RetireJapan

We're in a house, and one thing I like about it is being able to park them inside and then roll my bikes in/out the front door. Plenty of area just in front for washing them, wipe downs, lube/cleaning, and so on. I'm not sure about the smaller buildings (3-5 floors), but reports I've read say that with condos you cannot take bikes on the elevators. This would really crimp my lifestyle--having to leave nicer bikes in a common parking area, needing to lock them, and so on.

Behind the house/out the back door of our place there's space for BBQ, a mono-oki for the grill, chairs/benches (and other junk).

We had to leave our last apartment due to complaints from our neighbour downstairs that I our 2 year old daughter was noisy. This same person would on occasion get drunk with her husband and be noisy. The police were called a couple of times...
To be honest I wanted to stay and fight it out with this individual, but my wife wanted us to move...

I own a house now and would not buy a mansion for this very reason. So I guess if you have young children this is a factor to consider

A couple more points, possibly irrelevant:

1. If you live in a snowy area then you'll probably have much more snow clearing to do with a house.

2. If you're interested in (or think you might be in the future) gardening, growing vegetables, sitting outside on a lawn, letting grandchildren play in the garden, family barbecues (already mentioned) and so on, then obviously a house is a better choice.

We went for a house, partly for the parking space. We also have 2 toilets, which is very rare in an apartment.
Suits us right now.
I can see how the convenience of putting out rubbish whenever you want to, and the lift/elevator vs stairs could be beneficial when older.

SZQ wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 12:12 pm

RetireJapan wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 4:54 am ... and not having to do 'community' activities and duties are big pluses for manshons in my experience.

Don't know anything about this. Are these common and obligatory?

They are the norm where we are in the sticks. Joining the ‘kumi’ is theoretically optional but expected if you own rather than rent. Some of the obligations are pretty annoying, none more so than having to patrol the streets occasionally whacking two sticks together to warn about the danger of fire…I refuse to participate in that futility, especially because you only have to do it once a week when you are the recipient of said sticks, and you can choose any day to do it.

I have owned and lived in 2 houses (35 years) and now a manshon (18 months). I was really glad we lived in a suburban house when my kids were growing up but now that I am retired, I am much happier living in a small manshon. Manshon life is certainly easier and more fun. Car parking is really expensive in my inner city area but we no longer drive. Instead there are nearby car shares, e-bike and Luup scooter shares, several subway and train lines, and taxis everywhere so transportation is far better compared to how it was in the suburbs - and is far cheaper than us running a car. About the only thing I miss about a house now is the inability to have a bbq but we only did that a few times a year anyway.

I don’t have problems with my manshon neighbors (although some regular visitor upstairs is pretty heavy-footed. Luckily they never stay for long). Ironically, I have been far more disturbed in both detached houses with a thumping bass from a music fan in one case overseas (and he was way across the street and a few quarter acre size blocks down!) and in Japan I, my wife, and all of the neighborhood were put off by a selfish all-round creep disliked by all people outside of his own family. (Thinking back I remember the daughter and child mostly visited while he was out golfing so... )

Perhaps it all comes down to your family situation. My answer: Detached houses are generally better for families but manshons are generally better for retired empty nesters.

Generally, Apartments built for rentals are built to a different specification than Manshons, and Manshons have better soundproofing than Apa-to.
If you're going to buy, you expect good soundproofing, whereas if you're renting the owner/builder want to reduce the cost.
Also, depending on the age of the building, the building code may have been different (lower spec).

Some things to consider:

Manshons
Larger Developments are generally better as the maintenance fees are spread over the larger number of units.
You can participate in the Owners' Kumiai/Rijikai, and determine how the maintenance fees are accumulated and spent.
The Management Fees usually include the staff, cleaning, gardening, garbage collection and other monthly running costs and an accumulation for larger maintenance fees, so for larger developments, you would not expect many unexpected/unbudgeted additional one-time costs...
Larger maintenance activities may be carried out every 15 years or so to maintain the structure, renew cladding, elevators, Internet, etc., so if you are looking at an older Manshon, you would want to check if/when larger maintenance activities were/will be carried out, and the accumulated bank balance to cover such activities. If the accumulation is not enough, it would mean that the previous owner had not paid his fair share of the maintenance fees that could be allocated to his period of ownership, and he should reduce the price to cover, or you should pass on the property.

As you are surrounded by other units, and insulated by them, heating energy costs can be significantly lower.

For Tower Manshons, it could be very difficult and expensive to maintain the structure due to the height. This has been a topic of discussion recently. Look this up...

These days, if you buy a Manshon, you usually own a portion of the land according to the ratio of your total floorspace to the development total landspace.

Under Accounting Rules
Steel reinforced concrete structures are depreciated over 47 years,
Timber structures are depreciated over 22 years.
The residual value of a steel reinforced concrete structure will last longer than a timber framed structure.
This will be offset by any land price appreciation.

Interiors in both cases are depreciated over 15 years, so on a purely accounting basis, after 20 years, the value of the house would be just the value of the land it is built on, and refurbishment would likely be in the region of Y4,000,000 for interior, bathroom, kitchen, boiler, etc., and maybe another Y2,000,000 for the exterior.
The value of a Manson would be the value of your portion of the land it is built on and 27/47 of the price of the structure (not including Consumption Tax), and refurbishment would likely be in the region of Y4,000,000 for interior, bathroom, kitchen, boiler, etc..

Tkydon wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 4:12 am...after 20 years, the value of the house would be just the value of the land it is built on, and refurbishment would likely be in the region of Y200,000 for interior, bathroom, kitchen, boiler, etc., and maybe another Y100,000 for the exterior.
...

I think you're missing a zero on those numbers, likely more.

Our kitchen reform alone (long ago) was well over ¥2M, and I did part of it on my own.

Yes, sorry... corrected and I upped the estimates

Thanks for the feedback everyone, lots of food for thought here!