Is Walkability an Important Consideration in Regards to Your Residence?

[sampelligrino]

A $4m home will rent out for a lot more than $5k/mo, especially in that area. It seems like there is no apparent reason for you and your wife to not take the home, but I'm not sure if your in-laws would be ok with you turning around and renting it out or what have you.

If I had to choose between rural and walkable, I'd take walkable any day of the week although I might be of a younger demographic (28 years old). I love the Silicon Valley area, each town has its own feel and the cal train is awesome. Spend a good amount of time in Redwood City/Palo Alto/San Jose. To have a $4m home in that area would be killer!

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

That's important for those of you with random gangs of fruit pirates roaming the streets.

My house is 15 miles from town. Only the deer bother my pear trees. I will gladly have peace, quiet, and random wildlife in the yard over the convenience of a walking distance shopping outlet.

Right there with you on this one. Proximity is nice, but "walking distance" (at least as I'd define it) is a negative - not a plus - for all the reasons you mentioned.

Sigh... Maybe if I were younger and more sociable...

[kneedeep]

Yes, very important.

[GB-man]

Tough call. Generally no although I am an avid proponent of location is the first and nearly only consideration when shopping for a home.

Also it's freezing cold here for several months a year so cars are really a must.

[SG56]

I would rent it.

The answer to that question depends on so many factors, such as which continent, which country, what age etc.

I grew up in a city and growing up, never imagined I could live in the suburbs.

Many years later, I wouldn't change the space and comfort of my home, just to walk to the grocery store or to restaurant. As a bonus, I don't have to worry where to park when i get home and walk 2 miles, not knowing if i'll find my car undamaged in the same spot tomorrow (city of chicago).

20 years ago, sure thing!

having lived in Europe most of my life, I was used to "walking distance to everything."
Even within the US, it's different. SF is definitely different and people actually choose to walk, which is awesome.

I'd rent it and continue enjoying the suburban life with picket fence and 2-3-4 car garage ;)

[goin camping]

Not for me. I'd rather have privacy and a lack of neighbors.

As to the house. Of course I would accept the gift and then rent it out. I live for mailbox money!

You could probably rent the place out and pay the assisted living bill and pocket some too.

[fusionstorm]

Originally Posted by BristolCavendish

You don't have to 'slum it'. Piedmont, CA (IMO) is one of the nicest neighborhoods in Alameda County, perhaps the best. I recall heading out that way a few years back for a 'deck party' and it reminded me a lot of Woodside, except a bit cooler temperature wise during the summer months.

T'was joking. Los Altos is definitely a nice town, and the proximity to the center of the tech universe means there's no shortage of folks who could afford a steep monthly rent. HQs of Google, Apple and Facebook are all within 10 miles of Los Altos.

[520Matt]

As an earlier poster said you may lose the grandfathered tax break if you don't occupy the house, better check the rule/law.

Where i live not a many neighborhoods are within walking distance of shops etc so if I were to move locally it would be very low on the list of considerations.