Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Aug 11, 2015 11:06:43 GMT -5
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,910
|
Post by zibazinski on Aug 11, 2015 11:15:36 GMT -5
I agree that the layout of some of the new houses in my community is poorly thought-out. One house in particular that I visited during an open house had 4 bedrooms upstairs, with a very wide hallway. It looked impressive, until I went into the children's bedrooms, where you'd need a shoehorn to squeeze in just a bed & a dresser. There was NO room to move in those bedrooms. It would've been a much better use of space to have a narrow hallway with bigger bedrooms.
As a soon-to-be empty nester, I hope the next house DH & I purchase has everything we need on the main floor--master bedroom, laundry room, etc. I've known too many parents of friends who have taken a fall trying to climb the stairs! I insisted to DH that the main things we needed be on one level. Thank heavens I did. We've turned down lots of neat places where we'd love to live because of bedrooms upstairs.
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by movingforward on Aug 11, 2015 11:18:50 GMT -5
Plus a lot of people, old as well as new parents of babies/toddlers don't want the hassle of stairs of a townhouse. They may be affordable because it costs less to build up but it's a pita. I healed from childbirth so much faster on a one level home than a three level. Give me a ranch style any day. I don't have kids and even I don't really want the hassle of stairs. It may be what I end up with but not my first choice. The layout of some of the older condos where I live is really optimal to me. They are around 1100 sq feet, all one level, with an open floor plan. The problem is that as the city has aged and expanded the older areas are starting to become higher crime. Everyone is moving out into the newer areas of town and the older areas are becoming less desirable. I am having a hard time finding what want. Luckily, I am in no rush. The only thing is that I am sure interest rates will rise before I buy anything. Oh well, there is nothing I can do about that I guess.
|
|
Cookies Galore
Senior Associate
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 18:08:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,886
|
Post by Cookies Galore on Aug 11, 2015 11:20:41 GMT -5
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by movingforward on Aug 11, 2015 11:28:42 GMT -5
The other problem I have with the newer homes/condos is all the "extras" which raise the HOA fees. For example, I don't care about a pool or a fitness center. I run and take dance classes for exercise. I am not a sunbather so I am not one who gets much use from a pool. I would rather not pay for this stuff but it seems to be the new trend where I live for both single family home neighborhoods and condos/townhomes.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Aug 11, 2015 11:34:57 GMT -5
I found one! Brand new 2 bd/2ba, 1K sf, for $185K
www.mychallengerhomes.com/properties/ch_Tyler.cfm
There are a lot available in the $230 - $270K range. But that also gets you into a bigger home, which IMO makes it not qualify as a starter home. Tons of townhomes & condos in the $150-200K range though.
Small homes just aren't in huge demand right now, so they aren't being built. But, depending on where you live there are tons available for sale.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Aug 11, 2015 11:36:59 GMT -5
Here's my take.
The article is right in that it doesn't make sense for builders to build starter homes. There's no money in it. There is already a glut of "starter homes" out there. They're typically older homes built in the 50s-80s. Lots of ranches. There's always a disconnect in real estate where some homes simply cost more to build than you can buy a similar home for.
I think the author actually makes a very good point, that the ones which do exist are largely either falling into disrepair (seems like often owned by a baby boomer who bought it a long time ago and hasn't kept it up, so will more inventory hit when they start moving out/dying and being renovated) or they're being rented out to young families. The latter really points less to an issue of these homes not existing, but to the flexibility young couples crave today. The homes exist, but they're being rented, not sold. Seems like that stigma of "renting" is starting to largely disappear as people see it as a viable choice for flexibility rather than an unwanted requirement because they "can't afford to buy".
|
|
tcu2003
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 31, 2010 15:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 4,954
|
Post by tcu2003 on Aug 11, 2015 11:45:32 GMT -5
It is all where you live. We have tons of starter homes here. Apparently Colorado was booming in the late 70's & there are tons of neighborhoods filled with starter homes that popped up at that time. Yes, they aren't building brand new homes at the smaller size or cheaper cost right now. But, that is because that isn't what is in demand & it isn't where the money is for builders. You want small, affordable, & brand new, then you have to go with townhome or condo right now.
