Where should I move? Looking for community… (Seattle, Bellingham: fit in, how much)

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote

I lived in Sandpoint in the 70's as a kid (absolutely freaking beautiful and a small town). Humongous lake. It was gorgeous; but, it was not a resort town back then.
.

That's Sandpoint, Idaho, he's talking about, OP. Utterly breathtaking scenery! I don't know if it's artsy. Would be worth a visit to explore, though. ID winters are snowy, though, especially northern ID. But snow means--good water supply. It won't run out of water in your lifetime, probably.

OP, I only suggested Eureka, because it's one of the cheaper locations in Humboldt, AND it's starting to improve. People are moving there for retirement and also as a WFH location. But as you know, there are other towns in the area, that aren't as "downhill" as Eureka, as you described it, that are very affordable: Fortuna and Ferndale, to name a couple. A little more upscale is McKinleyville, which has been growing fast.

And more generally in Humboldt, the drug scene has been changing; weed farms have been sold, and new people coming in, who are interested in organic farming, organic dairy, are buying them up.

But ok, I guess I'm not telling you anything you don't already know. I'll leave it at that.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote

Astoria's prices went crazy (they were still somewhat affordable as late as 2017). Most of the houses in Astoria are very old and most of Astoria is prone to landslides except a couple of streets (and those are pricey).

Could you elaborate on this, please? "Old" houses are a plus, IMO. I've looked at RE there, and there are beautiful homes up on the hill. I've been wondering if the town tends to get gale-force winds, though, coming in from the ocean, and squalls. Lewis & Clark and the community they founded on the lower Columbia gave up on the area because of that.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Could you elaborate on this, please? "Old" houses are a plus, IMO. I've looked at RE there, and there are beautiful homes up on the hill. I've been wondering if the town tends to get gale-force winds, though, coming in from the ocean, and squalls. Lewis & Clark and the community they founded on the lower Columbia gave up on the area because of that.

Oh, just that old houses are more expensive to maintain.

I really was seriously looking at Astoria to potentially retire. I found some software I have no way of recalling now what I found years ago. But, it shows where landslides occur. Not only that, but, I had looked at a couple of houses in an area of ongoing landslides.

There's so much that goes into selecting a location that I am most likely to stay put for fear of making a mistake.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote

Oh, just that old houses are more expensive to maintain.

I really was seriously looking at Astoria to potentially retire. I found some software I have no way of recalling now what I found years ago. But, it shows where landslides occur. Not only that, but, I had looked at a couple of houses in an area of ongoing landslides.

There's so much that goes into selecting a location that I am most likely to stay put for fear of making a mistake.

I feel your pain. This is especially true now, in the era of climate change causing even more hazards. I do remember looking at one home online, amazing prices there, compared to Seattle & Bay Area, that was on a steep hill. The yard was terraced, which meant using stairs just to enjoy the yard, and the arrangement made me think, "Yikes!". Potentially precarious. Thanks for your info.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

I feel your pain. This is especially true now, in the era of climate change causing even more hazards. I do remember looking at one home online, amazing prices there, compared to Seattle & Bay Area, that was on a steep hill. The yard was terraced, which meant using stairs just to enjoy the yard, and the arrangement made me think, "Yikes!". Potentially precarious. Thanks for your info.

Those houses built off the side of a hill without land completely under them sometimes fall down go boom.

[NW Crow]

The right specific Olympia neighborhood could be what you are after. Mostly west side but possibly central or northern. There is Puget Sound shoreline property, probably too expensive directly on though there are small / old / rough places. Live a block or half mile away? More possible. Also lots of small to larger lakes with housing to south and west.

There is funky hippy artsy musical foodie encased in more standard Americiana commercial and residential. It comes down to going to spots that fit you. Some nice forested shoreline parks.

Can poke around threads here, local newspaper and community boards, use Google maps / streetview and / or make a 3-5 day visit. I think it is far more likely that Olympia works for you than more "out there" options. Bellingham market (and within an hour) is probably more expensive than some things in Olympia but compare / contrast if you want.

You might like Cascades / Olympic mountains a lot or well enough... but not everyone thinks they are as appealing as Sierras or Rockies. Mostly pretty long winter conditions. Either you do winter activities or wait and wait for the snow to melt back.

Other spots in WA might appeal but I won't throw out because I am not as familiar or up to date on current price points.

[mayfair]

Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote

If you're buying you want something with staying power. If I was young I'd head to Madison Wisconsin. Eastern Washington is nothing like Western Washington (same applies to Oregon). But, they have good source of water (unless the Columbia dries up like the Mississippi. I would go to the Great Lake States or parts of Maine or Vermont.

Madison is not cheap but would have the art community, friendly people, great biking but the housing prices are almost coast level due to it being so desirable. Property taxes are also high. The biking trails are outstanding. You also have to be ok with a very long frigid winter and most people are when younger because you can go cross country skiing and be active outdoors all winter. They even plow the bikes lanes, so they are usable. For elders, snow removal gets old but you can hire it out.

If you want milder weather and the west coast, you have to pay high prices and deal with the problems of towns that have been discovered and swamped by growth. Those can still be good compared to other places, but you have to be aware of the reality.

[NW Crow]

In my above post I said:

"Also lots of small to larger lakes with housing to south and west."

I meant south and east.

[Diana Holbrook]

Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote

I am glad someone mentioned besides wildfires and their smoke also mentioning sea level rise maps. I have studied those. You do not want to live in Longview. Near there is Kelso and there are houses much higher up the hill; but the town can flood.

Any place on a river can flood. Not because of climate change or sea level rise, but because that's what rivers do: Rivers receive and drain excess water. The good news in Western WA is it is often not far to a hill, out of the flood plain.

Most of the houses in Astoria are very old and most of Astoria is prone to landslides except a couple of streets (and those are pricey).

Can I point out something that I think is important?

If most of the houses on the hill are very old, perhaps it is not as prone to landslides as you fear.

I would certainly never discourage you from hiring an engineer to assess any particular lot, I would not necessarily trust some website that is applying generic risk factors.

[jabogitlu]

Your post completely discounts risk, which is pretty much the opposite of what the insurance industry does, not to mention investors. Homeowners need to think like investors in order to protect their investments. There may be instances where other factors mitigate the increased risk (anticipated return on investment, value-in-use type scenarios where the buyer specifically wants water views, etc.), but at a baseline, it strikes me as somewhat naive to encourage people to not even think of 500 and 1,000-year levels of risk, prior to making an informed purchase decision...