The Money Mustache Community
General Discussion => Welcome and General Discussion => Topic started by: A mom on April 03, 2016, 10:02:16 PM
-
I liked this comment by MMM on his recent post. I wondered how many of you are able to do this.
Mr. Money Mustache April 1, 2016, 8:57 am
I think my new theme for designing and efficient life might become “Live in the mile around your house”.
When talking with friends at a party recently, I realized they live REALLY different lives than we do. They get up at 5am, take this kid to lessons and that kid to sports, then go to Yoga or the gym, then go to work, dash off to do something else with the kid or some volunteer thing or whatever.
Then go to the mountains every weekend for snowboarding, take family vacations elsewhere. The typical high-income modern person is barely ever in his own home!
In contrast, I get up, make some fancy coffee, do some writing and a few pushups and pullups, then my wife and boy wake up. I make them a fine breakfast, then they hang out to do some homeschooling while I go out for a walk or a bike errand.
In the afternoons, little MM and I do physical or educational projects together, I might disappear for a few hours to go build things with friends or do a meeting with someone. Then I come home and make a fancy dinner. Friends might stop by to play in our backyard park for some frisbee, and maybe stay for beers or dinner I’ll start a fire in the woodstove, make a fine dinner, and maybe the family and I will all watch a nature documentary or a new Sci-Fi epic or something. Occasionally we’ll go off on a trip.
The typical week varies a little with social events and such, but there is virtually no car travel and very few organized activities. We are much more freestyle than most and I generally dislike when stuff gets planned more than a week in advance. I’m much happier when I get to decide what to do RIGHT NOW.
I’m definitely a weirdo by modern standards – to a rich person, this might sound is like a description of an alien lifeform’s habits. But it seems this is more like how humans have lived for most of our existence, and that might be why it is so satisfying at the deepest level.
Reply
-
You haven't seen the mile around my house.
-
I hope to achieve this when my family moves across country in 2 weeks. The plan is to see how much driving we can design out of our lives, and just use biking and walking as our default mode of transport.
I love the concept and my husband is on board with it so even if we can't completely achieve it straight away we will work towards it.
-
Not doing it, but would like to do more. Started biking to local parks for pinics regularly last summer. Will likely do again. Gradually will add local events, but likely won't be as local as MMM.
-
Cool idea - I just mapped out our regular places, and almost everything is within 1 mile. Our workplaces and two of our grocery stores are half a mile. My ballet studio and the library are a little under one mile. The park I like to go to is about 1/4 mile. The furthest grocery store that we go to is a bit over the limit at 1.4 miles. One mile also gets us to any of the performing arts venues if we feel like seeing a symphony or opera, and the movie theater is just slightly over a mile.
Pretty much the only time we leave our one-mile bubble is to go hiking or biking, plus some socializing here and there with people who don't want to come downtown. Downtown Vancouver is just great.
-
I really loved this comment. We really try to do this -- we chose our current home with this goal in mind. And with a Walk Score of 84 and a Bike Score of 99, we have no excuse for not doing this. Within 1-2 miles of our house we have groceries, hardware stores, garden nurseries, drug stores, parks, a library, our kids' school, a venue that hosts huge free festivals and fireworks every year, friends, etc. Our jobs are further off -- 5 mi and 2.5 mi -- we still bike there, but not quite as convenient as the rest of our lives. The more we make an effort to "live" near our house, the less stress and more enjoyable our lives feels. At this point we can't even imagine living in a place where we need to use a car for our day to day lives.
-
We'd have to go to true subsistence level on our property as the nearest place to buy food is over 5 miles.
-
For the most part, it's not possible where we live. The trio of places I shop for best food prices requires a car. The library where I volunteer, the post office where our p.o. box is, and our health care providers are all about 5 miles away. I batch errands as much as possible.
However, DH is still working, and plans to do so for about five more years. His office is three tenths of a mile from home. I walk him to work every morning. We enjoy the quiet pre-dawn walk and the workout the steep hill provides. Since work happens far more often than the need to run errands, I'm very happy with this arrangement. The fact that there are wonderful hiking trails and walking paths within easy reach is also far more relevant to our lifestyle.
Not everything is within a mile, but the most important things are.
-
I don't drive, so we've always planned our life with that in mind. I walk to work, to the library, to the stores. When my kids were still school aged, we were able to walk to school (though not always very enthusiastically. ;-) )
My dh has a 6 mile commute, and we do run car errands on Saturday morning.
The only thing that's out of easy reach for me is our church, which is downtown.
-
Says the man who flies to Ecuador for meetings. :D
I guess I'm confused about his point; is it totally just to avoid car travel? Or any trips outside of the home? Is even biking distance too far for one to go for errands or entertainment? Or that being a homebody is superior to someone who likes to travel when they're FI?
-
This sounds like a great ideal to strive for, but one I'm unlikely to achieve before FIRE. I like how it also emphasizes the value of having "a tribe" which is something MMM has also talked about in the past.
-
I love to do this but currently it's not possible as my job location is now a commute away. In my opinion it's the way I like to live in that I can basically use my bike to get everywhere I want to go.
-
I manage 1.5 miles, which is the distance I walk to work. We live near the city centre and on the edge of a busy neighbourhood, so most things we need are within that distance. (DH's job is a little further away though, so he takes the bus). Neither of us drive and the public transport isn't great, so we do have to pay higher rent for this location, but I'm sure it's more economical overall than owning and running a car. For daily living, this is cheap and healthy, but adventures elsewhere are important too.
-
Limiting cycling to just the mile around my house would get old pretty quickly. :P
-
This is pretty much the way I live. The only thing I need to do is build up more of a tribe. (Moved from very HCOL area to very LCOL area). I am probably in some ways happier than I've ever been in my life. Simple, home-like, very much in tune with nature. Small house, 4400 acre park across the road, family around the corner (pros and cons there,ha-ha), a good dog to walk with, all services 5 minutes in the other direction--life is good. There are a couple places I might travel to once in a while, but for the most part this simple woodsy life suits me fine.
-
It's a nice idea. I definitely have to move before I tried it though as the area I live in isn't particularly nice!
-
The closest supermarkets (as opposed to convenience stores) are two miles away. There's another one being built a little closer, but even that one is 1.5 miles away. There used to be grocery stores (barely) within a mile, but that was back in the 1970s before "grocery stores" turned into "supermarkets."
Also, my job is 6 miles away (biking distance) and my wife's job is even farther (mass transit distance).
For me to live in the mile around my house, I'd have to either substitute my house for a condo/apartment or spend $500K+ (probably closer to $1M now) for a single-family house in Midtown or Home Park.
-
I thought about this and realised that I do mostly "live" within a mile of my home. I do have to work about 2 miles away, and I live within 15 minutes walk of a large city (Glasgow), but I tend to spend most of my free time within my own area.
I have a gym 2 streets away, a library, bakery, greengrocer, butcher and a Lidl supermarket within a 5 minute stroll, a couple of pubs and a nice restaurant in the next street and a gorgeous park that I use on sunny days for picnicking and hiking about half a mile away (I live in an apartment block, with no garden). I don't have a car - I walk everywhere but the city has fantastic public transport options. I live pretty simply, I don't want or need to go to lots of places.
