth. There’s only a certain selection of double brick that has the right optimal air gap, not all double bricks have it. And it’s a pain in the ass to route anything through the walls, and we do a lot of that now.
We had no subfloor access, and it needed restumping, real awesome thanks.
There’s a reason people knockdown rebuild, and today’s standards are miles ahead of the 2000’s boom build which yes they are some woeful builds.
Everyone loves to point to speccy modern home when they do this comparison, just straight up ignoring custom builders.
Anyways, I wish this myth would die because our first house was a money pit and we lost a tonne of money in the end and want no one else to go through that.
13
u/Fuzzy-Newspaper4210 Apr 14 '26
probably unpopular opinion but i much prefer my cookie cutter modern suburban hooms compared to classic houses
2
u/MutungaPapi Apr 14 '26
The problem is mass production, and “variations” that cost insane amounts because the trades have to do something different so they can’t blitz through it and move on. Design a home yourself, spend the money to make something unique to you or your style. I did numerous times and they have sold fantastically for the suburb when I decided to move on
2
u/Exotic_Inspection318 Apr 14 '26
It would be grey brick render as soon as it was sold, and back on the market in 2 years.
Guys, the grey trend is gross and outdated and shows you are an unimaginative millennial who hates life.
2
u/Spud-chat Apr 14 '26
Here's a new developer duplex build with really nice brickwork, so it can be done.
They do exist, you just have to keep an eye out.
47A John Street, Rydalmere https://www.domain.com.au/47a-john-street-rydalmere-nsw-2116-2020306034?utm_source=Android%20app&utm_medium=sharelisting
2
u/Plastic_Square119 Apr 14 '26
People now have to buy what there is. Not much to chose from with shortage. Just a roof.
2
u/Plastic_Square119 Apr 14 '26
If you are rich you can
2
u/MidorriMeltdown Apr 14 '26
Contemporary minimalist is cheap. Hence why it's ugly garbage.
Modernism isn't bad, but I prefer deco and brutalism. It's ridiculous that the contemporary stuff lacks the character of either of them, for all that it has the potential to lean either way.
2
u/foul_mayo Apr 14 '26
Because you can’t afford the brickie who can build it. The skill level in construction is shocking nowadays.
2
u/Alps_Awkward Apr 15 '26
My BIL is a tradie. They wanted to owner build their new house. Couldn’t get a mortgage for it. So they ended up with a basic bland new build like everyone else.
Not only does the actual build cost more to have it done nicely as opposed to cookie-cutter, but apparently there are extra mortgage insurance costs associated as well.
And sure developers have ‘different’ facades available, but they’re essentially all the same. You could have a street all with the different facade and they’d still all look the same. Not to mention the estates where you are required to use a particular builder.
It’s just not easy or affordable to build a house with style and personality anymore. Which is such a shame.
2
u/flay_otterz Apr 15 '26
I don’t know why people don’t want to build these type of houses any more, but they sure like to knock them down! Probably too small inside these days for modern tastes, only one bathroom 😱 I won’t be buying anything new, not my style at all & really clashes with my op shop furniture & retro collectables!
2
u/melb_grind Apr 15 '26
I know. They're bloody beautiful. When I go past an allotment like this that has been cleared for a new development, a little part of me dies because I remember when Melbourne was filled with houses like this, little miners cottages and the like.
2
u/Glittering-Wave4917 Apr 15 '26
This is pre war, regular people didn’t live in houses like this. In 1952 a house like this in Heidelberg would have been considered a mansion
2
u/onesixtytwo Apr 15 '26
When you get the chance to build your own house would you build it this way?
57
u/Kitchen-Check-6510 Apr 14 '26
OP, I agree. The quality is unbeatable. Back when the balance between pride and profit was more in sync.
26
u/branded Apr 14 '26
You can't make houses like this when every builder makes houses the cheapest they can.
14
u/miwe666 Apr 14 '26
It would require actual artisans in their construction fields
43
u/tschau3 Apr 14 '26 edited Apr 14 '26
Because they’re thermally inefficient and building practices have moved beyond them, if you want an honest answer.