Although, where I live you can get a 6,000 sf mansion on the side of the mountain for less than $700K (price picked because the article called $700k the price for a dream home) & still only pay $3-4k in property taxes. I don't think I realized you were in Colorado - we were just out there for vacation a couple of weeks ago. Beautiful and definitely cheaper than coastal living.
|
|
tcu2003
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 31, 2010 15:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 4,954
|
Post by tcu2003 on Aug 11, 2015 11:50:31 GMT -5
I'm also in the Midwest and there are definitely still starter homes, but many of them are from the 50s or 60s. My sister's house is a one-story ranch with 3 bedrooms/1.75 baths, and definitely less than 2000 sqft, but the layout is done well, so it doesn't feel that small, outside of not having a guest bedroom (her complaint).
DH's first house was on the larger end of starter - bought new in 2004-ish, around 2000 sqft plus an unfinished basement. No stainless steel or granite and hardwood only in the kitchen. I think he paid about $184k for it, and sold it for around $210k in 2011 (he'd finished the basement himself and built a deck). That size was pretty typical for that neighborhood, but when we looked last year when we moved back to the area, most new construction homes were condos/villas or much larger homes.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,483
|
Post by Tiny on Aug 11, 2015 11:54:25 GMT -5
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starter_homeFrom the Wikipedia: A starter home or starter house is a house that is usually the first which a person or family can afford to purchase, often using a combination of savings and mortgage financing. In the real estate industry the term commonly denotes small one- or two-bedroom houses, often older homes but sometimes low-cost new developments. The concept originated in the United States during the post-World War II era when entry-level home ownership was a preferred option for young families and regarded as part of the American Dream.
The original concept of a newly built starter home outside of the city has changed due from both the end of low-cost land development and the changing preferences of successive generations in the United States. Since the end of the 20th century, more new homeowners are seeking different kinds of housing such as a condominium or older existing home.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 10:27:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 12:06:53 GMT -5
As a soon-to-be empty nester, I hope the next house DH & I purchase has everything we need on the main floor--master bedroom, laundry room, etc. I've known too many parents of friends who have taken a fall trying to climb the stairs! I insisted to DH that the main things we needed be on one level. Thank heavens I did. We've turned down lots of neat places where we'd love to live because of bedrooms upstairs. That was a primary criterion when we downsized. DH is 77 and has a minor balancing problem due to 2 previous falls, each of which resulted in a subdural hematoma. He gets night sweats from his polycythemia and sometimes gets up in the middle of the night to move to the spare BR if his side of our bed gets too damp. So many places we looked at had a lavish MBR on the first floor and all the others upstairs, or a finished basement with steps so steep DH didn't even want to bother looking down there. We ended up with a house with 2 BR upstairs, including the master, so he's got a spare, which is also his office. The downstairs also has 2 BR plus his "man cave" and TV, but the stairway area is wide, open to the light, and has a generous landing midway down, so it's far safer. I think there's going to be a bigger demand for homes that have all the living on one level, or at least don't have potentially dangerous staircases.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 10:27:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 12:24:23 GMT -5
The row house townhome/condo in Philli that cookies galore posted sold for $74.9k in '00. Then they sold it for $220k just 5 yrs. later......what's that a nearly 300% increase, in 5 yrs? Aiyiyi...they made out like bandits on that deal.
Now the people who bought in '05, for 220k and have owned for 10 yrs. and have had at least 2 reductions in the last 2 months; down to asking $224.9k now, less than 5k over their purchase price, not counting their realtors fees/closing costs they paid or any improvements/changes....ugh, looks like it's a loss for them....now that sucks..