I hate shopping, and Glasgow is known for it's shopping malls, so I tend to stay out of the city centre. I rarely go to the museums, cinema or theatres and when I do it's a special treat - and usually free (our museums and art galleries are always free) or low cost. I live alone, am on nodding acquaintance with my neighbours and shopkeepers and I'm very content with my lot.
-
Says the man who flies to Ecuador for meetings. :D
I guess I'm confused about his point; is it totally just to avoid car travel? Or any trips outside of the home? Is even biking distance too far for one to go for errands or entertainment? Or that being a homebody is superior to someone who likes to travel when they're FI?
I guess I should have included that the statement by MMM was in response to the following question: What change do you think the average Joe can make that’ll have the most impact on finances?
So no issues of moral superiority involved. :)
Thank you! Putting it into context has cleared up the confusion; as a response to that question I would say it's a great answer.
-
My work - 1.3 miles
Wife's work - 1.5 miles
Church - 1.5 miles
Grocery - 2.1 miles
Kids' school - 2.3 miles
Running trail along the river - 1 mile
Closest park - 1.4 miles
Home Depot - 2 miles
Soccer fields/rec center w/pool - 2.5 miles
Not quite the mile around our house, but that's pretty much everything we do except the gym (~4 miles), at least with any regularity. It's a great life. We can drive into the city with ease if we want or need to, but the want to has decreased steadily the longer we've been here. It makes not spending excess money easy, and it's all bikeable.
-
I thought about this and realised that I do mostly "live" within a mile of my home. I do have to work about 2 miles away, and I live within 15 minutes walk of a large city (Glasgow), but I tend to spend most of my free time within my own area.
I have a gym 2 streets away, a library, bakery, greengrocer, butcher and a Lidl supermarket within a 5 minute stroll, a couple of pubs and a nice restaurant in the next street and a gorgeous park that I use on sunny days for picnicking and hiking about half a mile away (I live in an apartment block, with no garden). I don't have a car - I walk everywhere but the city has fantastic public transport options. I live pretty simply, I don't want or need to go to lots of places.
I hate shopping, and Glasgow is known for it's shopping malls, so I tend to stay out of the city centre. I rarely go to the museums, cinema or theatres and when I do it's a special treat - and usually free (our museums and art galleries are always free) or low cost. I live alone, am on nodding acquaintance with my neighbours and shopkeepers and I'm very content with my lot.
That sounds like a perfect location.:)
-
You have to keep in mind that the words that MMM is spewing these days is from the perspective of a multi-millionaire with a $500k income who still travels extensively and also moved 2000+ miles away from his birthplace into a different country.
Living within a mile is just stupid if you're in the accumulating phase or you simply want to build your stash in general. Sure, it's possible for a lot of people to make their millions online with a laptop and an internet connection, but it's silly to only focus on that and not try tons of other things until something clicks. It's likely that what you find won't be within one mile of your house.
Sure, if you're completely FI and have all the money you'll ever need, living within a mile of your house can be a really satisfying experience - not having to move too much to get to the things you need, aka efficiency.
-
You have to keep in mind that the words that MMM is spewing these days is from the perspective of a multi-millionaire with a $500k income who still travels extensively and also moved 2000+ miles away from his birthplace into a different country.
Living within a mile is just stupid if you're in the accumulating phase or you simply want to build your stash in general. Sure, it's possible for a lot of people to make their millions online with a laptop and an internet connection, but it's silly to only focus on that and not try tons of other things until something clicks. It's likely that what you find won't be within one mile of your house.
Sure, if you're completely FI and have all the money you'll ever need, living within a mile of your house can be a really satisfying experience - not having to move too much to get to the things you need, aka efficiency.
I don't understand why you have to be a multimillionaire for this. Why is it stupid? Plenty of people in this thread have already spoken up that they do this--or close to it. His comment was a suggestion for having a strong positive impact on one's finances, and it was spot on. It's a great sentiment.
I'm not FIRE or wealthy. I do have a 90-minute (one way) commute 3 days a week (which is subsidized by my company), but other than that, 90% of my carless lifestyle is within a 20 minute walk of my building. Now, that has a LOT to do with where I chose to live. If you're not in a dense area with a lot of walkability or bikeability, this probably isn't going to be practical. I imagine this would be much harder to do in sprawling suburbs, for instance. But I don't see it having anything to do one's accumulated wealth (or lack thereof).
-
I think this is great if you are a transplant to an area where you can just choose to associate with people in a certain radius of your home.
My wife and I both grew up in Massachusetts where we now live to we spend a lot of time traveling on the weekends to visit family with our kids.
-
We pretty much live within a mile of where we live, with the exception of the wife catching the light rail downtown for work twice a week. We work from home, parks/lake/library/grocery store all within easy walking distance. Community garden across the street. The price we pay is that we had to pay Seattle housing prices, but well worth it imo. We occasionally talk about how much profit we'd make if we sold the house and moved somewhere cheaper (prices have gone up 50% in the last 4 years) but to get much cheaper we'd have to move to the suburbs where stuff seems a lot less walkable.
-
My world is pretty much bounded by my office, 7.5 miles southeast of me (wouldn't want to live near it, it's in an industrial area with very poor schools) and my wife's parents' place 8 miles west of us. And local to us, the shops (grocery, home depot, target, etc) are <3 miles away in various directions. This weekend, for instance, the farthest I ventured from my house was Home Depot a few times.
-
If you live near an older city that has an actual downtown like Longmont (where mmm lives) this isn't a bad idea. For the rest of us in the burbs built post 1950, I think it gets a lot more doable if you stretch the mileage to about 3.5 miles. That gets me to grocery stores, the library, the gym etc.
-
You have to keep in mind that the words that MMM is spewing these days is from the perspective of a multi-millionaire with a $500k income who still travels extensively and also moved 2000+ miles away from his birthplace into a different country.
Living within a mile is just stupid if you're in the accumulating phase or you simply want to build your stash in general. Sure, it's possible for a lot of people to make their millions online with a laptop and an internet connection, but it's silly to only focus on that and not try tons of other things until something clicks. It's likely that what you find won't be within one mile of your house.
Sure, if you're completely FI and have all the money you'll ever need, living within a mile of your house can be a really satisfying experience - not having to move too much to get to the things you need, aka efficiency.
I don't understand why you have to be a multimillionaire for this. Why is it stupid? Plenty of people in this thread have already spoken up that they do this--or close to it. His comment was a suggestion for having a strong positive impact on one's finances, and it was spot on. It's a great sentiment.
I'm not FIRE or wealthy. I do have a 90-minute (one way) commute 3 days a week (which is subsidized by my company), but other than that, 90% of my carless lifestyle is within a 20 minute walk of my building. Now, that has a LOT to do with where I chose to live. If you're not in a dense area with a lot of walkability or bikeability, this probably isn't going to be practical. I imagine this would be much harder to do in sprawling suburbs, for instance. But I don't see it having anything to do one's accumulated wealth (or lack thereof).
I'm saying it's silly to move somewhere and then say, "well this it! everything within one mile is now what my opportunities are confined to". It doesn't happen in real life. It doesn't even really happen in MMM's life. Sure, most people's everyday activity in dense areas happens within a mile or two. That makes sense. That's just natural given that denser areas have more things within proximity to one's home. No shit.