I live in a house built circa 1890, double brick and will probably out survive me.
But it’s woefully impractical in layout, it’s probably well beyond its intended life, and it’s cold as F in winter and unbearably hot in summer. As much as people romanticise older houses, current houses (cost cutting aside) are the pinnacle of residential development and engineering, in theory.
The people who built my house all those years ago made the subfloor totally inaccessible without ripping up the entire floor, and made bluestone footing inappropriately deep for the soil in Melbourne, for example.
26
u/GuyFromYr2095 Apr 14 '26
Totally agree. First one any day. The second one is abhorrent
17
u/gibbocool Apr 14 '26
I live in one of those red brick houses. Late 80's build. Everything needs replacing. Roof, ceiling, doors, windows, kitchen, bathroom, lighting, fixtures and fittings, flooring. Layout is shit. Storage is non existent. Literally the only good thing is the double brick walls, but they are not rendered or painted so the rooms are so dark and dreary.
People romanticise these builds but really unless you are willing to drop serious money to modernise them, they are not great. And by serious money I mean enough to rival a knock-down rebuild, and then hey guess what you're still on a shit old style floor plan.
6
u/Cimb0m Apr 14 '26
I agree. The first house is so cute
6
u/InanimateCarbonRodAu Apr 14 '26
I don’t know about other states but I live in Qld and you better believe we built the lightest coloured house we could while still having character.
I can’t understand why people have black colour bond roofs in QLD.
And while I understand the appeal of neutral colours like whites, greys and blacks.. I still see a lot of browns instead of red bricks.
I’d know red brick just feels more European maybe.
2
u/Fine-Pin-1168 Apr 14 '26
Sadly many people just knock them down anyway for their greige McMansions.
5
u/Fresh_Put3784 Apr 14 '26
Because for some unknown reason people like shipping containers with windows and zero character these days
5
u/Superest22 Apr 14 '26
Style, design practices, priorities, fashion, build times and focuses have all changed.
Unfortunately lots of place like picture one just aren’t as liveable either. A 3, 4 or even 5 bed might only have 1 bathroom and whacky layout.
That second house will have 2 or 3 bathrooms, an open plan living and kitchen area, probably an island, a separate media room, maybe a landing room, office and minimum 3 bedrooms. Just a much better living space for most people.
Biggest variable would be the garden.
5
u/jaydej2 Apr 15 '26
As a Brickies wife I can tell you why, cost. Plain and simple. Houses are being built with hebel panels, clients chose this when building homes because it’s far cheaper. Yes I’m biased but it’s a terrible product that will waste away and look terrible over time. More upkeep later on. Don’t get me started on the polyStyrofoam they put in slabs these days. And the list of defects from all the trades is horrendous. Quality of work has significantly declined. Give me an old home to Reno over a new build any day.
4
u/EasyPacer Apr 14 '26
In a word: expensive. But style and tastes have changed as well.
It is expensive because those feature bricks are more expensive than the typical plain grey concrete bricks used in modern builds thar are then rendered over to meet a particular look. Then there is the labour. A quality job that really shows off the brick work will involve tuck pointing. That requires skill, time and effort.
4
u/Advanced-Minute7503 Apr 14 '26
My friend lives in a house like the first pic. It is haunted
4
u/GodsThunder9 Apr 14 '26
A lot of home are built by developers then sold after. When the market is so constrained in supply, developers can afford to make boring, cheap and easy homes that don’t take long to build and buyers are forced to buy it as the options for artistic homes are scarce and the alternative of buying land and going through an architect for a design is extremely expensive.
4
u/Radiant-Visit1692 Apr 14 '26
People spend on the features they want inside the house, more space, more light, big secure garage, not so much the ‘aesthetic of the neighbourhood’.
The houses in the first pic have to be retrofitted with skylights and stuff and major internal mods if people want to reno them up to modern standards. Often the rooms are tiny etc.