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 10:27:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 12:37:35 GMT -5
Also live in the Midwest and there are plenty of starter homes in my area. There have been several projects that were just started before that housing crash that have been revived in the past couple of years. The people that I know (myself included) are staying in their starter townhome/homes and not buying the McMansions, at least in the conversations I've heard nobody wants to pay the overhead that comes with a bigger house (TAXES, utilities, upkeep). Upgrading to even a reasonable sized house would quadruple my property taxes to 10k/year, no thanks.
|
|
emma1420
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2011 15:35:45 GMT -5
Posts: 2,430
|
Post by emma1420 on Aug 11, 2015 12:46:50 GMT -5
Also live in the Midwest and there are plenty of starter homes in my area. There have been several projects that were just started before that housing crash that have been revived in the past couple of years. The people that I know (myself included) are staying in their starter townhome/homes and not buying the McMansions, at least in the conversations I've heard nobody wants to pay the overhead that comes with a bigger house (TAXES, utilities, upkeep). Upgrading to even a reasonable sized house would quadruple my property taxes to 10k/year, no thanks. I've been waiting for the housing market to recover, so that I can at least break even when I go to sell my house. When I next buy, I won't be buying any sort of McMansion (despite what the bank tells me I could borrow once I've sold my house). I would rather have a much smaller house in a great area. I have a friend who is trying to sell her 6000 sq ft house, and despite it being what every HGTV fan would want (hardwood, granite, open floor plan, etc.), it's in a less than stellar school district, and most people are afraid of the utilities that come along with a home that size.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 10:27:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 12:49:38 GMT -5
Also live in the Midwest and there are plenty of starter homes in my area. There have been several projects that were just started before that housing crash that have been revived in the past couple of years. The people that I know (myself included) are staying in their starter townhome/homes and not buying the McMansions, at least in the conversations I've heard nobody wants to pay the overhead that comes with a bigger house (TAXES, utilities, upkeep). Upgrading to even a reasonable sized house would quadruple my property taxes to 10k/year, no thanks. I'm also in the Midwest but a cheaper area. Friends who are building another house (not sure if it's bigger or smaller) put their gorgeous McMansion on the market in early May for $575K. It's been reduced twice and is now at $500K. I think it's just more house than most people want.
|
|
TheHaitian
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 27, 2014 19:39:10 GMT -5
Posts: 10,144
|
Post by TheHaitian on Aug 11, 2015 12:51:12 GMT -5
The article is not saying they don't exists, off course they do from the 50's to 70's.
The article is stating they are no longer being built; so if you want a started home You have to look for one built in the 1950's.
We saw a few of those when we were looking, 3 beds / 1 bath, slab ranch... 900 - 1,000 sqft.
Some updated some not. Updated ones were going for 320k+ and not updated ones for ~250k
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Aug 11, 2015 12:52:14 GMT -5
It is all where you live. We have tons of starter homes here. Apparently Colorado was booming in the late 70's & there are tons of neighborhoods filled with starter homes that popped up at that time. Yes, they aren't building brand new homes at the smaller size or cheaper cost right now. But, that is because that isn't what is in demand & it isn't where the money is for builders. You want small, affordable, & brand new, then you have to go with townhome or condo right now.
Although, where I live you can get a 6,000 sf mansion on the side of the mountain for less than $700K (price picked because the article called $700k the price for a dream home) & still only pay $3-4k in property taxes. I don't think I realized you were in Colorado - we were just out there for vacation a couple of weeks ago. Beautiful and definitely cheaper than coastal living. I love it. Although YM has definitely helped me appreciate it more. I can't believe the prices on houses in some locations & the property taxes are insane. I can't imagine paying several times more than what I did for my house & paying 10x more in property taxes for the privilege of living with insane traffic & probably a huge commute. Then it sounds like in most places you are stuck with the school district you live in, which puts a lot more pressure on buying in the right part of town, which means money as well.
