Several years ago, someone on this sub did a really thorough breakdown comparing west Denver neighborhoods (Barnum, Athmar Park, etc.) and made the observation that a lot of the homes in Westwood weren't worth saving. Can't remember all that they said, but they made it sound like the build quality of a lot of those post war homes wasn't the best, and a lot of them have had questionable electrical, etc. work done on them over the years.
I don't work in real estate or construction, nor am I familiar enough with the area, so I can't say for sure if their takes on the neighborhood were right or not.
But as I'm potentially looking at buying a different home (and now that I have a more realistic understanding of what a huge maintenance liability houses truly are), I'm leery of buying an old home that's maybe not worth sinking a lot of money into. I want to know which neighborhoods have the most homes that fall into this category.
I also realize the question in this post's title may seem odd, as we typically think of a house as existing in perpetuity. Although evidently in some countries (like Japan?) they usually decide after 40-50 years homes should be torn down and rebuilt because they're not worth upgrading.
FWIW, one could argue that the Highlands/NW Denver was a good answer to this question 20ish years ago. There was a post on this sub where someone was complaining about the tear-downs and slot homes in NW Denver, but another poster pointed out that a lot of the old houses in that area were wood frame homes from around the turn of the 20th century that were in bad condition. Given the area's proximity to downtown, it's not surprising that those homes in poor condition were demo'd for redevelopment.
Anyway, what do you think? Which neighborhood currently has the most homes that make you go "eh, I'd stay away from this?"