Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
$140k is about what that joint should be worth. no one is selling. I mean why would they?
Property Taxes would have been ~$1,100/ yr on their new home in 1991, yet today that would be $18,000+/ yr (at my levy rate, nearby).
So... if the original purchaser was an hourly papermill worker, he might be pulling in $40k / yr as a retiree. Spending 1/2 their annual income on property taxes, and the other half on healthcare, just may not wash.
I have (3) ex-coworkers in the much bigger homes in Lacamas Shores They paid $350k - $400k at the time (brand new), but today they are all empty nesters, and itching to head back to CA. I think they missed a great opportunhity to do so. (but i'm usually wrong in my timing).
Ok, yeah, they have some large mansions in there with 5000 sf+ and lake views. I guess if they're empty nesters in a HUGE house, its overkill and lots of work to maintain. What's the point of living in 6+ BR, two story McMansion then? While they could definitely get a lot more $$ for it now, moving back to CA would be downsizing quite a bit for a similar priced home. But that's probably ok if they can get into a nice area and closer to family.
Without Prop 13 type protections, those taxes would kill a retired papermill worker on Lacamas Lake. So, they basically get taxed out of their home. Hmm, I guess if you're going to retire in WA, you need to fly under the radar and not stand out as one of those 'rich' home owners in a million dollar+ property. It's like putting a tax target on your back.
Well guys, thanks for all the chatter, and the comments answered my questions I guess! Just two of us and want to downsize to about 1600-2000 sf with a budget topping at $650k, so maybe we should look older neighborhoods and maybe have to deal with some updating!
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,694 posts, read 58,012,579 times
Reputation: 46171
Quote:
Originally Posted by trailtramp
Well guys, thanks for all the chatter, and the comments answered my questions I guess! Just two of us and want to downsize to about 1600-2000 sf with a budget topping at $650k, so maybe we should look older neighborhoods and maybe have to deal with some updating!
You've got a lot of choices.
If you're a trail tramp, you might want rural. Still plenty of choices.
If a 'hiking trail tramp', I would look for a place near a stop on the Skamania County Transit line.
If an ATV / vehicle trail tramp, you might want to be near Off-road park, or forest service land.
If a bike trail / walking established trails, get within walking distance to any of our great trails. (Urban or Rural).
If urban... just get walking distance to Fisher Transit Center. Something near Fairway Village so you can walk to groceries and eateries.
If you want out of the wind, look into the wind charts on airport websites, Troutdale will have accurate maps for the Columbia Gorge region. If I were averse to the wind, I would be north of a line along Lacamas Lake (south side)
I won't bore with again posting the plan I use to find and buy inexpensive properties, It's very simple. I have several on my radar today, nothing over $400k mostly under $200k. I have friends who are still looking for places, but I don't need any more. I sold my last for ~$300k and owner financed it. Small home, large shop, barn, fruit orchard, rhodie garden, huge veggie garden, 3 acres. Taxes were very cheap (low valuation and very low levy). Very close to excellent hiking and photo ops. (Clouds (below us) were spectacular yesterday)
Well guys, thanks for all the chatter, and the comments answered my questions I guess! Just two of us and want to downsize to about 1600-2000 sf with a budget topping at $650k, so maybe we should look older neighborhoods and maybe have to deal with some updating!
Yes, look at the established neighborhoods which will many times (though not always) have larger lots than the new construction. With only two of you looking for a house under 2000 sf, you will find some decent homes which are ~20-30 years old. Keep in mind its still a tight market with limited inventory. Although not as bad now as at the peak with multiple competing offers over list price, sellers are still holding on to properties not knowing what the economy holds. Some regret not selling at the peak and are hoping prices will rise again. But I think the market is cooling with modest prices drops as rates rise. You just have to give it some time to find the right place.
