Tweet
Inspired by a conversation with a co-worker, who does not have a vacation house but rents a condo in Vermont for 8K for 6 months each year, and drive there every Friday after work. I figure we can do that, or we can just buy a place for a little more.
A lot of NYCers I know own a vacation property when they rent in the city. - To buy in the city takes a lot of money, where outside commuting distance a house can be had for 200-300k.
The benefits would be:
2) a place to stay to ski in Vermont (we spend around 8-10K on skiing yearly), but now that we have a child, I don't have to fly to Colorado and mountain hop, I'm fine staying around Manchester Center in VT and go to the smaller mountains in the area and Killington. Plus, we can go there for weeks in the summer when it is super hot in NYC (we both have decent vacation time and compressed schedules with 3 day weekends every other week).
3) have things like a yard, bbq on the deck, grow herbs or whatever will survive without much care.
4) STORAGE! Baby stuff, bikes, skis, seasonal stuff. We could really unclutter our apartment in the city if we had a house we can shift things to on seasons we don't use them.
5) lots of outdoor stuff for our son would be cheaper there - horses, sports, etc.
6) diversification into the real estate, not just stocks.
I'm looking at a house with asking price of 275K. It is a nice renovated 3-br, 3 bath house (I never had more than 1 bath in my life). with 2 acres, few minutes from a mid-sized ski mountain.
I could offer 250K if we saw it and liked it.
There is also a ski chalet available for like 130K, but not quite a house and has little land.
The major downside of this undertaking is 3.5 hour drive there. However, anything within normal driving distance is priced to reflect that, and also does not have good skiing.
Would this increase our quality of life enough to justify possibly not maxing out all IRAs?
Would this take care of my house fever and have a family retreat and awesome family memories?
A lot of NYCers I know own a vacation property when they rent in the city. - To buy in the city takes a lot of money, where outside commuting distance a house can be had for 200-300k.
The benefits would be:
2) a place to stay to ski in Vermont (we spend around 8-10K on skiing yearly), but now that we have a child, I don't have to fly to Colorado and mountain hop, I'm fine staying around Manchester Center in VT and go to the smaller mountains in the area and Killington. Plus, we can go there for weeks in the summer when it is super hot in NYC (we both have decent vacation time and compressed schedules with 3 day weekends every other week).
3) have things like a yard, bbq on the deck, grow herbs or whatever will survive without much care.
4) STORAGE! Baby stuff, bikes, skis, seasonal stuff. We could really unclutter our apartment in the city if we had a house we can shift things to on seasons we don't use them.
5) lots of outdoor stuff for our son would be cheaper there - horses, sports, etc.
6) diversification into the real estate, not just stocks.
I'm looking at a house with asking price of 275K. It is a nice renovated 3-br, 3 bath house (I never had more than 1 bath in my life). with 2 acres, few minutes from a mid-sized ski mountain.
I could offer 250K if we saw it and liked it.
There is also a ski chalet available for like 130K, but not quite a house and has little land.
The major downside of this undertaking is 3.5 hour drive there. However, anything within normal driving distance is priced to reflect that, and also does not have good skiing.
Would this increase our quality of life enough to justify possibly not maxing out all IRAs?
Would this take care of my house fever and have a family retreat and awesome family memories?
Comment