Just popped in to look around tonight, also. Interesting thread …
I agree with Shoveler about downsizing boomers (and older) preferring a one-story house. A house with no stairs with a flat front entrance (without stairs leading up to it) and a flat, wide driveway (to park a boat on w/o using bricks) is hard to find in coastal CA counties. Even one-story condos and PUDS seem to go fast and at a premium. I’m a boomer on the cusp of “retirement” and I definitely would prefer a house like that and I don’t care if its 1300 or 2300 sf (or somewhere in between). South Lake Tahoe has a lot of reasonable inventory that fill the bill.
I agree with FIH in that living in LA, Ventura or SD Counties or the OC is far preferable for a worker bee than living in Riv County, especially southern Riv Co (too remote to most good jobs). San Bern County (south of the summit) is also remote for workers to live in to a slightly lesser extent. I think it’s true that Temecula always attracted both homebuyers and renters for size and newer age of homes for the money in recent years and that was the original (and continuing) sole reason for buying a principal residence out there. Now TV just so happens to have a few busy tourist attractions in its midst and thus has managed to put itself on the map over the last decade.
For the same money, if TV homebuyers would have been willing to accept a smaller, 1950’s or 1960’s nondescript cosmetic fixer in say Clairemont (SD Co), Buena Park or Orange (OC) or El Monte (LA co), for example, they wouldn’t have had anywhere near the horrendous commute to their jobs as they did/do from TV. They traded those two extra hours daily in commute time they could have spent with their families (and also agreed to pay MR/HOA) for a larger, more modern home for the same money as a home would have cost them in the more established areas (examples above). In short, buying in TV and moving out there was a personal decision which either ended up working out long term for these workers and their families … or it didn’t. Residential RE in TV fell in value much, much more in the recession than did the more established areas in coastal counties and seems to have recovered 75% of that fallen value today (on average). Make no mistake … the families headed by worker bees who bought into TV and stayed to raise their families there paid a hefty premium to do so, imho. Aside from the MR/HOA that the well-established communities didn’t have, this “premium” paid to reside in TV wasn’t in money. It was in time lost with family … something a person can never get back (not even taking into account tires, auto maintenance and gasoline, which cost money).
I’m not putting down TV, here. I do realize it has some light industry as well as some white-collar jobs available in a few sectors (but not nearly enough for its working-age population). I am impressed by its attractions and the fact that it can now bill itself as a legitimate tourist destination, but I’m NOT impressed by its traffic.
The established, close in cities in CA coastal counties are more expensive to live in for very valid reasons. The truth is, location trumps all and the “right” location will buy a lot of freedom for a FT worker. [end rant]
I DON’T agree with FIH that former “Californians” choose to live in LV (or AZ) because it is the next best thing to living in SoCal and they’re not yet ready to “downgrade” to CO or KS. First of all, living in the arid desert floor that is LV and Phoenix with these cities’ oppressive heat nine months per year does not compare in any way, shape or form to living in a CA coastal county. The two lifestyles are apples and oranges. LV is what it is and you can’t fix this, FIH!
And uhh, secondly, perhaps KS might be a “downgrade” from SoCal as far as having cheaper housing to buy/rent but if you think CO is cheaper than SoCal, you’ve been hanging around too much with the 420 crowd on your visits there and haven’t been paying attention! Residential RE is very pricey in all the good areas in CO and not that cheap in the mediocre areas. In some mountain towns, most of the available listings are permanently-skirted mobile homes and manufactured homes asking $300K+.
In all the good areas of Denver near the well-paying jobs, SFRs cost $475K on up to $1.6M (not incl the exclusive “old money” enclaves, which are more expensive). Even the neighborhoods situated on well-known “Type A” flood plains have asking prices of $375K to $525K for a 65 yo SFR! Boulder prices are on par with Pt Loma and LJ (SD). Douglas Co and CO Springs are far from cheap. The ski-resort towns and other mountain towns (with fishing, boating, hiking, jeeping, ziplining, hot-air ballooning, whitewater rafting, etc) are very expensive to buy into as well and there is a dearth of listings in them. The western slope from Grand Jct to Durango can be ridiculously expensive and gets moreso the further south you go. The cheapest wood shack in Telluride will cost at least $900K and need $200K of work before it is habitable … that is, IF you can find one for sale! (Most Telluride homebuyers there can only afford a timeshare costing $350K+ for a 1/52 undivided interest!) A 1600 – 1800 sf ranch home in Durango of any age will cost $425K to $575K.
If you want to move to CO for “reasonable living costs” and you must take out a mortgage, then try Longmont (but not for long, it’s inching higher with every sale) or Erie, Greeley and the rest of Weld County, Sterling, Ft Morgan, Lamar and Pueblo/La Junta. In short … living in the icy, windy plains has a “reasonable” cost … or just stay in LV or Phoenix.
US locales with cold, snowy winters aren’t necessary “cheap” to reside in. In addition, their residents have much higher winter utility bills than do CA coastal dwellers … Case in point, Jackson, WY and other WY and ID towns in the Tetons. The cheapest SFR listings in Jackson list for $750K and up and are not even built on site! The spring AND summer combined in this region is only 5-8 weeks long so any new construction must be built off site and carried into the area in pieces and erected quickly as weather permits. Hence, a large portion of SFRs there are “manufactured homes.” The typical home worth $750K to $950K in Jackson is a 2200 – 2700 sf one-story Manuf home with an attached two car garage erected on a desolate lot with little to no landscaping. Why do Teton residents need landscaping if it can’t survive for more than two months per year? Occasionally, skirted mobile homes are for sale in secondary towns in the Tetons which are situated on large lots or acreage. However, overall there is a dearth of listings in the region year-round.
In short, many cold, snowy regions of the US are every bit as pricey as CA coastal counties or rapidly catching up … especially in the well-known (and desirable) tourist towns and ski resorts of the rockies. The soon-to-be retiree on a tight budget is going to have a tougher time with relocation if they were dreaming of retiring in or near a touristy mountainous area. We will probably see many more of them “retiring in place” than originally intended to, especially in CA (due to low property taxes pursuant to Prop 13).
