Posted on 10/05/2018 7:31:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
There are plenty of reasons for Texas’s population boom over the past several years—the economy, immigration, Whataburger—but one that can’t be overlooked is the fact that you typically can find some space to stretch out. And thanks to a chart from real estate site Property Shark, we can see exactly how much square footage you can get in Texas, compared to the rest of the country, for $200,000.
The chart shows how much average square footage you get from a $200,000 investment in 33 U.S. cities, including the six largest in Texas—Houston, San Antonio, Dallas, Austin, Fort Worth, and El Paso. And the numbers across the state look pretty good.
Let’s start by just recapping what the study found for each city:
The order of that list, from most to least amount of square footage for your money, won’t surprise anyone who follows real estate in Texas. Austin, which has a limited supply of homes but is flooded with people, is the most expensive city. El Paso and San Antonio, where that relationship tends to be flipped, are among not just the most affordable cities in Texas, but in the entire country. Houston, Dallas, and Fort Worth split the difference, finding themselves in the middle of the pack both in Texas and the U.S.
Looking at the numbers in the context of the rest of the country, though, helps explain the boom that we’ve seen throughout the state. Austin’s average of 1,341-square feet per $200,000 makes the city seem expensive and overpriced to people in parts of the state where your money goes a lot further. But it’s a downright bargain compared to cities in the northeast and the West Coast. When Austinites take the leap from renting to buying, they might notice that properties they’re interested in are swarmed with bids from California, often for more than the asking price. Why? Because 1,341-square feet is an impossible, luxurious dream to people out there. $200,000 in San Francisco gets you a measly 260-square feet, and the numbers don’t get much better throughout the rest of the state’s coast: San Jose will give you 376-square feet, San Diego 496-square feet, Los Angeles 501-square feet. If property is three to four times as expensive where you’re from, then even Austin’s relatively high property values seem like a stone-cold bargain by comparison. (Let’s not even get started on Manhattan, where $200,000 will get you 126-square feet, commonly known in Texas as a small closet.)
Extrapolating further from this data, it seems that cities where $200,000 you fetch between 1,1100–2,100-square feet are the ones experiencing the greatest population booms: According to Census data released in March, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, and Phoenix are the metro areas with the largest gains between 2016-2017 (Orlando and Austin came in at number eight and number nine, respectively). Seattle (where you get 525-square feet for your money) and Washington, D.C. (where it’s 423-square feet) were the only cities in the top ten that offered fewer than 1,100-square feet for $200,000. (Pricing date for the other two metro areas, Tampa and the inland California city of Riverside, wasn’t available.) Other fast-growing metro areas like Charlotte, Las Vegas, and Nashville similarly fall within the same price window.
| 2017 Rank | 2016 Rank | Metropolitan Area | 2017 Population | 2016 Population | Numeric Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, Texas | 7,399,662 | 7,253,424 | 146,238 |
| 2 | 2 | Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, Texas | 6,892,427 | 6,798,010 | 94,417 |
| 3 | 3 | Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, Georgia | 5,884,736 | 5,795,723 | 89,013 |
| 4 | 4 | Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, Arizona | 4,737,270 | 4,648,498 | 88,772 |
| 5 | 11 | Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, D.C.-Virginia-Maryland-West Virginia | 6,216,589 | 6,150,681 | 65,908 |
| 6 | 6 | Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, Washington | 3,867,046 | 3,802,660 | 64,386 |
| 7 | 13 | Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, California | 4,580,670 | 4,523,653 | 57,017 |
| 8 | 8 | Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, Florida | 2,509,831 | 2,453,333 | 56,498 |
| 9 | 9 | Austin-Round Rock, Texas | 2,115,827 | 2,060,558 | 55,269 |
| 10 | 7 | Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, Florida | 3,091,399 | 3,036,525 | 54,874 |
Low real estate prices don’t necessarily mean that a city is growing or shrinking, though. Cleveland, which gives property owners the most bang for their buck (3,769-square feet) has shrunk every year this decade. San Antonio, which places third on the list, boasted a growth of nearly 25,000 people over a twelve-month period between 2016 and 2017. El Paso, which places second, grew by only 2,780 people in that year. The sweet spot may be somewhere in the middle, in other words, but there’s not as much to learn by looking at the margins.
In Palo Alto, CA, $200,000 buys the dog house in the back yard.
Hmm... Maybe I should sell out & head to Tennessee...
(Not quite yet, but maybe in a few years)
It’s not just the price. It’s the property taxes, too. How are those?
RE: Maybe I should sell out & head to Tennessee...
What makes Tennessee even better?
RE: It’s not just the price. It’s the property taxes, too. How are those?
What ever the property taxes are, they’re nothing compared to where I live ( Long Island, NY ).
I feel your pain. We’d love a nicer house. But we won’t buy one in NYS.
My wife and I recently moved out of Milwaukee County where we were paying $14,000 in property taxes to the country with a new and bigger house and acreage for $5000 in property taxes. I don’t see the appeal to living in the city anymore.
Starts out showing austin @ 1,341-square feet for 200k.
then, devil in the details, they list Round Rock-Austin.
Round Rock is an affluent suburb of Austin.
Median household income Round Rock: $69,892
Median household income Austin: $42,689
(approximates - data is from wiki)
so, 200k will buy a ahouse with less sq. ft in Round Rock vs. Austin...go figure.
For $200,000 you could probably buy a city block in Detroit, Gary, IN, south side of Chicago...etc.
Property taxes in Tarrant County, Fort Worth, are frozen once you reach 65 years old. I didn’t file for my tax exemption until I was 67 and they reimbursed me for the taxes I had already paid. On a 2000 square foot house I pay about $2000 a year in taxes.
I often joke that I sold a shack in Rhode Island, 1200 sq ft, and bought a mansion, 2000 sq ft and brand new, in Texas for half the price.
We are headed to Dallas area.
2 more years and adios Illinois!
L
“It’s not just the price. It’s the property taxes, too. How are those?”
My question too...being from illannoy I’m paranoid about those. It’s costing me about a grand per month in this unholy place.
In DFW metro property taxes can be well over 1% assessed value but the valuations are significantly lower so the actual tax amount is much lower than say, California.
Only if it’s in the back yard of the nastiest crack house within 50 miles
we could be followin all y’all (practicing).
Daughter’s family is in Wichita Falls.
Son’s family an my better angel and I still live in Illinois.
When Illinois starts taxing retirement income (and they will), we are history.
Zillow puts my 960 square foot, on 1/10 acre, 85 year old house in Northern California at $600,000.
Thank God for Prop 13 and having lived here 49 years, my property taxes won’t even buy dinner at a three star joint around here.
“For $200,000 you could probably buy a city block in Detroit, Gary, IN, south side of Chicago...etc.”
They should give you 200k to take a place.
For 100K we bought a nice house on 5 acres in Missouri and pay $800. as yr in taxes.
In Palo Alto, CA, $200,000 buys the dog house in the back yard.
In New Jersey’ you’d be lucky to get the permit to build the dog house for 200K ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.