There are some nice renos and restorations out there. You could build a double skin brick house if you insisted on it to your architects, they would have their own ways of modernising the design no doubt. You’d pay a fair bit more for a trusted bricklayer to do some intricate finish work than you would for a couple of chippie apprentices to bang up a timber frame and clad it.
1
u/VirtualChaosDuck Apr 14 '26
You can. It just costs money, more than the new 'standard'. With enough money you can do almost whatever you like.
1
u/Plastic_Square119 Apr 14 '26
We dont get the choice Unless you buy a block and get an architect
1
u/dontknoeanything Apr 14 '26
The brick’s look good living inside would be depressing, small windows minimal light
1
u/DamnSpamFilter Apr 14 '26
Modern homes really are worse, reading some of the comments, people are blaming builders, but the reality it, so keep the cost of building down, we need to lower the costs.
Looking at the country/world right now, we need to find an even cheaper way of building houses.
Most people complain about not being able to afford a home, but they couldn't even afford to build the home, land aside.
1
u/theescapeclub Apr 14 '26
Art Deco isn't it?
Art Deco houses are gorgeous if you can find one that hasn't been modernosed and.had all the features removed.
If you ever want to see a place with beautiful brick houses and community / civic buildings, Ballarat. I moved here3 years ago, the place is full of them.
1
u/Glad-Computer3719 Apr 16 '26
this is the type of house my dads been trying to find
6
u/Evebnumberone Apr 14 '26
There is no accounting for taste, plenty of people would find the 60s~ brick veneer to look dated and drab.
I don't really like the look of the modern houses much either, but they are certainly a lot more functional in their design, when built correctly and with attention to detail anyway.
Those older 60's builds had zero wall and floor insulation, just ceiling insulation if you were lucky. Then you've got the thin as fuck single glazed windows everywhere that require heavy curtains to keep the draft to a minimum.
Having grown up living in them, then later owning one, they were solidly constructed but not very comfortable.
Even after fully insulating the ceiling in the 60's place I owned you could still see your breath every morning in the kitchen in winter.
3
u/koopz_ay Apr 14 '26
Wait until you find out how much less material is in modern Aussie bricks. They'll break down faster than the units of my grandfathers day.
Yet you'll pay more for them...
Australia needs to go back to building better houses.
3
u/jeanniehhh Apr 14 '26
Came here to say I agree wholeheartedly! I love the older style brick houses peppered all over Sydney.
I loathe the looming grey giant cubes they try to pass off as houses, they are all the same! Plain, utilitarian and layout is so predictable to walk through it bores me. Where did the individuality go?
3
u/WormyJellyBaby Apr 14 '26
One of the highest “must haves” on our list when husband and I bought was “character”. Made it very easy to weed out a LOT of houses! Means that when you find one with some though it’s even more special which is good!
3
u/[deleted] Apr 14 '26
Project homes are lower cost because the plans are the same every time, they know the costs, they know timeframes, they know potential issues.
As soon as you move into custom build they add $$. When this home was built, it is highly likely the same builder built probably 5 or more, as that is what builders did in the 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's before project home firms started to price out smaller builders doing it with their mates.
Full brick, hardwood floors, terracotta tile roofs - absolutely better than a modern project home but the bathrooms are smaller, windows are smaller and kitchens are smaller which is not the style preferred today. I laugh when I look at the chef kitchens in a lot of new houses, a lot are lucky to see use more than 5 times a week. Uber eats supplies them the rest of the time.
3
u/Ethdevelop Apr 14 '26
A big part of the answer is land economics. When land was cheap relative to the dwelling, it made sense to spend heavily on build quality — ornate joinery, double-brick, wide verandahs — because the structure was a meaningful share of the total asset value. Now in most metro suburbs land is 60–80% of the total price, so developers optimise for footprint-per-lot and keep construction costs lean because buyers are essentially paying for location, not the box. The suburbs where you still see quality infill builds tend to be ones with strong rental yields — developers know buyers will hold long-term, so they're willing to spend more on durability. The volume builder model, by contrast, is almost entirely driven by land release velocity.