But to live somewhere and say you're only going to work at places that are within a mile of your house? That's where the logic begins to become flawed and you're limiting your opportunities. Yes, I'm taking it a bit too literal - sometimes one's mobility can be directly correlated with one's success.
-
I walk about 1/5 mile to the train stop, ride it 5 miles to work, and walk another 1/5 mile to work. Wife unfortunately has to drive about 8 miles each way.
Other than that though, we're pretty close. I think our grocery is just outside of that radius, but that is because the Aldi closed for renovation and the local place (1/10 mile walk) is too expensive for everything (and doesn't have everything); we go there when we need 1-2 items. Oh, and wifey stops at Costco on the way home from work 2-3 times a month.
-
If you live near an older city that has an actual downtown like Longmont (where mmm lives) this isn't a bad idea. For the rest of us in the burbs built post 1950, I think it gets a lot more doable if you stretch the mileage to about 3.5 miles. That gets me to grocery stores, the library, the gym etc.
Even then. I live in an old town that does have a nice downtown right on the rail line (but my house was built in '59). I live about 1.3 miles from downtown. If my house were a mile closer, it would probably have cost ~$100k (30%) more. Plus, the downtown area, which is very nice, is mostly restaurants and boutique type shops, yoga studios, salons, etc. Great to have around, but not exactly good for the staples we need. The actual places we shop regularly (grocery, Target, Home Depot) are within your proposed 3.5 mile radius.
-
I don't really understand living somewhere beautiful like Colorado and not taking advantage of the mountains.
I mean, yes, 75% of my life is right around my house, but when I want to go for a hike, I go to the mountains (PacNW). Why not live in Kansas if you're not going to take advantage of your beautiful surroundings?
-
If you live near an older city that has an actual downtown like Longmont (where mmm lives) this isn't a bad idea. For the rest of us in the burbs built post 1950, I think it gets a lot more doable if you stretch the mileage to about 3.5 miles. That gets me to grocery stores, the library, the gym etc.
Even then. I live in an old town that does have a nice downtown right on the rail line (but my house was built in '59). I live about 1.3 miles from downtown. If my house were a mile closer, it would probably have cost ~$100k (30%) more. Plus, the downtown area, which is very nice, is mostly restaurants and boutique type shops, yoga studios, salons, etc. Great to have around, but not exactly good for the staples we need. The actual places we shop regularly (grocery, Target, Home Depot) are within your proposed 3.5 mile radius.
This is how the suburbs by me have ended up too. I work in Downers Grove and its "downtown" is exactly what you're describing.
The only places I frequent at all within a mile of my house are Ace Hardware, the library, and a really good Thai restaurant. Everything else is right around this mythical 3.5 mile suburban bubble. Everything's available, it's just all a few miles away. Very clearly designed with "everyone has a car" in mind. In fact, I'd probably be closer to grocery stores/etc if I lived *farther* from my suburb's "downtown."
-
I'm saying it's silly to move somewhere and then say, "well this it! everything within one mile is now what my opportunities are confined to". It doesn't happen in real life. It doesn't even really happen in MMM's life. Sure, most people's everyday activity in dense areas happens within a mile or two. That makes sense. That's just natural given that denser areas have more things within proximity to one's home. No shit.
But to live somewhere and say you're only going to work at places that are within a mile of your house? That's where the logic begins to become flawed and you're limiting your opportunities. Yes, I'm taking it a bit too literal - sometimes one's mobility can be directly correlated with one's success.
I don't think that's what he is saying at all, and you can always move closer to your work.
-
That comment struck me as well, and not just as a way to save money, but as a pleasant way to live. We had the opportunity to do this while on sabbatical in Europe and it was amazing (we did it in both large cities and tiny villages). We walked to work and walked almost everywhere else with some public transit for longer distance attractions. We walked to grocery stores and parks, and had our favorite bakers, and cheesemongers, and farmers markets, and pasta shops all within walking distance. And we were much healthier for it. It is harder to do in North America because most smaller cities are not designed to be easily accessible without cars. We are 80% of the way there. Our work is about 5 miles away, but groceries, school, library, nature trail, etc, are all a mile or less from our house. My ideal would be able to walk most places including work and school, and occasionally drive to other places on the weekend for more outdoorsy adventures.
-
I've always ascribed to the this: if I can't bike to work it's too far.
Been doing this for 30 years. Walk to grocery stores, do the garden, good ale house a few blocks away, etc. OK - take the car to the mountains for climbing/backcountry skiing, but generally the car stays parked during the week. Commuting distances, spending hours of your day going back and forth in a line never made sense to me.
-
I live in Phoenix and while we do venture outside of the 1 mile radius, it's very easy for my family to live happily within 3-5 miles of our house. We have grocery stores, schools, churches, fast food and family owned restaurants all well within walking distance. Also movies, Target, a hospital , doctors and dentist, all nearby.
Not to mention friends who also live in the neighborhood, which is priceless.
We live just a short walk to bus stops and a quick bike ride to the light rail.
I work at home. My husband works about 3 miles away--a straight shot on one city bus.
3/5 of our kids still live at home.
We have 2 sons at two different high schools, both within 3 miles of our house.One of our adult sons also lives at home. He is a recent college grad who works at an elementary school right across the street from us.
Our neighborhood would probably be considered lower-middle class, and in the 18 years we've lived here, I've seen it swing in different directions, but I love it. Wouldn't trade it for a newer, bigger or more expensive home. We have ample space and a huge back yard in an established, well-developed part of town.
It's perfect for us and while we'd have to make a few small changes to live within 1 mile, it's definitely do-able.
-
hah. Within a mile radius I have....11 neighbors. Three ponds. Three barns. One church, if you don't count going up the driveway in the mile. That's it.
Within 5 miles we have a post office, bank, pizza shop, 4 churches, and a CSA. Now we're talking.
I live my life within 40 miles. Day to day within 20 (my husband's commute), usually.
But I live on a farm. So I realize this is basically the total opposite of living in a city or town. I do like the concept of not racing around everywhere-my parents limited us kids to up to 2 activities apiece at a time growing up, and there were still weeks when we were rushing around. But I'm really glad I got to play a sport and a musical instrument, so thanks parents!
-
I aspire to this as much as possible. My work is three miles from home, but most other day-to-day things are within a mile. Within that radius we have four supermarkets, a post office, a library, a big thrift shop, a few parks, our dentist, my son's daycare, the pediatricians' office, an elementary school, a high school (middle school is 1.1 miles away), a couple dozen restaurants, and more. The net result is that our car sits idle more days than not, and we have exercise as a natural component of most errands. It's good for the body and the wallet at the same time.
-
I don't understand why you have to be a multimillionaire for this. Why is it stupid? Plenty of people in this thread have already spoken up that they do this--or close to it. His comment was a suggestion for having a strong positive impact on one's finances, and it was spot on. It's a great sentiment.
I'm not FIRE or wealthy. I do have a 90-minute (one way) commute 3 days a week (which is subsidized by my company), but other than that, 90% of my carless lifestyle is within a 20 minute walk of my building. Now, that has a LOT to do with where I chose to live. If you're not in a dense area with a lot of walkability or bikeability, this probably isn't going to be practical. I imagine this would be much harder to do in sprawling suburbs, for instance. But I don't see it having anything to do one's accumulated wealth (or lack thereof).