While it may not be your first choice, renting is normally better to give you more time to really get to know the various neighborhoods. It also allows you to watch and wait while for that home that more aligns with all your preferences. But it can still be done remotely like we did. Its just more of a challenge and you must rely more on locals for insights - along with all our various opinions, preferences and biases. Talking to a trusted and recommended realtor can really help also. They are watching the market daily if they are doing their jobs and know many neighborhoods that may match what you want. You gotta give them the full laundry list including gotta haves and nice to haves. That list may morph as you see various places within your preferred budget or get more of a 'boots on the ground' perspective.
Lastly, while you may not care about school districts, its important to be aware that as you cross various 'invisible to you' boundaries, school quality goes down as crime can increase. It's many times a tell tale sign of other systemic problems within a neighborhood. Generally, central Vancouver has more of those issues vs. the west or east boundaries.
So here are some that meet 'most' of the criteria mentioned. They all have larger lots compared to most 'new' developments. Keep in mind that some two stories have bedrooms downstairs. So, the upstairs can be used for guests instead - make them climb the stairs. That's what our retired family does in Fishers Landing. They live on the first floor.
Ok, yeah, they have some large mansions in there with 5000 sf+ and lake views. I guess if they're empty nesters in a HUGE house, its overkill and lots of work to maintain. What's the point of living in 6+ BR, two story McMansion then? While they could definitely get a lot more $$ for it now, moving back to CA would be downsizing quite a bit for a similar priced home. But that's probably ok if they can get into a nice area and closer to family.
Without Prop 13 type protections, those taxes would kill a retired papermill worker on Lacamas Lake. So, they basically get taxed out of their home. Hmm, I guess if you're going to retire in WA, you need to fly under the radar and not stand out as one of those 'rich' home owners in a million dollar+ property. It's like putting a tax target on your back.
Derek
Talk to my wife. Two out of our three kids are out of the house so we have two empty bedrooms plus a third that was always a guest room.
But the kids want their bedrooms for when they frequently come back on holidays. And my wife wants a big house so we can host all the big family gatherings during holidays (instead of going to someone else's house! ) and so here we are.
Other factors are (1) moving is an extraordinary headache when you get to this point in life with a lot of stuff, and (2) we have a 15 year fixed at 2.6% that we'd be throwing away if we moved and a smaller home might not actually be cheaper due to the mortgage cost. Plus we like our location better than any of the places nearby that have smaller homes.
If the kids permanently move away and we no longer have a need for the finished basement I'll probably tear out the carpet and turn it into a shop for building boats and then be happy.
I expect our combination of factors is more or less replicated by most older couples still living in larger homes around here. If all our kids ended up on the east coast or somewhere far away we'd probably think harder about downsizing. Especially into something like a condo that we could walk away from for months at a time to travel without worrying about maintenance or anything. But now it doesn't make much sense.
If you're a trail tramp, you might want rural. Still plenty of choices.
Not a "trail" person at all. Not even outdoorsy. No interest in gardening or livestock. My aim would be privacy... large distance from neighbors, no HOAs etc., house not visible from the road (even when foliage has fallen), minimal manmade noises.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtnSurfer
So here are some that meet 'most' of the criteria mentioned. ..
I expect our combination of factors is more or less replicated by most older couples still living in larger homes around here. ....
"We are all individuals" (except me, perhaps). Variability among "older couples" is high. Some don't have kids. Some are early-retirees, while other are WFH employees and still others are traditional office employees.
We downsized from a rural house on acreage, to a laughably small studio apartment in the city, including traumatic letting-go of decades of accumulation of tools and car-parts. Formerly the go-to guy for swapping engines, now I can't even change my own oil, or inflate a tire. Whenever the market equilibrates, we'd like to reengage with the homeowning world, this time avoiding the parlously caustic mistakes of the prior house. This means choosing the right location, of course. But it also means decisions such as whether to keep working and living in the big-city, or to take early retirement and to relocate. There's no obvious compelling or optimal solution.
Talk to my wife. Two out of our three kids are out of the house so we have two empty bedrooms plus a third that was always a guest room.
But the kids want their bedrooms for when they frequently come back on holidays. And my wife wants a big house so we can host all the big family gatherings during holidays (instead of going to someone else's house! ) and so here we are.
