Zaragoza: New builds with bargain-basement finishes

Zaragoza builds expensive and finishes cheap

You walk into a new-build show flat in Zaragoza, see the modern facade and the immaculate floor, and within two minutes you're looking at the skirting boards with suspicion. That's what the start of a forum discussion describes: parquet even in the kitchen and bathroom, joints sealed with a white that looks like glue stick, large-format sanitaryware and raised sinks that, according to reports, end up giving way. The thesis of the person who opens the thread is blunt: there isn't a single development that's saved.

The author of the initial message doesn't stop at finishes. He lists hollow doors at €50 each, run-of-the-mill switches, basic-range kitchen furniture and carpentry that gives way at the first knock. And he adds the context that, according to him, explains everything: land owned by the city council and Ibercaja, developers without financial muscle and a city that, he claims, is mortgaged until 2045. His personal conclusion: better a renovated 1980s home than a brand-new delivery.

What exactly is criticised about new builds in Zaragoza

The inventory of defects that appears in the discussion is long and very specific. Parquet floors that swell from damp, hollow and crooked tiles, walls that aren't plumb, plasterboard that cracks at the corners and is covered with dazzling white paint. Some relate leaks that appear in the middle of the living room and end up coming from an unsealed balcony drain above, or seepage that falls directly into the flat below. The bathroom extractor that doesn't work because someone poured cement down the pipe.

The criticism isn't limited to what's visible. Several messages insist that the serious thing is what you can't see: the asphalt membrane, the enclosures, the installation. The idea that repeats is that the developer cuts item by item until the construction is as cheap as possible, and that it doesn't matter, because everything is sold before it's finished. When problems appear, the one who already got paid isn't there.

The price isn't the problem: the problem is what you pay for it

Here the analysis becomes more uncomfortable. One message argues that finishes aren't a capricious decision, but the arithmetic consequence of the market: if the typical buyer earns between €1,500 and €2,300 a month, the mortgage has to fit into about €640 a month over 35 years, which sets a sale ceiling around €273,000. With taxes, land and labour through the roof, what's left for materials is little. The conclusion is bitter: a house with year-2000 finishes would cost almost double and nobody could buy it.

Against that, another block of opinion points to the lack of craftsmanship. It's not just the material, it's who installs it. There's talk of unqualified labour, of professionals from the trade who left in the previous crisis and didn't return, and of a sector where the figure of a decent skilled worker is scarce. The mix of cheap materials and poor execution is what produces the result described by the show flat visits.

1980s second-hand versus newly delivered development

The alternative that gains ground in the conversation is used housing. Several messages defend that a building from the 60s, 70s or 80s, with brick structure and full renovation, withstands the passage of time better than a current development. Cases are cited of 1962 properties that have passed the technical inspection without issues and of renovated 1920s Madrid blocks that are still solid a century later.

The counterpoint comes from insulation. Some recall that current regulations are much more demanding in thermal and acoustic terms, with forced ventilation included, and that this makes construction more expensive. Those living in 2018-2022 developments speak of excellent insulation. The doubt that remains floating: if the new building insulates better but is worse executed, what exactly are you buying?

The land problem and the same four construction companies

The urban planning background takes up a good part of the exchange. It's stated that much of the land in the south of the city belongs to the city council and Ibercaja, a legacy of the 2008 bankruptcies, when several construction companies fell and the assets ended up in the hands of the financial entity and Sareb. From that drain, it's argued, came a market concentrated in a few builders who work with the same suppliers and negotiate prices without real competition.

That diagnosis extends beyond Zaragoza. In Madrid, developments of plasterboard with sheet facades that look disposable are described, and prices around €750,000 for a four-bedroom. The shared conclusion is that the phenomenon is national and that the Mediterranean coast takes it to the extreme: shoeboxes with poor finishes at international destination prices.

Is it worth buying new build today or is it better to renovate?

The answer that prevails in the discussion is that it depends on what you can pay and what you're willing to assume. Those who buy new build pay for the absence of renovation, for the legal guarantee and for regulatory insulation, but accept low-range finishes and irregular quality labour. Those who buy second-hand assume a renovation that, according to the calculations handled by participants, doesn't go below €40,000 if you want to do it well.

The added problem is that second-hand isn't cheap either. Flats of 60 square metres in modest neighbourhoods that don't go below €150,000 are cited, 80 square metres around €185,000 and three-bedroom with two bathrooms that go to €220,000, all with kitchens and bathrooms to gut, worn floors, windows to change and old radiators. The gap between what it costs and what it offers has closed upwards.

---

There remains the disconcerting fact. In a conversation where it's debated whether new brick lasts 25 years or 60, someone points out that 1950s buildings are already being rehabilitated instead of demolished, not because of their architectural value, but because there aren't enough personnel or companies in the whole chain to put up replacements. The labour shortage, which started as a quality problem, has ended up being a brake on the renewal of the housing stock itself. And that, no show flat can fix.