In most places, being within 1 mile of everything you likely need (work, food, etc.) also places you in prime real-estate. And by prime, I mean extremely expensive.
-
This was an interesting thought exercise. There's a park and lots of houses within one mile of my apartment, but that's about it. 3 miles gets me to the grocery store, and I can get downtown if you push that to 4 in a slightly different direction. Not easily walkable per se, but certainly bikeable. There's trails and bike lanes everywhere here, so I can run and bike to my heart's content. You'd have to push it out to 11 miles to include my work commute, but my life fits pretty neatly into a 4-5 mile radius about 95% of the time I'm not working or visiting family out of state.
-
This was important for us when we moved, and we are very happy to live less than one km from work, school, and the center of our medium to small size town. Since we chose the "wrong" part of town, the house was relatively cheap too.
It is not about limiting ourselves, but about not wasting time and energy on irrelevant stuff. The kids can walk to school, or run over to the library on their own. I spend no time at all commuting. If the kids get sick at school, DH can be there to pick them up on three minutes. Of course we travel outside the zone, but because we want to.
-
I need to do more of this. Within a mile, we've got 3 parks, including one of the best in the city, a Whole Foods, a Sprouts, a Safeway, a public library, a golf course, three light rail stations if we have a reason to go downtown. I think there are 6 micro breweries. A weekly farmer's market. Dozens of restaurants if you stretch to 1.5 miles. I think the only things we don't have are retail shopping and my wife's gym.
-
That comment struck me as well, and not just as a way to save money, but as a pleasant way to live. We had the opportunity to do this while on sabbatical in Europe and it was amazing (we did it in both large cities and tiny villages). We walked to work and walked almost everywhere else with some public transit for longer distance attractions. We walked to grocery stores and parks, and had our favorite bakers, and cheesemongers, and farmers markets, and pasta shops all within walking distance. And we were much healthier for it. It is harder to do in North America because most smaller cities are not designed to be easily accessible without cars. We are 80% of the way there. Our work is about 5 miles away, but groceries, school, library, nature trail, etc, are all a mile or less from our house. My ideal would be able to walk most places including work and school, and occasionally drive to other places on the weekend for more outdoorsy adventures.
Exactly. It's nice not to travel too far. I also wouldn't take the 1 mile as a literal figure - for me it's say 5 miles or so. For me it's a fair bit further than that but the point is you can live your life predominantly via using a bike or walking to get around. Traffic isn't an issue.
-
My wife would still drive to the grocery store even if we lived IN the grocery store. It's been a substantial challenge convincing her that we should let the kids walk or bike the 0.25 miles to their school instead of her taking them there by car. But she's getting better. :)
We do have an ace hardware 1 mile away and a grocery 2 miles away, both of which I bike to. Work is 8 miles, but that is a bikeable distance too, though admittedly I haven't done it many times yet.
-
I would like to live in the mile around my house, but that isn't possible at the moment without moving. Our jobs are in a different town that is 15 miles away and we do most of our shopping in yet another city that's a lot larger, but also about 7 miles away.
We both love living in the country and I'm not sure we will ever give that up to live in the mile around our house. It's a nice thought, but I like having a big yard and privacy from snoopy neighbors. I hear stories from my friends that live in the city about how their neighbor complains about them not raking their leaves or not removing snow from one of their cars soon enough. That would drive me crazy!
-
In most places, being within 1 mile of everything you likely need (work, food, etc.) also places you in prime real-estate. And by prime, I mean extremely expensive.
Depends on your definition of expensive. We live in downtown Chicago, but our living expenses (for 2 people) are about $30,000 per year--very achievable in a childless two-income household with Chicago's soon-to-be $15/hr minimum wage. On one hand, my rent is a bit lower than average, but on the other I have an facepunchingly high food budget that could be halved easily--so it probably equals out.
And since everyone else is doing it: Within a mile, I have 2 Targets, 2 Whole Foods, 2 candy stores, 1 Trader Joes, 1 terrible supermarket, 2 good supermarkets, 3 small independently owned supermarkets, about 50 Starbucks (not hyperbole; they're rarely more than 2 blocks apart), and several CVSs and Walgreens. Also, 2 farmers markets, the main branch of the Chicago Public Library, the Chicago Riverwalk, Millennium Park (free concerts!), Grant Park, Chicago Cultural Center, the Art Institute of Chicago, some smaller museums, 2 ice skating rinks, tons of really cool architecture, lot of water features, all of the public transit (including a water taxi), and several university campuses. Hundreds of "neighborhood" restaurants, hundreds of pubs/bars. thousands of chain restaurants, a couple churches, lots of gyms, lots of salons, and way way way too much crap to buy (I'm looking at you, 2 Disney Stores that tempt me so). Stretch to two miles and you've got the Museum of Contemporary Art, Navy Pier, a beach, the lakefront trail, and part of the museum campus.
But. No schools. No real playgrounds. No neighborhood sandlot type places. No bakery. No butcher. No fishmonger. No awesome ethnic supermarkets. No independently owned ice cream joints. No yards. No vegetable gardens. No backyard animal husbandry. No "tribe." No nearby friends, family, or coworkers (downside of working 30 miles from home). No parking for less than $200/month.
Big city living is not for everyone, particularly families with children (although there is a 2-child family on my floor--I suspect they homeschool?), but I think anyone who loves it can make it work. We think about moving to the suburbs--I want a dog and a garden, he wants a car and a man cave. But then we look around us and realize what we'd be giving up--including our smallish annual budget.
-
There's something to be said for this - I mean, just think of how much less time is spent "traveling".
It's a sliding scale, and we were a LOT closer to MMM's end of the scale for a few years. My son's school is 0.7 miles from home. We have a produce stand, 2 drugs stores, a couple of coffee shops, and two grocery stores about 1-1.25 miles from home. Well, we lost the main grocery store. Will get another one some day. I used to do yoga up there too.
Especially when I had babies, we were not in any activities. I like to go for little walks/ hikes in my neighborhood. I can walk to the beach in under 2 miles.
But.
Well, we lost the grocery store. The one that is left? You can take MMM's grocery budget and double or triple it. So, I drive to get groceries.
I do work out at home a few days a week. But I also drive to the gym 2x a week to swim, drive my toddler to swim lessons (we live at the ocean, swim lessons are non-negotiable for me. I was 40 when I finally felt comfortable in the water.)
My 10 year old decided he wanted to play baseball. He was 9 when he started. So many friends "when are you going to LET him play a sport?" What do you mean, LET HIM. He doesn't really want to play a sport? Well, at 9, he decided to play a sport. When I was a kid, his age, I wanted to play a sport too. My dad wouldn't let me. I tried gymnastics, but he didn't want my mom to drive me on Saturdays (I lived in a rural area). Then I tried basketball in 5th grade and baseball too. I wasn't particularly good at either, but the kicker was the the bus would drop me off 0.4 miles from home. My dad did NOT want my mom to have to pick me up because I got dropped off at dinner time. So, at the age of 10 or 11, I could sense this, and I quit. To make my mom's life easier.
Finally when I was 14 and "old enough" to walk home, I played volleyball. But I don't want to be *that parent*. Sorry, you can't play a sport because I don't want to drive you around. He tried a few bits here and there (the school had a soccer team one year). He likes baseball. He's learning a lot, staying fit.
