Bought an old San Francisco house in 2020 with a great rate, but the amount of work has become overwhelming — anyone else in this situation?
I bought a ~100-year-old house in SF in 2020. Like a lot of people, I feel very fortunate to have bought when I did because the interest rate is excellent compared with today and the house price has recently appraised for $700K more than what i bought it for. On paper, it feels like I should be grateful and just stay put.
But the reality of owning an older house has been much harder than I expected.
The house has good bones and we like the neighborhood, but over the past few years we’ve realized there are a lot of layered issues: moisture/waterproofing, drainage, old windows, roof leaks, failing stucco, foundation/crawlspace concerns, an unfinished/dirt-floor lower area, old plumbing/sewer questions, electrical/plumbing unknowns, and general “old house” complexity. A lot of it seems interconnected, so it’s hard to know where to start.
The biggest issue is that I feel like no one can confidently tell me what the correct plan is.
I’ve talked to contractors, engineers, waterproofing/drainage people, window people, roofers, stucco people, etc. Everyone seems to see only their slice of the problem. One person says drainage is the priority. Another says roof/windows/stucco. Another says interior waterproofing. Another says don’t trap moisture behind drywall. Another says you need to demo first. Another says you need plans. Another says you don’t. I keep getting conflicting or low-confidence answers.
It has created this awful loop where I’m trying to be responsible and not make a bad six-figure decision, but the more people I talk to, the less clear the answer gets. I feel like I’ve been spinning my wheels for years.
The financial dilemma is also hard. Because I bought in 2020, moving/selling is not simple. If I sell and buy again, I give up a very low interest rate and buy into today’s much higher-rate environment. Even “downsizing” may not actually lower my monthly cost much. So there’s a strong argument to stay and fix the house.
But staying means potentially taking on a huge, multi-phase remodel/remediation project that could easily run into $1M if we do everything thats needed, possibly more over time. I’m not a developer, contractor, or architect. I’m just a homeowner trying to make a rational decision without getting eaten alive by scope creep, bad sequencing, or bad advice and cannot afford a design build company and need to do things affordably.
I’m trying to figure out:
- Has anyone else bought an older Bay Area/SF house and later realized the work was far bigger and more complex than expected?
- How did you decide whether to stay and renovate vs sell and move on?
- Who actually helped you create a real plan? A GC? Architect? Structural engineer? Civil engineer? Building envelope consultant? Waterproofing specialist? DIY?
- How do you avoid getting stuck between specialists where everyone recommends their own trade but no one owns the full strategy?
- For old Bay Area homes, what is the right order of operations when you have moisture/drainage/window/roof/stucco/foundation concerns?
- At what point did you decide, “This house is worth fixing,” versus, “This is too much complexity and I should sell”?
How did you get unstuck? Who was the most useful professional to hire? And if you could go back, would you still fix the house — or would you sell and simplify? Any GC or sub referrals?
THX!