Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
ah, thanks Steve, very helpful! I pretty much have an anxiety attack in master planned communities and when I'm on those silent, empty suburban streets. Barking dogs, roosters, honking horns, interesting neighbors, that is what makes me happy. It isn't density . . . it is a certain spirit and juxtaposition that draws me in and makes me feel free and productive. Clearly it isn't for everyone, I get that but I'm glad that Austin has options.
Just wanted to see this again. Not that all suburban streets are empty and silent, not by a long shot, but this expresses so very clearly why some do NOT want to live in HOA neighborhoods. Not because they want to paint their house bright orange or put cars up on blocks in the yard, but because of a sense of life being lived that makes them feel free and productive.
I think where you choose to live is often based on your stage of life. In my case, rural – (born there,) city (college and single life,) suburbia (kids) and retirement (rural, suburbia, city) – will one day be our choice in the future. If you have a family to consider, you choose what's best for them. In my 20's I lived in Greenwich Village. I "graduated" to the upper west side of Manhattan in my 30's because I could afford to and it was the right choice given my job proximity. Several years later, after getting married and having a child and being awarded custody of my step son, we moved to Charlotte, NC and then to Austin. I chose a suburban environment in a school district that supported special education for my custodial step son in both locations. I ended up hating the suburban environment but grew to love several of my neighbors whom I now consider lifelong friends.
I grew up in a rural area in upstate NY and spent most of my adult life in NYC. Charlotte and then Austin suburbia was a shock to me. But it was best for my step son. And then we moved to Dallas and chose to live 30 miles east in a very rural environment on several acres with lakes, horses and roosters abound. My step son was off to college this year and suburbia had served him well in the Leander ISD. In Dallas, the rural environment was good for me, but not a great commute for my husband to the airport and my younger son was somewhat isolated. Now that we are moving back to Austin, I have perused the CD forum over and over again looking for answers to what’s best for everyone. I thank you all for your opinions and insights. They really helped me make my decisions for better or worse. I, like many would choose to live in a rural or semi-rural environment. An Austin horse farm seemed ideal. Dripping would have been great for me, but not my family due to long commutes to both school and work/airports. I work from home. I even contemplated moving back to suburbia again over the city due in part to commute times and proximity to neighbors for my son. But the traffic in Austin was a deciding factor. Sitting in traffic two weeks ago as we looked at homes ...I couldn’t imagine my husband wasting hours of his life in a 1-2 hour commute. It wasn’t fair. So we considered Barton Creek. Last minute, we applied to a private school. For all those doing the same, please know acceptance isn't guaranteed. Competition is fierce these days with limited spots and continued growth. So don't base your home choice on assured acceptance to PS. We were denied to the one school we applied to and my husband and I are pretty successful. He graduated from two Ivy League schools and I went to a top notch Liberal Arts school. He's in private equity. I was a television director. My son plays 3 sports and gets straight A's. We were still denied acceptance to Regents.
Next issue ... water is a big concern. My husband is an investor and we are moving back to help ensure the good people of Austin have adequate water, infrastructure and access during this trying time of drought … now and in the future. When considering our options, in rural Dripping we thought .... Will our well run dry? What if we can’t get access to LCRA? When considering rural areas we thought ..... Will we spend 3 hours in the car commuting? When considering outlying areas we thought ... Will the schools be on par with our expectations? Hoping for the best, we bid on a house in LT in a very eclectic horse community. What I needed (space, breath-ability acreage,) was much like Hoffando so specifically outlined in a previous post in terms of his needs, hobbies etc. However, it wasn't ideal for my 9 year old as the home in LT didn't have many neighbors and it was a long commute to the airport/city for my husband. So, I relented. We chose to buy in Westlake much to my chagrin … at first. I like the idea of suburbia with space. Those options are few and far between if you want good schools, privacy and an acceptable commute (less than 20 minute etc.)
We close on our house Monday. It's not ideal for me, but it is ideal for my child and husband. Sometimes life is about compromises. We can walk to school, have a private backyard with a pool and are slated to attend some of the best schools in the nation. There are no roosters. Oh well. That will be the next stage of life for me.
But please don't knock those who can and choose suburbia. It served us well at the appropriate time in our life.
So for all those "haters" who say living central is ideal, they must not have kids. When you're a parent, kids needs come first. So for all you soccer moms (or Lacrosse Mom's like me,) do what's best for your kids. Do what's best for your family. Family comes first. And for those who don't have others to consider, you are free to do what's best for you. But don't judge those with families by being an elitist who thinks living central is the only acceptable choice. It may be acceptable for you, but not for a family who will thrive in the suburbs by buying an affordable home (which is spacious and beautiful b/c TX builds them best) with good schools. Families need to save money for college. Kids need friends. And America needs well educated children.
I lived in the city for many years. Over-rated. For those who choose the suburban life, the suburban "Ticky Tackies" are not tacky here in TX at all IMHO. They are beautiful homes by comparison to other parts of the country. The "haters" need to get out more and travel the country to see what ticky tacky really means before passing judgment on suburban dwellings in Austin. Hate to see what you'd call the suburban homes in NY, LA or Boston. Those who judge these suburban homes need to realize that just because you live where you live (central) does not make it better. It's only better for you. When you have "us" to consider ... ie a family ... sometimes living central isn't an option. Do what's in the best interest of your family. If you don't have one ... oh well. Live where you can best enjoy life for everyone involved. If it’s only you, live where YOU want, but don't assume you know what's best for "US."