We still try to stay at home a lot. Aside from work and daycare and school. Those are my choices, not MMMs choices. On weekends, we walk to the park. Our 'hood has a potluck brunch or dinner every Sunday. This is my entertainment and social outlet. Instead of going "out" with other groups.
-
Aside from work about 80% of what I need is within 1 mile and 95% within 3 miles. Work is about 6 miles away. I live in a dense suburb, so I don't have to go far for much of anything. (The three mile diameter gets me to Home Depot, target, and downtown). There are two grocery stores within easy walk g distance, restaurants, banks, cvs, bakery, etc.
-
You haven't seen the mile around my house.
Yeah, to make this happen, you'd have to choose the mile pretty carefully. I don't live in that spot.
-
I can see the point of people saying that a one-mile life probably increases your housing cost, but it still seems to me that it increases it less than it would in a fully mustachian marketplace. Because so many people don't *care* if they have to drive ten miles to buy parmesan (rural mustachians, obviously I'm not talking about you).
So I probably paid a little more for my house in order to be within a mile's walk of my workplace, schools (from kindergarten to university), culture/services (our main museum, art gallery, library, govt building), shopping (two supermarkets, liquor store, small mall, drugstore, excellent bakery), activities (basketball, baseball, hockey/skating, bike path, birding spot), farmer's market, and (just barely) the hip resto/bar streets.
But I paid a lot less because OMG NO GARAGE HOW CAN PEOPLE POSSIBLY LIVE WITH NOWHERE TO PARK A CAR??? :-)
-
Where we used to live was much like that- even 1/2mi, not 1 mile. The rent was very high though. But it was a pretty calm way to live- I love being able to walk errands and not have to drive.
On the other hand, now we drive 2.5mi to groceries, I drive 80min each way to work (luckily only 2 days per week), and we are near zero amenities except for 1 small park about a mile away. On the other hand, the rent is cheap(er)!
-
Pretty much everything I do is within a mile from my place and I love it. Work is the furthest away at 1.1 miles but the grocery store, parks, bars, restaurants, museums, central library, Pike Place Market, even the ferry terminal out to the islands is within a mile. It really does give me so much extra time to enjoy the day without having to worry about driving, parking, sitting in traffic, etc. I do feel lucky and know it isn't always possible.
-
I rarely leave a two mile radius around my place, it helps that I work remotely though.
-
A mile is an arbitrary unit of measurement.
No one would even consider it if a blogger said, "Live in the 5,280 feet around your house." because the number 5,280 effectively communicates just how arbitrary the distance is.
Like all life advice, the broad strokes tend to be more important than the details.
You could broaden it out and then put some kind of probability on it. Something like, "I will live within 10 miles of my home 80% of the time."
If I analyzed my life, I'd probably unconsciously adhere to such a rule. I'm not a big fan of rules though. There are compelling reasons to break almost any rule you could come up with. That's why I don't do budgets.
I recognize that, "Do I live within a mile of my home?" is a fun thought experiment if nothing else though. Far be it from me to stop the fun.
-
When I was in my 20s in my last 2 years before leaving the Navy, I lived in the DC area.
My studio was 1 mile from work. I walked to work. I could buy groceries on the way (but drove to the commissary instead).
It was glorious! Most of that mile was in the underground between Pentagon city and crystal City, so rain/ snow/ humidity. Didn't matter.
-
I am suburban area with a Walmart and supermarket about 1/4 mile away. A major mall 2 miles north, another huge mall 5 miles west, library, parks, many drugstores, Target, within 2 miles.
I walk a lot instead of using the car, which is nice. I have lived in an area where I had to travel at least 5 miles for anything, which sucked.
-
I'm amazed by everyone saying within 5 miles isn't bad... Most of our stuff is within 3 miles, and that still feels WAY too far for me!
-
A mile is an arbitrary unit of measurement.
No one would even consider it if a blogger said, "Live in the 5,280 feet around your house." because the number 5,280 effectively communicates just how arbitrary the distance is.
Like all life advice, the broad strokes tend to be more important than the details.
Agreed.
-
This is why we moved post-FIRE. In my old suburban neighborhood everyone drove everywhere, even if a few things were technically within biking distance. The closest downtown type area was about 5 miles away.
Now we are within 1 mile of downtown and its 4 movie theaters, many restaurants, medical and dental clinics, library, banks and drug stores. Supermarkets are a little farther - three within 1.5 to 2 miles. I do walk and sometimes bike to them, but I drive to them sometimes as well.
Best of all we are just a few blocks from a recreational oceanside trail. I go out there every day, and I often walk 4 or 5 miles. It's free, and it always makes me happy.
-
A mile is an arbitrary unit of measurement.
No one would even consider it if a blogger said, "Live in the 5,280 feet around your house." because the number 5,280 effectively communicates just how arbitrary the distance is.
Like all life advice, the broad strokes tend to be more important than the details.
Agreed.
Yeah, the broad strokes are important. If you need to go 1.2 miles for some things sometimes, you're totally abiding by the spirit of the advice if not the letter. I feel a mile is a convenient measurement to use here because it's roughly the distance a typical person can walk in 20 minutes at a steady but not overly fast pace. Anything past this does seem a bit far to walk to most people.
I would personally say you should pick whatever radius you want where you would personally default to non-motorized transport most of the time. That's where the monetary savings comes in, and the exercise you get by walking or biking is an added bonus on top of this.
-
You haven't seen the mile around my house.
Yeah, to make this happen, you'd have to choose the mile pretty carefully. I don't live in that spot.
Yep. If I was interested in homeschooling my kids or not working, sure. And I wanted to have expensive deliveries of food and not hit the farmers' market or any stores, sure. And I was happy with zero cultural opportunities and never wanted to take my kids to the lake or hiking in the mountains, sure. So guess I'm stuck leaving my imaginary safety zone and venturing out in the world a little bit longer.
-
You haven't seen the mile around my house.
Yeah, to make this happen, you'd have to choose the mile pretty carefully. I don't live in that spot.
I'm with you guys - my house is in a lovely quiet residential location to live, but not where I want to spend all my time.
And I can walk 1 mile in 15 mins, so I'd go pretty stir crazy if I regularly stayed that close to home. I thrive on variety and changes, and love seeing the wider world and enjoying the delights of London.
-
I've always ascribed to the this: if I can't bike to work it's too far.
Been doing this for 30 years. Walk to grocery stores, do the garden, good ale house a few blocks away, etc. OK - take the car to the mountains for climbing/backcountry skiing, but generally the car stays parked during the week. Commuting distances, spending hours of your day going back and forth in a line never made sense to me.
Yes, I don't think it's all that uncommon in Europe. I lived in San Rafael for a while, and found the lack of amenities without having to drive everywhere bewildering. In fact, on a few occasions I walk the couple of miles to the mall I had people stop their car and ask if I needed a lift or was lost! While that was very kind of them, I found it weird that they thought it was weird that I was walking! Everything is just so spread out.
-
I would personally say you should pick whatever radius you want where you would personally default to non-motorized transport most of the time. That's where the monetary savings comes in
I really don't think that's necessarily true. If you get rid of your car, sure, you'll save some money, but I've already shown that INCREMENTAL miles are not very expensive (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/challenging-assumptions-cost-per-mile-of-driving-a-car/) assuming you still need to own one. And the other side of the equation is that housing that is readily walkable tends to be (but is not always) significantly more expensive. Like I said, a house a mile closer to downtown than my own would cost at least 30% more, because the area is more desirable.