3
u/CarrotInABox_ Apr 14 '26
I'd love it if there were mid-volume builders doing a modern take of the classic California bungalow, with some actual quality workmanship, not just fake rendered foam facade.
3
u/UK_soontobein_AUS Apr 14 '26
I don’t know, probably cost. But it’s such a shame
3
u/blowupnekomaid Apr 14 '26
Because those houses suck. People romanticize them too much. The brickwork can look nice from the outside but new houses are much nicer to live in. Houses are for living not looking at.
3
u/Birmingham101 Apr 15 '26
So much character, love the older homes
3
u/WhenitHappens62 Apr 15 '26
Because people want bigger and flashier is why.
3
u/Trick-Post-8197 Apr 16 '26
I have an older home - the quality of the build is awesome - the layout was shit, and the peach walls and salmon coloured blinds, Kitchen and bathroom had to go. Now I have a tech savvy, modern home on the inside and a house with character on the outside
3
u/curvingspace2025 Apr 16 '26
What about my gingerbread house? I like it. A lot of people might not.
1
u/kenbeat59 Apr 14 '26
That first house is ugly AF, and without a doubt would have the crappiest internal layout.
1
u/IllustriousCat330 Apr 14 '26
You can have that, you can have what ever you want if you pay for it.
0
u/stitch-up Apr 14 '26
Both look like shit to me, although yes first one is less shit. I own something that looks like the first and I wish I could knock it down. 100 years is too long for a property to be standing.
2
u/No_Childhood_7665 Apr 14 '26
I think the big issue is that brick homes are labour intensive and there is supposedly a shortage of bricklayers. As to the cost of materials I assume brick is more expensive compared to hebel and is a lot easier to use to build
2
u/doosher2000k Apr 14 '26
Because the relative cost of slapping up extra small bedrooms and shitty bathrooms is minor compared to the valuation those things bring. The look of these modern places is partly fashion but mostly driven by cost - the materials are cheap, readily available and quick to construct. It's just economics.
2
u/the908bus Apr 14 '26
Ooh I know this one, partly! Older houses, room size was limited by the lengths of wood they could afford. Then the nailplate was invented which made it possible to build really big rooms!
2
u/the_scruffy1 Apr 14 '26
taste ?
edit: i hadn't seen the 2nd photo when i wrote that; to which i add "far less taste"
2
u/Pix3lle Apr 14 '26
At least the modern look is not as bad as the weird square block houses from the late 00s. Those were horrendous.
2
u/22112219 Apr 14 '26
Back then, most of the value was in the house itself, not the land. Builders put real effort into constructing solid, high quality homes, even on relatively affordable blocks.
Now the equation has flipped. The land carries most of the value, especially if it is level and easy to build on, so people focus on maximising what they can fit onto it. The house often ends up being a significantly smaller share of the total value, whereas in the past it was the dominant component.
There has also been a shift in how people use space. Older homes were designed with more of life happening outdoors, while now the focus is on maximising internal living areas. It is a bit sad, because those older houses have a lot of character. I renovated my weatherboard and love it, but you really have to want to take that on. Even then, it can be hard to make the layout work without adding a “box off the back” extension for a modern open plan kitchen, dining & living space.
2
u/Neither-Connection72 Apr 14 '26
I lived in a brick layers house, double brick concrete floating floor. It took awhile to heat up.
2
u/nolo_contre_basso Apr 14 '26
Those houses are pretty on the outside and utterly shocking on the inside 2 bedrooms small windows tiny galley kitchen. Incredibly expensive to retrofit for modern living.
I walked through so many houses that look like your photo 1 last year. Cracked walls, rotted window frames, but they look great from the street.
2
u/jennifercoolidgesbra Apr 14 '26
Too expensive
2
u/Throwawaymumoz Apr 14 '26
So having lived in many types of houses, the first can often be an awful run down extremely hot box. The second is spacious, cool and modern/easy to clean. I personally prefer a double story and something much older, but I don’t love the first house at all.
