Track homes why so popular? | Page 2 | FerrariChat

Track homes why so popular?

Discussion in 'Other Off Topic Forum' started by J.P.Sarti, Apr 5, 2006.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. Dino Martini

    Dino Martini F1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2004
    Messages:
    4,619
    Location:
    Calgary Alberta
    Full Name:
    Martin
    Very Popular here in calgary..everyday a new area goes up it sells out in a day or two. Then the next area is 40k dollars more. Its pretty stupid.
     
  2. Simon^2

    Simon^2 F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    12,313
    Location:
    At Sea Level
  3. LightGuy

    LightGuy Four Time F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    46,160
    Location:
    Texas
    Full Name:
    David
    I went out of my way to find a nice sized lot surrounded by horse farms and pastures only 2 years ago. No more. Most developed now. Pisses me off.
     
  4. audihenry

    audihenry Formula Junior BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    662
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Full Name:
    Henry
    The secret is to find communities which have specific goals in mind. There are a certain communities in which the typical lot size is 2 acres+, home design is very strongly controlled, and they are very much against the anti-tract mentality.

    It doesn't come cheap to live in such communities, but they do exist.
     
  5. Simon^2

    Simon^2 F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    12,313
    Location:
    At Sea Level
    My neighborhood in orlando required a minimum lot of > 1 acre. All homes are custom. no semi-custom. no 2 homes are alike. must get all plans approved by Home owners assoc. architectural comittee. but like audihenry said... It doesn't come cheap. one of the last available lots, approx 1.15 acre, sold for $640K. this is not waterfront/waterview or anything.

    Thus the appeal of tract homes. maximize the home on minimum land cost. most bang for the buck. sort of the "Mustang 5.0 GT" of homes. if your budget is limited it can be your best option. IMO beats apts/condos. it's still a stand alone home.
     
  6. audihenry

    audihenry Formula Junior BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    662
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Full Name:
    Henry
    $640K? Sounds like a bargain! That's the price you'd pay here for a 6000 sq ft suburban lot atop which stands a post-war 1200 sq ft house, rotting inside and out, in an area you don't even want to drive through, let alone in a Ferrari! :-O
     
  7. Simon^2

    Simon^2 F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    12,313
    Location:
    At Sea Level
    Just making sure were clear, the $640K is for undeveloped land. not cleared. no house.

    I know it'd be more than that in LA, but $640K is a lot for a little dirt...
     
  8. audihenry

    audihenry Formula Junior BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    662
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Full Name:
    Henry
    I realize that! :)

    It's so over-developed here that such a land in a good place would be worth millions, if not more. My prevous post relates to what most people end up doing: they buy a rotting house and put up a McMansion in its place, unless they have the money to get a nice lot in a nice place, which is beyond the reach of most people. :(

    What's the average starter home in your area going for?
     
  9. Simon^2

    Simon^2 F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    12,313
    Location:
    At Sea Level
    Not sure what you mean by my area. my neighborhood is 1.5M-4.5M. starter homes in orlando are all over the map depending on area. I would say new starter tract housing in average areas goes for 300-350K. plenty of new neighborhoods going in with houses over $1M though.
     
  10. Buffarino

    Buffarino Guest

    Most people would love to live in a neighborhood like that. But for them (and me), a $1mm house is not feasible. Therefore, they either rent or buy in tract neighborhoods. It's not like people love living on top of their neighbors, believe me.
     
  11. Simon^2

    Simon^2 F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    12,313
    Location:
    At Sea Level
    I agree completely. Remember, my last few sentences were....

    "if your budget is limited it can be your best option. IMO beats apts/condos. it's still a stand alone home."

    In no way am I putting down a tract home, nor am i putting down a mustang 5.0. it's getting the most for your money, like I said. nothing wrong with that. most, me included, have to live within a budget.
     
  12. Mbutner

    Mbutner Formula 3

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,689
    Location:
    Bay Area / Washington DC
    Full Name:
    Quick Draw
    Lots of these in Norther VA/ Washington D.C. as well. It is a nice compromise due to population density, but you dont have to hear your neighboors banging the door down the hallway of your condo floor. Obviously not perfect but if you want to live in a highly populated area, there has to be some compromise.
     
  13. Fastviper

    Fastviper F1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Messages:
    4,525
    Location:
    Texas
    Full Name:
    Dash
    A friend of mine, a few months ago purchased 32 acres mostly on top of a hill, a 5100 sq ft house on the side of the hill. 10 minutes from the city. For 750k. That was on the growing side of San Antonio.
     

Share This Page