Disagree with all of this. Hot water leaks are very rare. Water heater failure usually manifests as cold showers and a quick replacement unit from a plumber. Drain pan with a hose is a more reliable protection than a sensor. Sensors are much more likely to give annoying false positives than to prevent damage; you can see from Rheem discussion forums that they’re not appreciated.
Water heater failure is also easy to avoid by annual or seasonal flushing of any accumulated sediment and checking the anode. As long as the anode is replaced, the water heater should be fine.
I would expect a large condo association's maintenance staff to be able to handle this sort of thing very easily.
I think the real problem is how susceptible houses in US/Canada (maybe elsewhere) are to water leaks of any sort. Drywall, wood, MDF, insulation, etc., are all immediately destroyed with water in a short amount of time. A typical house lasts for 100 years or more and will likely experience many water leaks of various kinds over the course of its lifetime.
Houses last 100 years? They can, but typically after 20 years it starts to make economic sense to scoop the remains of the house into a dump truck and build a fancier house on the now much more expensive land under it.
In my neighborhood (admittedly, originally built in the 50s) every single sale I can remember from the last 15 years has resulted it a complete teardown and rebuild bigger. And one of those rebuilds recently changed hands and is undergoing extensive remodeling for over a year now.
It never makes economic sense to tear down a house if you're paying for it (above the land value). It depends on building codes in your area and such but my house is nearly 40 and it's not even close to end of life. Hell, the house I grew up in is still there and it's gotta be approaching 80.
> It never makes economic sense to tear down a house if you're paying for it (above the land value).
The land value is the key. Often, houses in the 50s-80s were built in what was suburbs or actual small villages back then, with enormous land surrounding them because land was cheap. Nowadays, the urban areas have grown and grown, and with them the desire for space for people to live on - even here in Europe, in Munich for example, land values exploded over the last 20-30 years. Think of like the land price not only doubling or tripling, but increasing tenfold or more since the houses were built.
Say you have land with a house that was worth 50.000 $ when it was constructed... and now, the land alone can be worth millions. So you tear down the existing house that's in the middle of the plot, build four new houses on it, each one bigger than the old one, and sell three of the four houses to pay for your new home and a nice chunk of cash. Or you rent the houses out for absurd amounts of money and never have to work a day in your life again.
And that happens not just with houses 50 years or older. Here in Munich, I've seen this happen with houses younger than me, simply because land values went up so immensely.
It depends on the area, yes, but some areas like the Kaufingerstraße went up from 7721€/m² in 1980 to 80.000€ in 2012 [1]. In 2019, not even seven years later, the same area was worth 160.000€/m², and other areas also doubled in value over four years [2].
Munich is fucking expensive, I'm actually looking towards moving away entirely and save up to buy something when prices ever become reasonable. Forget about saving anything while living here - Munich drives away those who have been born here all the time.
European houses are usually built out of bricks and concrete on proper foundations instead of wood and drywall, which means the substance lasts a lot longer itself and it becomes actually economical to do upgrades like heat insulation, PV energy and the likes. Also, we don't have regular extreme weather events like hurricanes that devastate entire countries (and thus make it uneconomical to build expensive houses).
Wood doesn't get any weaker with age. Assuming no water damage, 200 year old timber houses are just as durable now as when they were built. In fact 200 year old timber houses in America are more durable than anything you can build now because the quality of wood 200 years ago, even 100 years ago, is better than what you can get now, and the quality of wood 100 years ago in America is better than anything Europe has had for multiple hundreds of years!
Also drywall is a nice material for many reasons. Need a new wall? One day of work. Want to remove a wall? If there isn't a support beam, not an issue. American houses can be reconfigured as the needs of family and society change. My 1950s house has had walls removed and added throughout its life and owners, which is why it has an up to date flow despite what was a very constricted original floor plan.
Also dry wall is easy to fix and paint.
Water is an issue, yes. That part sucks.
Finally, in regards to natural disasters, wood construction can withstand earthquakes far better than stone construction!
Water is always an issue no matter what type of construction. Concrete and masonry? Water and freeze thaw cycles will eventually destroy it.
Most common major structural work with stick built houses is jacking them up and replacing the foundation. That's because the concrete or masonry foundation has deteriorated but the wood framing is in good condition.
