Confused...do builders offer anything else beside alder...

[RonnieinDallas]

Originally Posted by BigDGeek

You don't have to buy a $550k house.

You can still buy a perfectly nice house in Richardson for less than $300k. It won't be new and it won't be custom. But to say that housing prices here are out of control because you can't find a perfect custom build on a large lot for $550k is an exaggeration.

I think people watch too much HGTV and read too much crap about out-of-whack median values in DFW, which are obviously dragged down by south Dallas and Dallas's blue-collar suburbs (like Garland and Mesquite, for example). People see a median value of $180-$250k and think they can get that in Frisco. This betrays a lack of understanding of what "median" actually means.

When did we cross the line into the assumption that in order for a house to be liveable, it has to look like someone's Pinterest fantasy board? When did we start assuming that we needed 800-1000 square feet per occupant in a house?

Land, materials, and labor all cost money. And all of these are strongly influenced by demand. Demand is high here so builders, suppliers, and laborers can all charge more.

Unfortunately for you, you've got a 2009 mindset. But this isn't 2009. This is 2015. The landscape has changed. You need to adjust your expectations.

^This!

They are dragged down. That is why I lump those silly COL calculators in with Zestimates, great school ratings, and bait-n-switch advertising. Do your own research.

It doesn't necessarily apply to the OP, but we consistently get relo's on this forum with crazy expectations about what type of housing they'll get in Dallas. They want brand new construction, with custom finish out, outstanding schools, zero crime, and they want close proximity to dining and retail! They want million dollar homes for $250-500k. You definitely can't get most of that for the median Dallas home price of $188,000.

I don't know who to blame the misinformation on, but a lot of people need a wake up call. The financial rags touting the Texas Miracle, and a whole bunch of "experts" constantly bragging about how cheap Dallas is, have something to do with it.

Originally Posted by nissan

I don't really understand your points tbh. You're saying there aren't enough choices with builder options, but your point is based on research w production builders. Most production builders, regardless of where in the country you are located, will only allow you to choose from a limited set of skus. There are economies of scale in play and, without sku rationalization, those benefits of scale aren't maximized.

Unless you're the sticks, 550k can't get you that stainless banister or whatever you're looking for via a production builder. You want that level of customization, go w a true custom builder; but, that budget won't work here. It's funny how ppl think new construction = full custom, at sub-$750k budgets and tract builders. Doesn't matter what area you're in, if you're in a major metropolis' suburb, you'll be hard pressed to get that level of customization at a 500k level imo.

^This

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by Runnn

The chart is one example, yet don't believe everything you read. Numbers can and do lie! That chart looks at TX as a whole and doesn't account for Dallas, Houston or Austin separately. If it weren't for the expensive metropolitan areas in TX, we might, actually, be living in one of the least expensive states in the country? I've traveled south TX, east TX and north TX, and many areas are almost 2nd world compared to the metroplexes. I know that driving around a huge metroplex everyday to get where one is going is very costly in many ways. Translation: Higher gas costs, higher insurance and higher maintenance cost for all that wear and tear.
Additionally, our overall COL in TN and Ohio was much less than in Houston or Dallas.

Finally, take NYC out of New York State, and how expensive would it be then? As well, take DC out of Virginia, Miami out of FL, Seattle out of Washington, Portland out of Oregon, and Atlanta out of Georgia. These metro areas skew everything, plain and simple.

Taxes:
That chart is about tax averages across entire states as such the information has to be compiled from data across all cities. Period.
The Tax Foundation's property tax burden for Texas is adjusted by local rates and populations. So that number is about perfect for comparison with others states.

So far as numbers lying - people lie not numbers. If you'd look around you'd find every reasonable source out there agrees with the chart I provided within just a little variance. All TF data is from government or university sources. If you think The Tax Foundation is lying prove it and become rich overnight. You can't because their numbers and methodologies are well understood, open and reviewed by outsiders all the time.

Any notion that the total per-capita state imposed tax burden in Texas is near to that of California is absolutely absurd on its face.

COL:
I have a research membership to C2ER due to an affiliation I have with a university. C2ER runs its own COL surveys and has for 50 years. I can look up last month's COL data from Dallas, Plano, Tyler, San Angelo etc. and compare COL to almost every city in the US over 25,000 people. I've used C2ER for years and it's just simply the best information of it's kind out there.

So far as metropolitan areas skewing the numbers they do. However, the only state in-which that dynamic is a big issue is NY. The population of the New York state portion of NYC is large relative to the rest of the state and it is very,very expensive to live there relative to the rest of the state. That applies to a lesser to degree to Illinois as well.