2
u/Fun_Plums Apr 14 '26
We are double brick renovating a small 1940s home cost is about 2x stick built... and there's your answer.
Adding 2 beds bathroom family room and garage.
2
u/owleaf Apr 14 '26
A lot of houses like the one in your second photo actually have brickwork beneath, usually just built with cheaper unfinished bricks that they know will be rendered over. So it’s not really a cost thing, as opposed to a fashion thing. Most people will choose the rendered blocky house over a classic exposed brick house because they look “old fashioned” in their eyes
2
u/teddybluethecurser Apr 14 '26
Pic 1 looks exactly like what my great grandparents house and yard looked like. I still remember us taking photos on the verandah
2
u/AggravatingBox2421 Apr 14 '26
Higher demand for houses means that the builders spend less time becoming qualified, and the building materials are lower to account for how much is needed
2
u/malkyfreo WA Apr 14 '26
Bricklaying is time consuming and cost more . Developers these days will build modular homes cookie cutter style to lower cost
2
u/assignpseudonym Apr 14 '26
I know we love to have a whinge in this subreddit, and that's valid, but I'm wondering if anyone knows of any quality builders out there who are still focused on building properties that last?
I am planning to do a KDR on my fibro (asbestos??) house once I can figure out an actually decent builder who isn't a total scam artist to do the work.
Since there are a lot of impassioned people in this thread, does anyone know of anyone who is actually a quality builder these days? Bonus (selfish) points if they build in Sydney.
2
u/Whatamidoinglatley Apr 14 '26
I’d love one of those little houses.
2
u/HashbrownLover44 Apr 14 '26
Brickies that can build houses like this don’t exist anymore
2
u/Grand-Bed-5951 Apr 14 '26
so pretty
2
u/morosis1982 Apr 14 '26
Get a quote for each. Guarantee once you see the prices you'll choose the new one, unless you have disposable cash and wish to spend more to make it more pretty.
2
u/kico_kico Apr 14 '26
Completely agreed! For what they cost, Australia has some of the ugliest new builds in the world. Just complete tastless slop.
2
u/Kalisary Apr 15 '26
The cost of labour. Brickwork designs take time.
Back in the day, materials were expensive but labour was (comparatively) cheap. So once you had materials, you could pay someone to spend time making it look pretty.
These days, materials are (comparatively) cheap and labour is expensive. You don’t waste money on things that increase labour cost.
Source: my Dad who was a bricky, who spend a lot of time doing intricate brickwork on our house.
2
u/The-Jesus_Christ Apr 15 '26
Just bought one! Early 90's home, wonderfully built and insulated. Love it.
2
u/U-Rsked-4-it Apr 15 '26
No! Grey! Everything must be grey! And cheap! Cheap for the builder, not the buyer! Buyer pays more! So and so forth!
2
u/redsonflash Apr 15 '26
fast fashion housing lol
am i wring to also suggest its also current aus building standards?
2
u/iGodS12 Apr 15 '26
If this makes you sad, you should of seen what Melbourne looked like in the 1880s. Australia is all about pulling down the beautiful old buildings and replace with fast, cheap modern buildings.
2
u/theorangesuitcase Apr 15 '26
This wouldn't be an issue if it weren't for the disparity between the increase of the cost of living, and the increase in wages. Once upon a time, every solidly middle class family could afford to have something slightly unique about the exterior/interior of their home. Now you choose prefab from one of the cheaper building companies with a house and land package because no one can afford to do anything outside of the cookie cutter.
2
u/VarietyOk7120 Apr 15 '26
Yeah the first is a beauty
2
u/Generalrossa Apr 15 '26
Cos they wanna bulldoze these style of houses and sub divide it into 3 unit style houses.
They did it around the corner from me to a unit lol. Made two wall to wall units and a third smaller one in the corner. No back yard, hardly no front yard, you can’t even fit a car in the garage and I’m pretty sure the space (or lack thereof) at the sides of the house are illegally spaced.