I agree that from a quality of life standpoint, and maybe an environmental standpoint*, living in a walkable area is better, but from an economic sense, it's entirely at a case by case basis because it's very easy to give back way more than your incremental per-mile costs in real estate costs.
*Personally, the effect on the environment of driving a couple miles in a modern car is basically nil, but whatever makes you feel better
-
Not possible unless I reduced myself to eating beech nuts, acorns and wild deer. Nearest town center is 7mi in every direction for us.
I'm not really sure what this even achieves - about all you're doing is driving less. It might as well be called "don't drive more than a mile in any direction from home". It's great to drive less, but unless everything you're buying/using/eating is completely sourced locally, it's still all being produced and shipped in from many miles away. So you're not actually "living" in the mile around your house.
-
I agree that from a quality of life standpoint, and maybe an environmental standpoint*, living in a walkable area is better, but from an economic sense, it's entirely at a case by case basis because it's very easy to give back way more than your incremental per-mile costs in real estate costs.
I'm not finding this to be the case necessarily. I live in a studio in downtown Chicago with my husband. I've looked at homes in the suburbs, and no matter how I spin the numbers, my expenses will go up quite a bit if we move. For starters, in the suburbs near my office, 1 BR single family home (SFHs) simply don't exist, and 2 BR are pretty rare. Basements are ubiquitous. Of course, as the square footage increases, so does the price. Sure the price per square foot drops, but there is nothing of comparable price per month because "build big" is the norm out there. So already I've traded my walkability of 95 to a walkability of 17 and get to pay at least $600 more monthly rent/mortgage for the privilege.
But wait, there's more! Things that I don't pay for now that I'd have to pay for to be closer to my office: property tax, water, gas, electric, trash, sewage, and... other stuff (rented all my life, so I have no idea)? So that's like what? I don't even know how much that stuff costs in this area since I haven't had to pay for it since moving here.
Also, add in the expense and labor of landscaping, house maintenance, plumbing emergencies, flooded basements, snow shoveling, rodents, and bugs!
Oh and that walkability of 17 means we need a car (sorry, folks, I'll walk all day, but I'm not a biker--plus, they didn't even HAVE a bike score for this area), insurance, gas, tires, oil, maintenance.
Now if you have kids or you need a ton of space for whatever reason, go for it! But I don't think it's realistic to say it's less economical to live near city center, especially if you DON'T want 3 bedrooms, a basement, a 3 car garage, a workshop, and a backyard the size of an Olympic pool.
You did say case by case, which I would agree with to an extent. Other suburbs and places in the city limits but not near downtown probably do have 1 BR SFHs of a price comparable to mine--but aren't relevant to me because that's not where I work. But rent/mortgage being equal, homeownership would still be WAY more expensive because of all those other expenses. I really can't see how it would be economical to move even if my rent in my current place increased by $500+ per month.
That said, I DESPERATELY want dogs--you know how some childless 30-ish women go baby crazy? That's me right now, but with dogs. Some day in the next few years I might trade my nice cheap walkable lifestyle for all the joys of homeownership just so I can have those dogs. It's all about priorities.
-
I agree that from a quality of life standpoint, and maybe an environmental standpoint*, living in a walkable area is better, but from an economic sense, it's entirely at a case by case basis because it's very easy to give back way more than your incremental per-mile costs in real estate costs.
I'm not finding this to be the case necessarily. I live in a studio in downtown Chicago with my husband. I've looked at homes in the suburbs, and no matter how I spin the numbers, my expenses will go up quite a bit if we move.
I'm talking apples to apples (house to house, or even apt. in walkable area vs. apt in less walkable area). Going from urban to suburban isn't the same thing, especially given the house vs. apt discussion.
-
I walk/bike this all
.5 miles to the gym, grocery store and redbox
1.0 miles to the barber, dentist, post office and fruit/vegetable market
1.25 miles to the library
2.5 miles to work, doctor
8.5 miles to chess club. I bike during DST and drive during standard time.
-
I'm talking apples to apples (house to house, or even apt. in walkable area vs. apt in less walkable area). Going from urban to suburban isn't the same thing, especially given the house vs. apt discussion.
I apologize if this comes off snarky, as that is not my intent, but why specify, especially after the fact? Your thesis was that walkability (in general) means a price increase--my argument was that this isn't necessarily going to be the case even most of the time.
For the sake of apples-to-apples, however:
Average price for a 550 square feet in my building: $1400.
Apartment complex that's almost but not quite walking distance from my office: $1445 for 527 square feet, plus they require renters insurance.
-
Kinda. I live within a mile of work (which happens to be the public library, so that's nice) and a lovely park which we regularly walk in. There's also a grocery store within about a mile, as well. But we do use the cars for shopping at Aldi and Target (maybe 3 miles away?), and for visiting friends/family, and our gym (the YMCA) is also probably about 3 miles away. But we don't have over-scheduled weekends, for the most part, we use that time to re-charge at home as much as possible, and not spend additional time in cars, if we can avoid it. We do drive to the Minneapolis/St. Paul area about once/month on average for concerts or other cultural events, or to see family/friends who live there.
-
I'm talking apples to apples (house to house, or even apt. in walkable area vs. apt in less walkable area). Going from urban to suburban isn't the same thing, especially given the house vs. apt discussion.
I apologize if this comes off snarky, as that is not my intent, but why specify, especially after the fact? Your thesis was that walkability (in general) means a price increase--my argument was that this isn't necessarily going to be the case even most of the time.
For the sake of apples-to-apples, however:
Average price for a 550 square feet in my building: $1400.
Apartment complex that's almost but not quite walking distance from my office: $1445 for 527 square feet, plus they require renters insurance.
What suburb do you work in? And where in Chicago? Both those rents seem fair for the area, but higher than they need to be to me.
FWIW, it would be far cheaper for my wife and I to live in the suburbs, but we would at the same time be losing the walkability. In the suburbs, the closer you get to the Metra (which happens to mostly be downtown in any particular suburb, although not necessarily closer to a grocery) the more expensive your housing.
-
I'm talking apples to apples (house to house, or even apt. in walkable area vs. apt in less walkable area). Going from urban to suburban isn't the same thing, especially given the house vs. apt discussion.
I apologize if this comes off snarky, as that is not my intent, but why specify, especially after the fact? Your thesis was that walkability (in general) means a price increase--my argument was that this isn't necessarily going to be the case even most of the time.
For the sake of apples-to-apples, however:
Average price for a 550 square feet in my building: $1400.
Apartment complex that's almost but not quite walking distance from my office: $1445 for 527 square feet, plus they require renters insurance.
What suburb do you work in? And where in Chicago? Both those rents seem fair for the area, but higher than they need to be to me.
FWIW, it would be far cheaper for my wife and I to live in the suburbs, but we would at the same time be losing the walkability. In the suburbs, the closer you get to the Metra (which happens to mostly be downtown in any particular suburb, although not necessarily closer to a grocery) the more expensive your housing.
