Does the exterior color/material of a home matter? (Houston: transplants, house)

[G Grasshopper]

Why is it that all homes in Austin seem to need stone or brick on the exterior? Is there some problem with siding, stucco, wood shingles, etc.? I lived in a house (years ago) in Austin that was stucco. And in east Texas I lived in a house with siding. I don't remember a stigma being attached to either, but it seems that now there is. Any insights?

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by G Grasshopper

Why is it that all homes in Austin seem to need stone or brick on the exterior? Is there some problem with siding, stucco, wood shingles, etc.? I lived in a house (years ago) in Austin that was stucco. And in east Texas I lived in a house with siding. I don't remember a stigma being attached to either, but it seems that now there is. Any insights?

Well, for one thing stone and/or brick is cheaper to insure, presumably because of fire danger. And homeowners insurance is a big deal in Texas.

Another reason is that siding is cheap. People associate it with cheaply built homes. That's why you'll see homes marketed with "X sides brick/stone"... they are considered higher quality and cheaper to insure the less siding you have. I understand that there are older homes and custom homes of very high quality with wood siding, and in other cities these homes may be more common so there is no stigma... but here in Austin, much of the housing is new and builder-grade. Hence the stigma of cheap siding.

I don't know enough about stucco to comment on it, but I don't think it's very common around here.

[Hunny15602]

As someone who is from the NE, I know I'll be thrilled to get away from siding and it's equivalent. Every new home around here is built w/mostly siding, maybe a few accent areas of stone if you are really lucky, and then they slap on a $600K (or more!) tag on it. Plus $20K or so in annual taxes, just to make it super affordable!

Again, thanks for everyone's input. I will most certainly consider the advice of all, but I know it just comes down to individual preference and curb appeal. I find many of the homes in TX to be striking, regardless of whether they are in new or established communities, so I'm sure that will be the easiest part of my decision! it's funny, if you asked me in the past to conjure up my dream home, it would be a stucco home w/a spanish tile roof. I was convinced that was perfect for me. During my past few trips out to TX though, I was just floored by the exterior beauty of the homes, and how many different materials were incorporated to create these homes w/such visual interest! Oh, I can't wait to come down there for good!!

[CptnRn]

Originally Posted by G Grasshopper

Why is it that all homes in Austin seem to need stone or brick on the exterior? Is there some problem with siding, stucco, wood shingles, etc.? I lived in a house (years ago) in Austin that was stucco. And in east Texas I lived in a house with siding. I don't remember a stigma being attached to either, but it seems that now there is. Any insights?

Brick and stone are very low maintenance, hard to damage and fireproof. The mass in the walls also cuts down on the outside noise that can penetrate the wall. siding, stucco and wood shingles all require maintenance and repair.

I just spent $4,000 replacing rotting wood, cleaning and repainting a house with hardboard siding and wood trim, have had to do that about every 10-15 years, it just doesn't hold up. The hardboard siding starts to disintegrate, delaminate when the paint gets old and moisture gets through it. Especially along the bottom edges where rain and lawn sprinklers wet it.

I have built one building with a stucco exterior and found the material easy to damage from a ladder leaned against it, and it has to be repainted periodically.

[FalconheadWest]

Stucco is VERY common, but only in the higher price ranges. With the heat and humidity of the area, you're really supposed to paint stucco every 4-5 years, and many homeowners in the lower price ranges can't afford that so brick and stone is a better alternative for them.

In my neighborhood, over half the homes have stucco, and it's becoming an acquired taste. The builder "accidently" put stucco on my house, though it's probably 80% brick, and I'm looking at it as a free upgrade since all the other buyers had to pay for it.

[FalconheadWest]

Originally Posted by Hunny15602

Around here, it's important to have an attic fan to draw the heat out of the attic. Is that something that you can/should do in TX too?

Attic fans are fairly common in older homes. I can't say I've ever seen one in a home newer than the 1950's.

[Hunny15602]

Originally Posted by FalconheadWest

Attic fans are fairly common in older homes. I can't say I've ever seen one in a home newer than the 1950's.

Thanks for the FI - I'll let hubby know that we won't need that. I suspected as much, assuming that the barrier is more important, but whenhe gets something in his head....

[eichlerfan]

Coming from CA I will be more than happy to leave my stucco home behind due to painting. Painting can be really expensive, and so stone seems a lot more maintenance free. I will say though that I really dislike red brick homes. While looking for homes in Austin we only look for Austin stone. I guess never having grown up in an area with brick homes, the red brick just looks very dated to me. It's a good thing we don't all have the same taste, it would be a very boring otherwise.

[Jennibc]

Originally Posted by eichlerfan

Coming from CA I will be more than happy to leave my stucco home behind due to painting. Painting can be really expensive, and so stone seems a lot more maintenance free. I will say though that I really dislike red brick homes. While looking for homes in Austin we only look for Austin stone. I guess never having grown up in an area with brick homes, the red brick just looks very dated to me. It's a good thing we don't all have the same taste, it would be a very boring otherwise.

It's very interesting that some on this board think red brick looks dated, because I'd always thought it was the most classic of building materials as it seems to have withstood the test of time. I've seen it on homes built in the 20, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, and we are in the process of buying a house built in 2000 with you guessed it, red brick. So unless you mean "It's so 20th century" I don't understand how people think it it's dated.

[centralaustinite]

Originally Posted by Jennibc

It's very interesting that some on this board think red brick looks dated, because I'd always thought it was the most classic of building materials as it seems to have withstood the test of time. I've seen it on homes built in the 20, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, and we are in the process of buying a house built in 2000 with you guessed it, red brick. So unless you mean "It's so 20th century" I don't understand how people think it it's dated.

For me it is a combination of red brick, arched windows, double-high entry, and peaked roof that seems very dated to me. And specifically in Austin. I guess it is because I live central and very rarely see red brick, so I associate it with the big 90s building boom in Round Rock etc.

But there certainly seems to be a steady appetite for it, so i am probably the outlier.