Any place inexpensive anymore? (Portland, Salem: house, unemployment, buying)

[Steve97415]

Originally Posted by Fiddlehead

One last thought. Do you really need a 3000 sf home? That seems a bit over the top for a family of four.

I'd have to agree with that. Half that size would be more than enough for a family of four. What happened to big cars in the 1970's is going to happen to big homes in the coming decade: as the cost of utilities goes through the roof, people will only want compact space-efficient houses. Those with McMansions will have to unload them on the market at a loss...probably selling them to contractors who will convert them into multi-family dwellings. Look for the Prius-house, not the Hummer-house.

[bluebird39]

I don't know... if you have family in the PNW, and like it there, I'd stay put!! Especially if you have little ones. Family becomes much more important. We moved away from Oregon partially to be closer to part of our family that my kids hardly knew. Also so I could afford to NOT work while they were little.

We're moving back to OR very soon, and I'm SOOO glad. The culture "back East" is so different that "out West". It was really hard for me to get used to.

Boise seems nice. Tri-cites WA will be close to us and not too far from either Portland or Seattle, seems cheap, btu I've never been there.... ---shrug--- Good luck!

[jjpop]

Have you looked in Vancouver, WA? Particularly the Fishers Landing/Camas area has newer construction and the prices have dropped considerably from their highs. When we were looking last summer, it was high on our list because of affordability (though we weren't in that price range). There are people that diss Vantucky, but we thought it wasn't bad for suburban sprawl.

Maybe you can get 3000sf for $350k, but certainly you can get 2200-2400sf for that price based on my research. Then you'd still have all the amenities of Portland within a reasonable driving distance. Plus if you can work in WA there would be no income tax.

[Fiddlehead]

Originally Posted by bluebird39

We're moving back to OR very soon, and I'm SOOO glad. The culture "back East" is so different that "out West". It was really hard for me to get used to.

I am happy for you Bluebird, but I don't think I would make broad cultural statements about "back East" vs. "out West" being so different. You are talking about an amazing range of cultures in both regions, so..

I was only mentioning that affordability argues for the East, especially if you want a nice home for a reasonable price. Obviously, it might not work for an individual for many reasons, but if value is a concern, it is obvious that the West has risen beyond its proper value in many places.

I recall that you made a decision to move to a specific area in N. Michigan, which is rural, flat, very cold, and very cloudy, but beautiful. That does not describe all of the East. Again, I am happy you will be returning to an area that seems good for your family. Just curious, what did you really miss most, the culture or the mountains and geography of Oregon? I know I would miss the landscape terribly if I moved to the Great Lakes. W. PA is much more mountainous and not so cold, so a bit different, but I could very well feel the same way.

[malachai23]

Geez. If he wants a 3000 square foot house so be it. Lots of people live in 3000 square foot houses. There is absolutely nothing wrong with 3000 square foot houses or wanting to live in one.

So, OP, if I told you my house in Dayton is 3000 square feet, would you reconsider? LOL

[John Shaft]

Originally Posted by Steve97415

I'd have to agree with that. Half that size would be more than enough for a family of four. What happened to big cars in the 1970's is going to happen to big homes in the coming decade: as the cost of utilities goes through the roof, people will only want compact space-efficient houses. Those with McMansions will have to unload them on the market at a loss...probably selling them to contractors who will convert them into multi-family dwellings. Look for the Prius-house, not the Hummer-house.

One thing folks in the Pac NW really haven't figured out is that, by and large, their houses are pretty small when compared to the rest of the country. 1500-1700 sqft might seem "normal for a family of four" here, and anything else is "oh-my-gosh-excessive-McMansion." When I first moved here, I couldn't believe how expensive the houses were, particularly when compared to how small they were.

Granted, it helps keep the heating costs down in the winter, but with the grey weather keeping folks indoors for months at a time, I can't see how people manage to live in smaller houses without going stir-crazy.

[Silverfall]

Originally Posted by John Shaft

One thing folks in the Pac NW really haven't figured out is that, by and large, their houses are pretty small when compared to the rest of the country. 1500-1700 sqft might seem "normal for a family of four" here, and anything else is "oh-my-gosh-excessive-McMansion." When I first moved here, I couldn't believe how expensive the

I have had many relocating clients ask for a 3,500-4,000 square foot house with three car garages (which aren't all over the place here). They are stunned when they can't get those easily here.

The urban growth boundaries require smaller houses for developers to make money. I think the smaller house size has less to do with heating costs than builder/developer costs. You can only squeeze so much house on a 5,000 sq foot lot.

It's the price we pay for no sprawl.

[FV9]

Interesting comments and I appreciate them all. Couple of response:

1) Salem: Lived there for a few years while in law school. Have friends there. Just didnt really enjoy living there;
2) Vancouver/Camas: OUr first house was off of 192nd. I enjoyed living there and I was working in Vancouver. However, my wife was working in Portland, as I am now. The commute killed here, which is why we moved to Portland (actually, Gresham). In general, I would like to escape commutes, higher taxes, etc;
3) 3000sf house. I know its bigger, but we like the room. I understand you point, though.

Western Montana is interesting, but my wife is an only child. I dont think she would move that far from her parents.

[Fiddlehead]

Good to hear it was helpful. Best wishes with finding the right spot. It is sometimes discouraging. I know, I have been looking for an affordable, decent-sized home in Ashland for about seven years now. A challenge, to be sure. If your tastes are pretty mainstream, you might keep an eye out for foreclosures. But I suspect you are already doing that.

[vaughnwilliams]

Originally Posted by Steve97415

The law of supply and demand ensures this: if you want what everyone else wants, it's going to cost you money.

More desirable = more expensive
less expensive = less desirable

There is no such thing as an affordable place in a mild to moderate climate with good city planning, a sound local economy, low crime, low pollution, good schools, uncongested roadways, high livability and an artsy progressive vibe. Too many people are looking for that and competition from them drives up the cost of living. If you can find some criterion in the paradise formula that isn't that important too you, but might be off-putting to others...if you would be fine living where it's beastly hot for 8 months out of the year, or some place really remote from major population centers, or where City Hall is broke and the schools have a Third-World feel to them...then you can expect a major reduction in cost of living. But in a country of more than 300 million people, when you find some place that's affordable there's a good reason for it...for one reason or another, a lot of people would not want to live there.

Except for "remote from major population centers" and "reduction in cost of living", the second half of your post describes where I live perfectly.