Although, I do miss out on big city life. I think if I could do it all over again I would have spent some time in my early 20's living in NYC. Then moved to a smaller city like where I live now when I wanted kids.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 10:27:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 12:54:27 GMT -5
Also live in the Midwest and there are plenty of starter homes in my area. There have been several projects that were just started before that housing crash that have been revived in the past couple of years. The people that I know (myself included) are staying in their starter townhome/homes and not buying the McMansions, at least in the conversations I've heard nobody wants to pay the overhead that comes with a bigger house (TAXES, utilities, upkeep). Upgrading to even a reasonable sized house would quadruple my property taxes to 10k/year, no thanks. I've been waiting for the housing market to recover, so that I can at least break even when I go to sell my house. When I next buy, I won't be buying any sort of McMansion (despite what the bank tells me I could borrow once I've sold my house). I would rather have a much smaller house in a great area. I have a friend who is trying to sell her 6000 sq ft house, and despite it being what every HGTV fan would want (hardwood, granite, open floor plan, etc.), it's in a less than stellar school district, and most people are afraid of the utilities that come along with a home that size. DW makes me leave the room now when watching HGTV, I start talking about the waste/affordability and she just wants to see the homes.
|
|
GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl
Senior Associate
"How you win matters." Ender, Ender's Game
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 13:33:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,291
|
Post by GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl on Aug 11, 2015 13:00:46 GMT -5
The Boston Metro area- and indeed the whole Northeast "Corridor" are expensive period. However I know of several relatives who have bought starter/ first homes in the Boston area in the last few years. One was in Quincy, one in Roxbury, and one outside the city near Mansfield. All of them are existing homes, and the one in Quincy was financed with the plan going in to have a room mate. The one in Roxbury is a three story brick and stone monster- but it is in a neighborhood that is either "pre- gentrification" or "uh- oh". Kidding aside, it is in a section that is probably on the way up. The one in the 'burbs was just sold- they moved to Exeter, NH because of a job change and wanting their kids to grow up away from inside the 495 belt. I think they made a healthy profit, although they sunk it all in the new house.
Here in Maine it is much easier to find a starter home, though like anywhere you will pay a price in something- location, size, condition, or some combination thereof. Of course the incomes tend to be quite a bit higher in the Boston area than here.
In fact, I've known people that live here and commute to Boston. Hmmm, that is likely our plan once YDS launches off to college. Depending upon where we end up, DH will catch the train and get off and walk to his office. If the commute ends up being really onerous, we figure he can rent a studio pied a terre and the rent and our mortgage in Maine will still be cheaper than what we are paying now. Plus, we will be living in Maine.
|
|
Cookies Galore
Senior Associate
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 18:08:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,886
|
Post by Cookies Galore on Aug 11, 2015 13:15:27 GMT -5
The article is not saying they don't exists, off course they do from the 50's to 70's. The article is stating they are no longer being built; so if you want a started home You have to look for one built in the 1950's. We saw a few of those when we were looking, 3 beds / 1 bath, slab ranch... 900 - 1,000 sqft. Some updated some not. Updated ones were going for 320k+ and not updated ones for ~250k I don't see the problem with that. Of course, I like homes that are much older than 1950s. :-)
|
|
yogiii
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 19:38:00 GMT -5
Posts: 5,377
|
Post by yogiii on Aug 11, 2015 13:37:10 GMT -5
Hmmm, that is likely our plan once YDS launches off to college. Depending upon where we end up, DH will catch the train and get off and walk to his office. If the commute ends up being really onerous, we figure he can rent a studio pied a terre and the rent and our mortgage in Maine will still be cheaper than what we are paying now. Plus, we will be living in Maine. Hello! Welcome, future neighbor!
I don't envy your husband's projected commute though. Is this just something he will do for a bit until he transitions to other wok or is it a long term deal?
If it's just train, that's much more relaxing!
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,483
|
Post by Tiny on Aug 11, 2015 13:38:41 GMT -5
The row house townhome/condo in Philli that cookies galore posted sold for $74.9k in '00. Then they sold it for $220k just 5 yrs. later......what's that a nearly 300% increase, in 5 yrs? Aiyiyi...they made out like bandits on that deal.
