Anyone else LOVE California suburbs? (Oakland, Irvine: renter, buying, bankrupt)

[genjy]

Originally Posted by infinite_limit

This is very well said

I can't explain how depressing it feels to know that if I want to interact with society, I have to pile in my money pit also known as automobile.

Furthermore this forces me to game plan every single place I'm going for ideal "avoiding traffic/wasting gas" . Absolutely no sense of excitement or adventure. Every single day feels just like the last. Same roads, same lights, same direction. No social interaction. Return home and hide in house away from the world outside.

Depression.

I am not sure what kind of suburban lifestyle you have experienced, but your really broad stroke does not apply to every suburb. Actually, what you said above can easily apply to someone living in an urban environment, too.

Very few Californians can live without a car--I have friends who live in the heart of San Francisco (Mission District and Chinatown) who own and drive cars daily. Hell, one of them drive a taxi for a living!

Of course, some people do choose to not drive. However, they are at a disadvantage because much of California cannot be accessed without a car. If you can live a life traveling only where mass transit takes you--your prerogative and more power to you.

[Ghostly1]

Originally Posted by Charles

What's the problem? What do you have against homes in the suburbs? Since many of them are owner occupied and the post 1990s homes are under an HOA, these homes are well managed and well maintained. Landscaping, structure, furnace and A/C, etc.

They don't all look the same. Some tracts look very similar but most builders have a half dozen plans with several different layouts. color schemes, and different elevations.

You think all these homes look the same?

You either missed or ignored the "not every suburb" part of the post. Regardless of a few different floor plans, roof tiles and paint jobs (pale pastels or earth tones), there is still a sameness about them that to me screams "conformity" and lack of imagination. Many (that doesn't mean all) build on small lots very close together. I don't happen to find that attractive or compelling either.

No problem! Please don't try to create one. Simply differences of opinion. You like 'em, I don't. No harm nor foul either way.

[mrsltd]

(renters - they don't care about their community - they're only renting).

From Charles.

Not sure I totally buy this. I guess speaking in generalities is the norm when we are trying to defend our own stuff.

"We care, they don't". That sort of thing.

[Kafkaesque]

Yes. Being able to contract is fundamental. Having a HOA is par for the course.

If you don't like the HOA agreement, don't buy the house.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by mrsltd

From Charles.

Not sure I totally buy this. I guess speaking in generalities is the norm when we are trying to defend our own stuff.

"We care, they don't". That sort of thing.

So you posted this because you disagree with me and you are asserting renters are just as interested and have as much at stake in their communities as homeowners?

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by Ghostly1

"conformity" and lack of imagination.

Not to mention builders putting the least amount of quality into their Legolands to derive the maximum profit per unit.

Nice! (in San Jose):


Bland! (in Tracy):


Sure they're allegedly safer, but so is locking yourself in a bunker in paranoid fear.
If you're going to make the biggest purchase of your life, wouldn't you want something about that to reflect the uniqueness that is specific to you? A little creativity? Just a little?

[Kafkaesque]

That's a nice Victorian but the paint scheme has to go, hehe.

Not your typical suburb though, that's for sure.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

Not to mention builders putting the least amount of quality into their Legolands to derive the maximum profit per unit.

A little creativity? Just a little?

Sure that Victorian is nice. But tat home would probably cost twice as much to build as a tract home. There are a lot of details and design and craftsmanship that go into that home.

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by Kafkaesque

That's a nice Victorian but the paint scheme has to go, hehe.

Not your typical suburb though, that's for sure.

Ah, but so many refer to SJ as nothing but a sprawling, hopelessly bland lifeless suburb. The vast majority of which, have never lived here. So, yes, we may need to note our propensity to dogmatically define everything via allusion to dichotomy, in this case, a region where people live must either be a city, or a suburb. Seems there is much room for any number of additional categories, especially with our predetermined narrow definitions of what these two consist of.

More SJ - Eichlers are sprinkled here and there:

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by Charles

Sure that Victorian is nice. But tat home would probably cost twice as much to build as a tract home. There are a lot of details and design and craftsmanship that go into that home.

Such a place can be scaled down, but just a little of the craftsmanship and care that went into that can be applied to any new unit without blowing up costs, if the builder uses a little ingenuity, and wants to present homes that stand out among the many cookie cutter places offered in the region.