San Antonio's favorable cost of living not enough (Houston, Dallas: fit in, house)

[ashbeeigh]

I haven't heard good things about the Austin light rail. It stops in far "north Austin" and really doesn't connect the suburbs like it needs to to be successful. I think the only time I would consider it is for SXSW or forf li ACL. Driving will be the death of Austin and San Antonio. If you get to know the traffic patterns in Austin and use the tolls appropriately you will miss the majority of traffic.

As far as cost of living in Austin versus SA....SA is way more affordable and always will be. The area is just so much larger. Y'all have to remember that Bexar county is huge. I am unsure how Travis county compares, but I feel as though there is just more land in general in San Antonio to make it more afforadable.

And I disagree with the people who say SA isn't hip. There are still times when I walk into a bar/restaurant and walk out thinking "I am too old and lame for this place." But I do that in Austin too. So. The number of times i do that in SA is less than Austim but I still do it.

[SweethomeSanAntonio]

Originally Posted by Pancho-Villa

Of course you don't get it. They live just as they do in SF,NYC and other premium areas. I did NYC when younger.

Are you saying Austin is a premium city like NYC and SF?

[Pancho-Villa]

It's absolutely creeping up there, yes.

[Azure110]

My thinking of Austin being "hip" has gone down a bit since I was told about light rail being in Dallas and Houston. I would say they are ahead in the amenities game compared to Austin.

[Pancho-Villa]

Originally Posted by Azure110

My thinking of Austin being "hip" has gone down a bit since I was told about light rail being in Dallas and Houston. I would say they are ahead in the amenities game compared to Austin.

That's fine and they should be...they both have many. many more folks living there. What I'm saying is that Austin is creeping up (it's desirable now and only getting more so) ...it's not cheap, and won't be getting cheaper. Of course,some will refuse to accept that.

[Azure110]

Originally Posted by Pancho-Villa

That's fine and they should be...they both have many. many more folks living there. What I'm saying is that Austin is creeping up (it's desirable now and only getting more so) ...it's not cheap, and won't be getting cheaper. Of course,some will refuse to accept that.

As long San Antonio is cheaper than Austin, I would say probably more people will flock to San Antonio and that may make us look more desirable but I think most transplants are attracted to Austin or even Dallas/Houston.

Many transplants moving to Texas probably don't have as much "sticker shock" because they are coming from even more expensive areas. Austin is probably still a bargain compared to San Francisco or NYC but who knows how long that will last.

Ideally you don't want to live in the poorest or richest areas of Texas, finding the perfect place in the middle appeals to most. Light rail would make Austin (and even San Antonio) look so much more attractive.

[Pancho-Villa]

Originally Posted by Azure110

As long San Antonio is cheaper than Austin, I would say probably more people will flock to San Antonio and that may make us look more desirable but I think most transplants are attracted to Austin or even Dallas/Houston.

Many transplants moving to Texas probably don't have as much "sticker shock" because they are coming from even more expensive areas. Austin is probably still a bargain compared to San Francisco or NYC but who knows how long that will last.

Ideally you don't want to live in the poorest or richest areas of Texas, finding the perfect place in the middle appeals to most. Light rail would make Austin (and even San Antonio) look so much more attractive.

Agree on most of what you say. It was "cheap" for me moving here, very cheap. Of all the places where I have lived, this has been the cheapest, but don't they fight light rail and that kind of progressive stuff here? I remember people on here very angry and opposed ...they don't want this type of change and will claim anything from "spending too much money" to "clogging the roads up further".

[JuneOf48]

Originally Posted by Pancho-Villa

Actually no, I'm not. I happen to have lived in a bunch of these types of cities. It's heading that way...I believe I used the word "creeping". It's not there yet. but it's going in that direction. It is, what it is Ryne. Younger, hip folks are drawn...and many have confirmed and whined about how expensive Austin is....it won't get any cheaper folks.
Ryne- I'm done...we all now what you are....no sense debating because your beloved SA is seen as a low value city.

I'd agree with you here. Austin is up there with Brooklyn and Portland in its ability to attract transplants, especially the young, cool, "hip" variety. As competitors, Dallas and Houston aren't even close. Incidentally, those are the kind of people that typically want to work in tech, too, although the relationship is definitely not cut and dry. I haven't thought of San Francisco as "hip" in the same way as Brooklyn or Portland for a long time, and that's partly because its insanely high real estate prices cannot support the kind of "edgy" artistic and musical producers that make an area "hip" in the first place. In order to strike the right balance, cities need to be at least livable for folks who do service industry stuff while making art and music in their free time. Austin, though, might finally be pricing those people out.

In other words, San Francisco is quickly becoming Manhattan rather than Brooklyn. Few young, creative types can afford it any longer. (Brooklyn isn't very affordable, either. Much of Oakland isn't either, and they've absorbed the people fleeing SF.) If Austin ever gets to that level, people will shift to other cities to sustain the kind of lifestyle that makes a place "hip." One of those cities may or may not be San Antonio. Or, it might be Asheville, or Nashville, or some place that isn't even on our radars yet. (Philadelphia is getting there, too.)

[Pancho-Villa]

Originally Posted by JuneOf48

I'd agree with you here. Austin is up there with Brooklyn and Portland in its ability to attract transplants, especially the young, cool, "hip" variety. As competitors, Dallas and Houston aren't even close. Incidentally, those are the kind of people that typically want to work in tech, too, although the relationship is definitely not cut and dry. I haven't thought of San Francisco as "hip" in the same way as Brooklyn or Portland for a long time, and that's partly because its insanely high real estate prices cannot support the kind of "edgy" artistic and musical producers that make an area "hip" in the first place. In order to strike the right balance, cities need to be at least livable for folks who do service industry stuff while making art and music in their free time. Austin, though, might finally be pricing those people out.

In other words, San Francisco is quickly becoming Manhattan rather than Brooklyn. Few young, creative types can afford it any longer. (Brooklyn isn't very affordable, either. Much of Oakland isn't either, and they've absorbed the people fleeing SF.) If Austin ever gets to that level, people will shift to other cities to sustain the kind of lifestyle that makes a place "hip." One of those cities may or may not be San Antonio. Or, it might be Asheville, or Nashville, or some place that isn't even on our radars yet. (Philadelphia is getting there, too.)

Ahhh..then you know that Williamsburg is the new Manhattan.

[SweethomeSanAntonio]

Originally Posted by Pancho-Villa

It's absolutely creeping up there, yes.

Premium cities have premium ammenties like world class museums, major league sports, symphony orchestras, well known zoo's, etc. Austin is a great city with a lot to be proud of but grouping it with the likes of those bigger cities is crazy.