Now the people who bought in '05, for 220k and have owned for 10 yrs. and have had at least 2 reductions in the last 2 months; down to asking $224.9k now, less than 5k over their purchase price, not counting their realtors fees/closing costs they paid or any improvements/changes....ugh, looks like it's a loss for them....now that sucks.. And, you've just noted the Housing Bubble... most places the Bubble peaked in 2005/2006 - by 2008 it was noticeably deflating across the country. It's recovered in some areas - other areas not so much.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,483
|
Post by Tiny on Aug 11, 2015 13:44:29 GMT -5
The article is not saying they don't exists, off course they do from the 50's to 70's. The article is stating they are no longer being built; so if you want a started home You have to look for one built in the 1950's. We saw a few of those when we were looking, 3 beds / 1 bath, slab ranch... 900 - 1,000 sqft. Some updated some not. Updated ones were going for 320k+ and not updated ones for ~250k
Isn't that a paradox? People want starter homes - there are potentially plenty of older homes that fit the bill - but people don't want those - they want 'new construction' in 'new areas'. The article also hints that "start homes" would now be built starting at 2000 sq ft.
Maybe it's just a case of "you can't have your cake and eat it too"?
Hence the opine that maybe it's people's expectations rather than a 'housing shortage'...
|
|
emma1420
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2011 15:35:45 GMT -5
Posts: 2,430
|
Post by emma1420 on Aug 11, 2015 14:03:35 GMT -5
The article is not saying they don't exists, off course they do from the 50's to 70's. The article is stating they are no longer being built; so if you want a started home You have to look for one built in the 1950's. We saw a few of those when we were looking, 3 beds / 1 bath, slab ranch... 900 - 1,000 sqft. Some updated some not. Updated ones were going for 320k+ and not updated ones for ~250k I think with the exception of immediately following WW2, I don't think that starter houses have ever been the focus of new subdivsions and housing builds. It's just that the standard of what is a starter home has changed drastically. The expectation of being able to buy a brand new house as a first house is something that must be specific to generation Y. Because my grandparents, parents, and friends never thought they would be able to built a new house starting out. Everyone I know bought an older home (some that needed work), with the hope that one day they would be able to move into a larger and/or newer home.
|
|
Cookies Galore
Senior Associate
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 18:08:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,886
|
Post by Cookies Galore on Aug 11, 2015 14:25:29 GMT -5
The article is not saying they don't exists, off course they do from the 50's to 70's. The article is stating they are no longer being built; so if you want a started home You have to look for one built in the 1950's. We saw a few of those when we were looking, 3 beds / 1 bath, slab ranch... 900 - 1,000 sqft. Some updated some not. Updated ones were going for 320k+ and not updated ones for ~250k I think with the exception of immediately following WW2, I don't think that starter houses have ever been the focus of new subdivsions and housing builds. It's just that the standard of what is a starter home has changed drastically. The expectation of being able to buy a brand new house as a first house is something that must be specific to generation Y. Because my grandparents, parents, and friends never thought they would be able to built a new house starting out. Everyone I know bought an older home (some that needed work), with the hope that one day they would be able to move into a larger and/or newer home. Yeah, I've never heard of building a "starter" home. Aren't you just building a house?
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by movingforward on Aug 11, 2015 14:31:52 GMT -5
I guess I just find it hard to believe that there isn't a market for new homes that are 1000 - 1500 sq feet. There are more single people than ever before purchasing homes. I just read an article the other day that stated for the first time ever there are more single women purchasing homes than single men. Couples are waiting to later in life to have children or deciding not to have any at all. I am not saying that everyone should EXPECT to be able to buy a new home. I am just saying that I can't believe there isn't a market for new homes on the smaller side of things. As Tiny pointed out earlier it still makes financial sense for the builder to build these.