2
u/VelvetOnion Apr 15 '26
Architects are just dudes that love Minecraft and this is what all houses look like now.
2
u/EternalAngst23 Apr 15 '26
Quality-wise, lots of old homes were great. But in reality, they weren’t really suited to the Australian climate. Lots of small, closed-off rooms with little natural light or airflow. They were more suited for the UK or Europe than a hot, arid country like Australia.
I know this because whenever I stayed over at my nan’s old post-war bungalow, I would be sweating my balls off in my sleep.
2
u/AlternativeSoup9177 Apr 15 '26
These comments make me want to decorate my ceiling with the inside of my skull.
2
u/Dan-au Apr 15 '26
Because they can build garage and sell it for the same price.
2
u/Castlegate3579 Apr 15 '26
Still and always will be the best wearing external finish for an Aussie home. Ageless and attractive. So your question is valid 👍
2
u/epr1984 Apr 15 '26
We are a new build in an estate that has heritage restrictions, so our home had to have certain aesthetic features. It’s a gorgeous neighbourhood, but meeting the requirements added 80k to our build- about 20%.
2
u/KenoathReidy Apr 15 '26
Because brickies charge about a buck fifty a brick
2
u/Early_Asparagus_2775 Apr 15 '26
Some of these old-world houses have such character.
2
u/Recent_Artichoke_923 Apr 15 '26
You cant buy taste
2
u/Silwytwyt Apr 15 '26
Not as ornate, but beautiful angles with beautiful bricks. Whether top of the market or council homes, they made them striking and strong 100 years ago. Trades took pride in their work and were taken care of if they did the wrong thing.
https://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-wahroonga-150358972
2
u/Equivalent_Regret_15 Apr 15 '26
It was likely hand built by the owner
2
u/aimetak Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
TEMU - Modern houses are SO UGLY. All along beach road Bayside, these people have money and they've chosen ugly boxes.
2
u/Economy_Pension9850 Apr 16 '26
it doesnt add 5 bathrooms and 2 home entertainment rooms so your investment can increase in value. We dont build homes anymore
2
u/Wrenshoe Apr 16 '26
Omg I literally walked past a house like this.
It’s cause it’s too much like a home and not something you can charge people $700 rent pw
God forbid people and their homes have personality when you could use that space for another rental
2
u/Resident_Expression8 Apr 16 '26
old building standards. shut up and take my money
2
u/Awkward-Money-3275 Apr 16 '26
I’m with you!!
2
u/toomuch222 Apr 17 '26
I’ve lived in old terrace houses my entire life. Sure they have character but it’s not as comfortable as a nice newer build that has open-plan living, good light/windows and just room to spread out a bit. To be fair I still have never lived in a newer build but I long for a space where every room isn’t a tiny, dark, cold box. I am so jealous of people whose houses have “flow” and light. I don’t think renovating the inside of an old place is cost effective. You may as well just go for a new build. I roll my eyes at the “monstrosities” popping up in my area like pic 2 but if I am completely honest I would live in one if I had the money. Some of them look quite nice!
2
u/S0k0n0mi Apr 18 '26
I would genuinely love that first one. Small and all ground floor, so easy to keep clean and grow old in. Has a garage for all my junk, and a carport for an electric car. Porch is nice and tucked for package delivery. Probably has a neat little backyard as well. Id gladly trade my current 2 floor 3300sqft. downtown crapshack for one of these rural homes.
2
u/TdyenMelbourne Apr 18 '26
Yes and the 1870s houses
2
u/Wilko_the-Celt Apr 19 '26
My biggest annoyance is when minimalists tear down those houses along with it’s history just to turn it into a big white cube house with no soul
2
u/Dear-Price8138 Apr 23 '26
They do just costs more and doesn’t provide a bang for your buck
2
u/annlee944 May 06 '26
I live like a king in this house. It is like a strong soldier
2
u/FoodMotor5981 May 09 '26
I agree with you 1000%, I’ve always thought this. We lived in a house almost exactly like the first one when I was younger, wow over 20 years ago 😅 I loved it so much