For all intents and purposes, Deerfield--not too far from the MD-N line, (but not walking distance either). I just Googled "deerfield apartment" and took the first result--admittedly not the best sample size. I'm looking a bit more deeply and it looks like that's pretty average with a couple outliers in either direction.
Live in River North, but the rent in that building is a bit below average for the area, to be honest.
I personally would never move into an apartment in the suburbs. If we're sacrificing walkability, we might as well get a house and yard out of the deal. We've considered moving out of the city, but it always seems like we'd be giving so much city amazingness and paying soooo much more. But then again, dogs.
-
I'm talking apples to apples (house to house, or even apt. in walkable area vs. apt in less walkable area). Going from urban to suburban isn't the same thing, especially given the house vs. apt discussion.
I apologize if this comes off snarky, as that is not my intent, but why specify, especially after the fact? Your thesis was that walkability (in general) means a price increase--my argument was that this isn't necessarily going to be the case even most of the time.
Because I didn't think of that kind of drastic lifestyle change. As you pointed out, there are a HUGE number of considerations, both economic and otherwise, that come into play when considering a move to/from the city/suburbs.
I was just trying to point out that fixating on one very narrow attribute, walking to certain things to minimize car costs, may miss the forest for the trees if you spend a lot more on housing, etc, in a given area.
-
In the suburbs, the closer you get to the Metra (which happens to mostly be downtown in any particular suburb, although not necessarily closer to a grocery) the more expensive your housing.
This is what I was thinking of. I'm in Arlington Heights, this is definitely true here.
-
I'm talking apples to apples (house to house, or even apt. in walkable area vs. apt in less walkable area). Going from urban to suburban isn't the same thing, especially given the house vs. apt discussion.
I apologize if this comes off snarky, as that is not my intent, but why specify, especially after the fact? Your thesis was that walkability (in general) means a price increase--my argument was that this isn't necessarily going to be the case even most of the time.
For the sake of apples-to-apples, however:
Average price for a 550 square feet in my building: $1400.
Apartment complex that's almost but not quite walking distance from my office: $1445 for 527 square feet, plus they require renters insurance.
What suburb do you work in? And where in Chicago? Both those rents seem fair for the area, but higher than they need to be to me.
FWIW, it would be far cheaper for my wife and I to live in the suburbs, but we would at the same time be losing the walkability. In the suburbs, the closer you get to the Metra (which happens to mostly be downtown in any particular suburb, although not necessarily closer to a grocery) the more expensive your housing.
For all intents and purposes, Deerfield--not too far from the MD-N line, (but not walking distance either). I just Googled "deerfield apartment" and took the first result--admittedly not the best sample size. I'm looking a bit more deeply and it looks like that's pretty average with a couple outliers in either direction.
Live in River North, but the rent in that building is a bit below average for the area, to be honest.
I personally would never move into an apartment in the suburbs. If we're sacrificing walkability, we might as well get a house and yard out of the deal. We've considered moving out of the city, but it always seems like we'd be giving so much city amazingness and paying soooo much more. But then again, dogs.
Ah. Yeah. River North prices are insane. Not sure how you can justify that one if you work in Deerfield!
As for Deerfield housing costs, it is going to be high and there aren't going to be a lot of rentals. I suppose if you get into Wheeling it will be cheaper, but that is getting farther. Nice area though (I hail from Libertyville originally, live in Bucktown/Logan Square area now).
-
Pretty much everything I do is within a mile from my place and I love it. Work is the furthest away at 1.1 miles but the grocery store, parks, bars, restaurants, museums, central library, Pike Place Market, even the ferry terminal out to the islands is within a mile. It really does give me so much extra time to enjoy the day without having to worry about driving, parking, sitting in traffic, etc. I do feel lucky and know it isn't always possible.
We must be neighbors SeattleStache! We're in Belltown.
I hadn't thought of it this way before but DH and I do mostly hang out within a one mile radius of our home. Groceries, movies, parks, restaurants, the library, festivals; it's all right here. We love the easy proximity of everything and the fact that we have a waterfront park nearby.
We used to live in a semi-rural area and we got tired of the 45 minute commute to everywhere. All of our friends lived far away. We felt pretty bored out there although it was beautiful.
It sounds like a walkable/bikeable neighborhood (with friends) has similar benefits for MMM that city living does for us.
SIS
-
Ah. Yeah. River North prices are insane. Not sure how you can justify that one if you work in Deerfield!
As for Deerfield housing costs, it is going to be high and there aren't going to be a lot of rentals. I suppose if you get into Wheeling it will be cheaper, but that is getting farther. Nice area though (I hail from Libertyville originally, live in Bucktown/Logan Square area now).
Work from home Mon+Fri (although my last boss wouldn't let me wfh and it was brutal), Metra partially subsidized by company--and the remainder is pre-tax--free Pace shuttle from Metra to office. Also, landlord is my cousin so my rent is several hundred lower than average for the building, and the building is older so it's lower than average for RN. The thing is I moved to Chicago to live IN Chicago, not Deerfield. :P
If we were to move out of RN, we'd probably look at the Bucktown/Wicker Park area--although I don't know how much longer it's going to be affordable.
-
I would personally say you should pick whatever radius you want where you would personally default to non-motorized transport most of the time. That's where the monetary savings comes in
I really don't think that's necessarily true. If you get rid of your car, sure, you'll save some money, but I've already shown that INCREMENTAL miles are not very expensive (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/challenging-assumptions-cost-per-mile-of-driving-a-car/) assuming you still need to own one. And the other side of the equation is that housing that is readily walkable tends to be (but is not always) significantly more expensive. Like I said, a house a mile closer to downtown than my own would cost at least 30% more, because the area is more desirable.
I didn't read that entire other thread about cost per mile to own a car, but it looks from your first post there that you think 25¢/mile is a reasonable estimate for incremental vehicle ownership costs, including depreciation. Okay, we'll go with that.
We try to "live within a mile of our house" and only need to drive once every other day (give or take). Let's say the average place we drive to within the metro area is five miles away, so ten miles round trip for an average vehicle cost of $2.50 per trip. We make roughly 15 of these trips per month, for a cost of $37.50 in incremental vehicle ownership expense.
What if we lived in a car-oriented suburb? My parents have such a house, in a sea of low-density housing that is roughly two miles from anything but more houses. Grocery store? Two miles. Big box retail store? Two miles. Restaurant? Two miles at least, but not many are even that close. Public library? Four miles. School? 2-4 miles. Dentist? Five miles. Everything is spread out, and essentially nothing is in walking distance. Let's suppose we need to go to three different places in an average day (two workplaces and one other place), again with an average driving distance of five miles each way. That's 90 trips per month, or $225/month.
For the sake of this comparison I ignored car trips outside of the urbanized area (for hiking or other leisure/tourism purposes), since I figure I would make those trips about the same amount whether I lived in the city or the suburbs.
Already we're at $187.50/month in transportation savings from living in a walkable area.
But wait! Because we aren't both driving cars to our workplace each day, we only need to own one when living in a walkable area, instead of the two we would need to own in a suburb. Now we get to add in some of the fixed costs that you so conveniently hand-waved away in your other thread. We pay about $50/month for a liability-only policy, plus something like $10/month for registration and maybe $50/month in fixed depreciation on an older vehicle. That brings the total savings to roughly $300/month.