The cost of living in Nashville for example is lower than Dallas or Houston. The survey agrees with you. Me too.
On average the cost of living in Ohio is about the same as Texas. Ohio taxes are just a bit higher.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by VegasMan_72

Just like I showed you the actual tax rates in the last thread comparing Las Vegas to a suburb of Dallas. I have the actual figures and my own experience living in multiple states that back me up. Its people like you who are misguiding and misleading potential relocaters and some of us can't let that happen.
I, who has experience in designing foundations, can also school you on foundation watering but that is for another thread.

Showing some of the taxes that comprise a location's tax burden is not the same as showing all of them.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by Runnn

EDS didn't need to personally attack you, me or others who disagree with his assertions! That's unprofessional and tacky!!! I'm not quite sure what he finds useful in this forum then?? And, I don't recall him indicating all the different places he's lived???

I didn't personally attack you. You made two demonstrably false claims and I showed you hard data/information as to why.

Currently I live in Dallas and we have a second home in Colorado.

Cities in which I've lived as an adult in reverse order:
Houston
Las Vegas
LA
NYC (rented for two years)
Chicago (rented for two years)

I'm very confident about this and related topics because I studied lots of economics in college and have worked in the field for most of the past 30 years.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by BigDGeek

You don't have to buy a $550k house.

You can still buy a perfectly nice house in Richardson for less than $300k. It won't be new and it won't be custom. But to say that housing prices here are out of control because you can't find a perfect custom build on a large lot for $550k is an exaggeration.

I think people watch too much HGTV and read too much crap about out-of-whack median values in DFW, which are obviously dragged down by south Dallas and Dallas's blue-collar suburbs (like Garland and Mesquite, for example). People see a median value of $180-$250k and think they can get that in Frisco. This betrays a lack of understanding of what "median" actually means.

1. I agree with your first point completely.

2. Every metropolitan area of any size, say the top 15 or 20, is going to have poor, middle and rich income areas.
So far a suburbs go Plano for example within its cohort of very nice, large (pop. over 200,000) high income etc. Likely has the lowest COL of the bunch, or very close, and it has a very high household income even before any adjustments.

[loves2read]

Unless they can afford private schools and the drive time to/from, schools for a young/middle age family are top most when considering where to buy---and because so many people shopping for homes ARE in that situation schools are (as everyone here knows) one of the top 3 factors even for resale--
Of course income/price and commute/location are the other two for most buyers
but one aspect that people maybe don't consider is that older neighborhoods in some areas have mainly above-ground utilities--and trees along the utility lines

even though Dallas is not big on ice/snow like the NE and Middlewest, there are times when an ice storm has come through and some areas have been w/o electricity for long periods of time--long enough that people either have to relocate to hotel/friends or live under really sucky conditions...

if you are shopping for a home in the spring and summer you appreciate the trees with the leaves that provide shade and make neighborhoods attractive--BUT those same trees can become a big negative in an ice storm--
and that doesn't take into account the damage any trees on your lot can sustain--falling limbs can damage roofs/cars or get damaged so badly they have to be removed...

The city has been trimming lot of trees on utility lines (often to the owners dismay) to try to reduce issues the next time ice comes around but above-ground utilities are a risk that any older neighborhood in any state with ice or bad weather can experience--not just Dallas--
even though there are offsetting positives for homes in those areas...

I guess that is super-negative mindset to some people--but what can I say--I see the glass half empty lot of time...

[VegasMan_72]

Originally Posted by EDS_

Showing some of the taxes that comprise a location's tax burden is not the same as showing all of them.

What a classic. When you couldn't refute a single factual evidence you had to revert back to your comical nonsense and meaningless "tax burden"

[Beardown91737]

Originally Posted by Runnn

Thank you VegasMan - You are 100% correct, and I could not have said it better! Well done!!! The tax burden nonsense is the same load of crap that the appraisal districts use to justify our annual sky high tax bills. News flash to all those who think it is sooo inexpensive here: When a 3000 sq ft home carries an annual property bill between 9k -13k (depending on your particular city) that isn't affordable. This is real disposable income that chewed up every year, and I haven't even started talking about house payments, insur, utilities, etc.

I was transferred here from California. We did not buy all the house we could afford here because of the property taxes. We will be in McKinney with Allen ISD and the property tax will be about 5 times what we paid at our former house. It will be about 80% of what we paid in California state income tax after all deductions. It takes money to run Texas and it has to come from somewhere.