We made a choice. I'm not sure if it's the best one. Had we bought a home in suburbia and sacrificed commute time with a home half the price, maybe we could afford to send our son to our Alma Maters. But we're banking on the Eanes ISD to help assure our son gets into a top state school and our home will appreciate given it's close proximity to the city. It's all about choices and compromise. Fingers crossed.
"Mostly Kotkin ignores, or doesn't understand, that the issue is not single-family versus multifamily, or suburb versus city. It's not even higher density versus lower density. The urban-rural Transect includes a range of walkable places, from suburban to urban core.
The issue is really walkable places versus auto-oriented places. Walkable urban places, which are where the market is trending according to many industry sources including the Urban Land Institute, Emerging Trends in Real Estate, and the National Association of Realtors, can be located downtown, in urban neighborhoods far from downtown, and in the suburbs.
These walkable urban neighborhoods often include single-family houses — but they are also mixed-use, more compact, and better connected than the far suburbs. There's a big difference between a small-lot single-family house in a mixed-use neighborhood and a large-lot house that is isolated in the far suburbs. There's a difference between a strip mall and a main street, an office park and a mixed-use workplace building."
I don't consider myself a hater of suburbia (master-planned, yes) but I do live and love living very central and I have three kids (one in elementary, one MS, and one HS). For us it works! And I know of lots of others who do it too! We do it in a small-lot single-family home in a mixed-use neighborhood.
League schools and I went to a top notch Liberal Arts school. He's in private equity. I was a television director. My son plays 3 sports and gets straight A's. We were still denied acceptance to Regents.
...
What I needed (space, breath-ability acreage,) was much like Hoffando so specifically outlined in a previous post in terms of his needs, hobbies etc. However, it wasn't ideal for my 9 year old as the home in LT didn't have many neighbors and it was a long commute to the airport/city for my husband. So, I relented. We chose to buy in Westlake much to my chagrin … at first. I like the idea of suburbia with space. Those options are few and far between if you want good schools, privacy and an acceptable commute (less than 20 minute etc.)
We close on our house Monday. It's not ideal for me, but it is ideal for my child and husband. Sometimes life is about compromises. We can walk to school, have a private backyard with a pool and are slated to attend some of the best schools in the nation. There are no roosters. Oh well. That will be the next stage of life for me.
But please don't knock those who can and choose suburbia. It served us well at the appropriate time in our life.
...
Im not sure where you live in "west lake" but you probably can have chickens. You can probably have roosters as well unless they become a nuisance to your neighbors.
If you have money, you can buy a small ranch outside of austin and go there for the weekends or during the summer. I have a number of friends who do that. There is a 25 acre ranchette with a small house for 350K. 35 acres for 150K etc.
Maybe I am misunderstanding. Are you saying that people are chosing Circle C or Steiner or Lake Travis because they can't afford to live urban?
Well, judging by how expensive the downtown and other inner areas of Austin are in terms of cost of living, Lake Travis and Circle C seem to be somewhat of a bargain.
Im not sure where you live in "west lake" but you probably can have chickens. You can probably have roosters as well unless they become a nuisance to your neighbors.
If you have money, you can buy a small ranch outside of austin and go there for the weekends or during the summer. I have a number of friends who do that. There is a 25 acre ranchette with a small house for 350K. 35 acres for 150K etc.
Uh, from what I have seen in terms of small suburban enclaves west of Austin, most of those communities have a median cost of housing around $700,000 and up. In fact, I saw many near Lake Travis and just SW of Austin that were going in the $800,000 to $1,500,000.
So where did you get your numbers?? I highly doubt that someone can find a ranchette that cheap anywhere close to Austin, especially if it is near the lake.
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,136,325 times
Reputation: 3145
The OP calls out Silicon Valley as an example of the triumph of suburbia, but ignores the fact that bus shuttle after bus shuttle of Google, Apple, EA, Oracle, etc. employees drives through my neighborhood of Russian Hill in the heart of San Francisco every morning and evening. There's also CalTrain connecting Downtown San Francisco, Downtown San Jose and all the tech points in between. You simply don't have to live where you work here and the nature of the work they do is in campus settings, so it typically favors larger developments than SF can provide. So, tech workers live in Russian Hill, SOMA, The Mission and The Marina and commute to Cuppertino, et al. How is this a triumph of suburban living?
Not to mention the fact that there are over two million people on a 2-3 mile wide and 40-mile long strip of land between here and Santa Clara County. Is that suburban by Austin standards? Because the density and development looks a lot like that of Central Austin all up and down The Peninsula.
Uh, from what I have seen in terms of small suburban enclaves west of Austin, most of those communities have a median cost of housing around $700,000 and up. In fact, I saw many near Lake Travis and just SW of Austin that were going in the $800,000 to $1,500,000.
So where did you get your numbers?? I highly doubt that someone can find a ranchette that cheap anywhere close to Austin, especially if it is near the lake.
Actually, in the Austin MLS, I find 11 that fit that description (house, 25 acres, $350,000 top price) and price range, and 12 with house, 30-40 acres, $350,000 top price. None near the lake, but if you'll read, that wasn't part of Austin97's description. Nor did I find it in JLO's post, come to that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
