High-Rise, or a House With Yard

I start most every day with the ritual of feeding and walking my dog followed by a few minutes of relaxation with a nice warm cup of coffee and the daily New York Times. I enjoy reading about world events and what is happening in the “big apple”. This past Saturday an article caught my attention that speaks to any urban city and to what I have witnessed in Denver.

In the article “High-Rise, or House With Yard?” a family takes a close look at the cost comparison between living in the Suburbs or living in the city. I am guessing that most would assume the more expensive option would be the city loft. Well that’s not the case in this analysis. That big house in the suburbs can actually be more expensive. I’ll tell you how they got to this conclusion.

Before I begin I’ll make one thing clear… this is not a square footage to square footage comparison. Basically, the city residence was half the square footage of the suburb home. The purchase price was higher for the city home, just not the square footage (okay.. that is what you would expect). That is often the trade off between these two. When you live in the city I like to think you trade some private space for so much more community space. Maybe you don’t have the fenced backyard but you do have public parks, green space, bike trails and other outdoor features outside your front door. Perhaps you don’t have as big of a kitchen, or a breakfast nook or media room. Instead you have (for Denver) three stadiums, movie theaters, stage and life theater venues, restaurants, coffee shops and bars. You have less space within your private domain but if you don’t mind sharing you have so much more to experience.

I’ll come back to the sharing aspect.

So you might be asking… if the mortgage on the city is higher how can the suburb be more expensive. Two big factors stand out to me. The first is transportation. Denver hasn’t quite made it to a car optional city for most (although I’m giving it a shot right now) but the transportation factor for cost is major. Car loans, car insurance, gasoline, car maintenance, parking, etc. all add up to one great big expense every month. City living with bicycle commutes, light rail and other public transportation, or simply using your own two feet is a wonderful and healthy lifestyle change that puts more money in your pocket.

The second big expense is tied to all that extra square footage in the form of utilities and maintenance. That’s right… that extra square footage is more expensive to heat, cool, and keep maintained. Over the course of a year these various suburb related expenses add up to make city living a cheaper alternative. For me that is great news because I love the city lifestyle. But I also love the social impact my new lifestyle offers.

Of course, looking at it with a BP oil leak perspective both of these expenses are also likely to grow in importance over time. Fuel costs are likely to continue to increase bringing both fuel and utilities higher and higher. Even with electric cars or other alternatives it is likely that fuel from all sources will continue to go up in price. As everyone points their fingers at BP, government oversight or any other third party for the devastating and tragic oil leak in the gulf I find myself blaming myself. After all, I’m the one using all that oil based gasoline for my fuel, my utilities, and my oil based products and services. Heck, I’ve flown more air miles in the past 5 years than most probably do in a lifetime. The best way to help protect the environment is not to blame the producer of the oil but instead to correct my own personal consumption.

So here is my own personal plan….

• I live in a condo downtown
• I travel the city by bike, foot, and for longer distances scooter ($1 a week in gas) or public transportation
• I gave up my car (although I have access to one when I need it)
  • The car optional lifestlye started July 1… so wish me luck
• I rented out my owned parking spaces (so I save car expenses and created income from the choice)
• I shop locally and support local businesses

Granted, it’s not much and I still have more than my share of transgressions but this article was just a terrific reminder of the cost realities of the two lifestyle choices.  Something to consider.  The couple in the article did end up selecting the suburb house for the needed square footage even with the higher expense after their children were born but others discussed in the article chose downtown living.  It was always the city lifestyle that was preferred… it was the square footage that was the main driver of a suburb choice.  How much private space do you need?  I told you I was coming back to this point.

I value my private space.  I do.  I lived in a residence in a suburb about twice the size of my current square footage now.  I had more space, more bedrooms, more rooms, more yard… more more more.

And only after living in downtown Denver in a shared high rise did I realize how much that suburb lifestyle also meant a lack of community.  I just like people.  I like meeting and greeting my neighbors in the hallways, at the gym, picking up my mail, or at the local coffee shops and restaurants.  I don’t want to live in spacious isolation, I want discussions and laughter and an exchange of ideas.  Granted, not everyone is friendly but you take the good with the “challenging”.  Even within the downtown condo lifestyle I would rather live in a larger denser building than a small condo.  Before this I lived in a building that had fewer residences.  Sure, it had nicer counter tops and cabinets and touted itself as a more private building but for me that wasn’t a plus.  I’d rather see others and know my neighbors that never see a soul.  Now I know that in the ‘burbs folks do build relationships with neighbors.  But I there is something about life in a city, a dense city, that is unique and magical.  Try it sometime and maybe you can trade in that car payment for a new bike and some funds for the local coffee shops.

Regards Denver, check out the New York Times article here.