|
|
emma1420
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2011 15:35:45 GMT -5
Posts: 2,430
|
Post by emma1420 on Aug 11, 2015 14:46:07 GMT -5
I guess I just find it hard to believe that there isn't a market for new homes that are 1000 - 1500 sq feet. There are more single people than ever before purchasing homes. I just read an article the other day that stated for the first time ever there are more single women purchasing homes than single men. Couples are waiting to later in life to have children or deciding not to have any at all. I am not saying that everyone should EXPECT to be able to buy a new home. I am just saying that I can't believe there isn't a market for new homes on the smaller side of things. As Tiny pointed out earlier it still makes financial sense for the builder to build these. I think there is the demand for that, but I think more single people want lower maintenance exteriors. There are still a lot of condos and townhouses being built. In my area, there are some villas that range in the square footage (with maintenance provided exteriors and landscaping) that are being built but they seem to be built more for people who want to downsize than people who are buying their first home. However, I know when I was looking for my first home, I found that my limited budget went much further with existing house stock than even new build townhouses in my area. So in many ways I don't think builders can really compete with the existing cheaper inventory.
|
|
GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl
Senior Associate
"How you win matters." Ender, Ender's Game
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 13:33:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,291
|
Post by GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl on Aug 11, 2015 14:48:07 GMT -5
So, that is still tiny to me. Maybe it's because it is 3 floors of tiny rooms on top of each other. If they were all on the same floor, one could do some creative changes to make it feel bigger. It bugs me that there is no closet at the front door, and that blocked off stairway down to the basement is kind of weird. Also, the kitchen sink, which could be changed out, is just a bar sink -- one wouldn't really cook meals in that kitchen. All that said, I do find tiny houses appealing. Less IS more. Sometimes.
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by movingforward on Aug 11, 2015 14:55:17 GMT -5
I guess I just find it hard to believe that there isn't a market for new homes that are 1000 - 1500 sq feet. There are more single people than ever before purchasing homes. I just read an article the other day that stated for the first time ever there are more single women purchasing homes than single men. Couples are waiting to later in life to have children or deciding not to have any at all. I am not saying that everyone should EXPECT to be able to buy a new home. I am just saying that I can't believe there isn't a market for new homes on the smaller side of things. As Tiny pointed out earlier it still makes financial sense for the builder to build these. I think there is the demand for that, but I think more single people want lower maintenance exteriors. There are still a lot of condos and townhouses being built. In my area, there are some villas that range in the square footage (with maintenance provided exteriors and landscaping) that are being built but they seem to be built more for people who want to downsize than people who are buying their first home. However, I know when I was looking for my first home, I found that my limited budget went much further with existing house stock than even new build townhouses in my area. So in many ways I don't think builders can really compete with the existing cheaper inventory. I agree. I am single and definitely considering a condo or townhouse. The problem is that all the new ones are all 1800 - 3000 sq feet. Personally, I can't understand why someone would want a condo that large. If I had kids and could afford what these things are selling for I would opt for a home with a yard (because it is the same price). Most people I know in condos/townhouses are singles, couples with no kids and retired people. Why in the world any of these groups would want 1800 - 3000 square feet is beyond me. I am actually kind of interested to see how well these things sell (they are supposed to be finished in December and are pre-selling now). There are 4 different new condominium complexes being build and they are all large. All are scheduled to be finished in December or early 2016. I am assuming the builders know their market and obviously it isn't me . I will most likely be buying an older place that has either been remodeled or will fix it up myself.
|
|
cael
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 9:12:36 GMT -5
Posts: 5,745
|
Post by cael on Aug 11, 2015 15:00:22 GMT -5
I know/known several people who live in southern NH or ME and commute to the north shore or Boston.. I couldn't do it. Unless it was a really well-paying job, couldn't bring myself. When we buy I'm hoping to stay within an hour of the city, preferably on the commuter rail lines in case I do end up getting a job in Boston (which is a goal) But... I would probably die to live in Maine. Kittery is only a 45m drive for me! (but then I'm another 35-40m from Boston, sigh.)
|
|