That's a pretty big difference! I can see where some people might find they save more than this in housing costs by living in a suburb, but it's a pretty high bar to clear.
-
If we were to move out of RN, we'd probably look at the Bucktown/Wicker Park area--although I don't know how much longer it's going to be affordable.
Probably not too much longer. My friends place (that they rented) in Logan Square, that is a worse location in most ways than our $1,400/month 800sf 1BR, just sold for $385k. That is a 2BR 2BA, but still--that is insane! I think with the continuing gentrification, along with the rising taxes, we'll be priced out of Chicago within 2 years and into the burbs. But we grew up in the burbs, so we're ok with it.
-
That brings the total savings to roughly $300/month.
I could quibble with some of the math (3 trips every day at 10 miles per?) but either way, taking your $300/mo... that takes 334 months (28 years) to pay back an extra $100k of mortgage principle (no interest or additional property tax). Which was my point. Around here, $100k for a more walkable location is probably not out of the realm of reason. Even $50k, it's a 14-year payback (let's assume opportunity cost and interest/taxes wash).
-
Everyone's getting way too hung up over the "1 mile" thing.
The real takeaway for me here is to not let your life degenerate into a never ending grind shuffling yourself (and your kids, if applicable) from one time sucking obligation to the next. If you can keep that shit reasonably in check you'll find yourself staying closer to home naturally.
-
Pretty much everything I do is within a mile from my place and I love it. Work is the furthest away at 1.1 miles but the grocery store, parks, bars, restaurants, museums, central library, Pike Place Market, even the ferry terminal out to the islands is within a mile. It really does give me so much extra time to enjoy the day without having to worry about driving, parking, sitting in traffic, etc. I do feel lucky and know it isn't always possible.
We must be neighbors SeattleStache! We're in Belltown.
I hadn't thought of it this way before but DH and I do mostly hang out within a one mile radius of our home. Groceries, movies, parks, restaurants, the library, festivals; it's all right here. We love the easy proximity of everything and the fact that we have a waterfront park nearby.
We used to live in a semi-rural area and we got tired of the 45 minute commute to everywhere. All of our friends lived far away. We felt pretty bored out there although it was beautiful.
It sounds like a walkable/bikeable neighborhood (with friends) has similar benefits for MMM that city living does for us.
SIS
Belltown is great! I'm in NW First Hill.
-
If you live near an older city that has an actual downtown like Longmont (where mmm lives) this isn't a bad idea. For the rest of us in the burbs built post 1950, I think it gets a lot more doable if you stretch the mileage to about 3.5 miles. That gets me to grocery stores, the library, the gym etc.
Same for me. Being "stuck" in suburbia means a wider radius to get to places we need to go. Yes, we could move, but we looked and looked and looked for a smaller house with a bigger garage, and were unable to find one. So for now (and the next ten years, which is what we committed to for this house, since we're now remodeling the kitchen), we're living with slightly longer commutes for our necessities.
-
Everyone's getting way too hung up over the "1 mile" thing.
The real takeaway for me here is to not let your life degenerate into a never ending grind shuffling yourself (and your kids, if applicable) from one time sucking obligation to the next. If you can keep that shit reasonably in check you'll find yourself staying closer to home naturally.
I tend to think of "walking distance" as the distance I can walk in 20 minutes. Happens to be about a mile at a leisurely stroll--my "city commuter" walk speed is about 17 min/mile. I don't really want to spend more than 20 minutes to get anywhere, whether by foot, train, automobile, or boat.
-
It's definitely an appealing idea. My work is about 8 miles away, but most of the places I go regularly are either within a mile of my house (park, gym, non-preferred grocery store, library, Home Depot) or between home and work (preferred grocery store, daycare). The biggest exception is my church, which is about 20 miles away, but I love it there and didn't find anywhere closer that met all my criteria, so it's worth the drive to me.
-
The take away for this thread seems to be this. For people that homeschool, or don't have kids and/or can afford $400,000+ housing (and possibly private school tuition) 1 mile radius big city or expensive burb living is great. For the rest of us, there's a sacrifice.
Personally, I live in one of the big sprawling burbs about 30 mins from MMM outside of Denver/Boulder. We used to live in a great walkable neighborhood in Denver. But, my son wasn't in school yet and my daughter wasn't born. We wanted a house and a 50s trac home near the freeway was running $350,000+ (out of our price range). Everyone said the school system would get better, but at that time the majority of students at the local high school didn't graduate. My wife was also starting her own business and could move anywhere.
I chose a burb without a city center where we could buy a decent house for under $300,000 (taxes under $2000 a year) and a public school that outperforms many of the private schools in the area. My wife worked from home, and then leased an office 10 mins away that directly between Boulder and Denver (where most of her contracts are) The people are sort of dorky and there aren't any cool shops or restaurants to ride my bike to but we're saving tons of money by not following the hipsters.
That said, I can't wait for my kids to graduate from high school so I can move into a small apartment, sailboat, school bus or tiny house in a funky neighborhood with plenty of queer people and people with strange haircuts.
-
We live right in the middle of a small town, and the 1-mile radius around us pretty much covers the whole place! So all services, schools, work, activities etc are easily within walking/biking distance. The only activities we drive to are the (under 9 miles) to the base of the ski hill for DH or XC skiing (under 4 miles to a spectacular golf course, if we golfed.)
The downside to this type of living have been mentioned briefly in other comments: the job market is small - so not a lot of mobility to increase wages, and we are at the mercy of only 2 grocery stores (and one small organic grocer) so there are not a lot of options when looking to slash grocery costs. Housing prices are high (welcome to BC, where BC stands for "bring cash" - but that is relative...a single family home with garage (that may need some upgrades) with a large yard is available for under $300,000 CAD. $450+ for a large finished home in the newer subdivisions, $1 Million + at the resort.
For us, upsides outweigh the downsides so we are staying put - if we ever move to a larger center, we hope to choose our home very carefully in order to maximize the walkability. This seems a lot harder these days with the urban sprawl everywhere...
-
We are about five miles from the nearest gas or grocery, live in farm country.
The trick is to reduce your number of trips to town, and to always keep a supply list so that when you go to town you pick up everything you need.
I wouldn't like living in town within walking distance to everything. Too many people and you can't pee in the yard or shoot guns.
-
I live outside Trenton- the only thing within a mile of my house worth anything is the CVS and the bar. (Although- I've lived where I live for almost 3 years- the bar is literally on the corner of my tiny block and I've never been)
Deli/pizza place (now becoming a Portuguese place) and the library is 2 miles.
That's about.
upside- I did move and even with 3 major trips
Home > Work
Work > Gym
Gym> Dance studio
Studio > Home
I manage to keep my mileage under 25 miles per day if I make no other stops. compared to the 250-300 miles I used to drive as an inspector- I'm quite pleased with this arrangement.
-
I wouldn't like living in town within walking distance to everything. Too many people and you can't pee in the yard or shoot guns.
Ha! True that!! 3 years on 40 acres - now in the city. Each has its benefits - thanks for the morning chuckle.
-
Wellll, I live roughly in the 5 miles around my house, if that counts for anything. Grocery, pharmacy, doctors, art museum, parks, YMCA, library, orchard, hiking + biking trails. Those are all within that radius; most are within 2.5 miles. I do think it saves time and money being close to most of the things you use regularly.