Other factors are (1) moving is an extraordinary headache when you get to this point in life with a lot of stuff, and (2) we have a 15 year fixed at 2.6% that we'd be throwing away if we moved and a smaller home might not actually be cheaper due to the mortgage cost. Plus we like our location better than any of the places nearby that have smaller homes.
If the kids permanently move away and we no longer have a need for the finished basement I'll probably tear out the carpet and turn it into a shop for building boats and then be happy.
I expect our combination of factors is more or less replicated by most older couples still living in larger homes around here. If all our kids ended up on the east coast or somewhere far away we'd probably think harder about downsizing. Especially into something like a condo that we could walk away from for months at a time to travel without worrying about maintenance or anything. But now it doesn't make much sense.
I think it really depends on the families' goals once empty nesters and closer to retirement. I know once our kids are moved out, we'll likely downsize at some point. I would like to travel more once retired. I'm not much of a house body preferring to be outdoors more. I also like the idea of two smaller places with one further south for the winter vs. one big house. I also have no use for acreage vs. others who relish the idea. Time will tell depending on what we both agree to. But I wouldn't mind a condo in FL or someplace similar for the winter months.
Yeah, those low interest rates are nothing to sneeze at. Who knows when that will even happen again.
Bottom line? There are no secret places anymore, anywhere in the US. My wife and I explored and visited potential cities around the country as possible relocation sites during the years we lived in Waco Texas as we were always planning to eventually leave. Off the top of my head we visited all of these places on various trips, always with potential relocation in the back of our minds, even if the trips were for other purposes
Albuquerque
Salt Lake City
Boise
Spokane
Seattle area
Bellingham
Olympia
Wenatchee
Santa Rosa (CA)
Santa Fe
Fort Collins
Boulder
Asheville
Pittsburgh
Minneapolis
Rochester (MN)
Medford
Fort Worth
San Antonio
Fayetteville (AR)
Metro Washington DC
You pretty much get what you pay for. If you want a beautiful place with a vibrant economy, good schools, and lots of recreational and scenic opportunities nearby you are going to pay for it.
The only real places where you can go to find a decent city, good schools, etc. without paying a fortune is in the midwest in cities like Des Moines or Cedar Rapids etc. But then you are living in Iowa.
We, of course, ended up picking Camas as our top choice for a long list of reasons, some personal (parents live nearby) and some to do with the location.
Last edited by texasdiver; 01-11-2023 at 10:10 PM..
You pretty much get what you pay for. If you want a beautiful place with a vibrant economy, good schools, and lots of recreational and scenic opportunities nearby you are going to pay for it.
But the costs differ depending on personal situation. Higher-income, frugal people will be most sensitive to state/local income tax. Housing costs won’t matter much, and other fees/costs won’t matter at all. People who spend most of their money, will be more sensitive to sales tax, property tax and so on. People at lower income levels would save money even in costlier areas, if those areas provide subsidies or other benefits. So yes, "we get what we pay for"... but the question as to who pays, and who gets, depends very much on state/local tax policy.
In my current locale, I pay more in state income tax than for my housing costs. Rephrased, if I move somewhere where housing costs double, but state income tax is zero, there’s a net savings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by texasdiver
We, of course, ended up picking Camas as our top choice for a long list of reasons, some personal (parents live nearby) and some to do with the location.
Perhaps remarkably, not all of us have relatives or local ties. This means both a freedom to move “anywhere”, and a paralysis-by-analysis. If there’s no compelling reason to be anywhere, then wherever one goes, one has only one’s own choices to blame, if the choice becomes unpalatable or disadvantageous. That’s quite a burden, isn’t it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Talking to a trusted and recommended realtor can really help also. They are watching the market daily if they are doing their jobs and know many neighborhoods that may match what you want. You gotta give them the full laundry list including gotta haves and nice to haves. That list may morph as you see various places within your preferred budget or get more of a 'boots on the ground' perspective. 
) and so here we are.
