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.
ketchikanite's comment was blatantly rude, but this information is helpful to know as a key requirement for finding the right place for you. I have lived in Chaffee County (Salida / Buena Vista) and would certainly rule it out for your desired level of healthcare access, despite otherwise being a potentially good fit. I would agree that somewhere along the Front Range or the Grand Junction area would be the best regional areas to search. The medical care elsewhere in the state currently doesn't mesh well with your wants/needs.
My biggest concern in looking at Colorado would be your desire for low climate change risk. Given that you're young enough to hopefully live for another 40 years, I think that eliminates Colorado. I'm certainly no climate scientist, but between the ever-increasing wildfire risk, consistently depleting snowpack / water levels, and poorer air quality, I think Colorado would be a risky bet when it comes to limited climate impacts. I'm a relatively 'new' resident in that I've only been here for 7 years, but what I've witnessed in that short of a period of time has been dramatic. I'm only 33 and this risk keeps me up at night. I'm not sure where else in the Mountain West would have a dramatically lower climate risk level, though. Idaho? Montana? (places with more water) Maybe it's all about the same?
Another point worth considering is how much crowding / traffic matters to you. I noticed you mentioned you'd prefer not to be in a 'big city', but that can mean different sizes to different people. Some people don't mind the hustle and bustle of bigger places, but for others its insufferable. The Front Range is already extraordinarily busy, even outside of Denver proper, and is only projected to grow more and more in the coming decades. That growth will affect every part of the Front Range, including places that currently look 'small enough'. This could make Grand Junction a more attractive option if that matters to you. If not, the Front Range is probably a better fit.
I think your idea to 'try out' areas is excellent and will serve you well in your search. Since your budget is so flexible, I'd say you're in a good position to find exactly what you're looking for.
Good luck, OP!
Thanks for the insight. The resource I consulted - I forgot to note it - said that Colorado was the 5th best state in the US in terms of climate risk in general, 7th best specifically for mosquito season increase, 5th best specifically for extreme heat, but admittedly 6th worst specifically for summer drought.
Grand Junction sounds like a good focal point, thanks.
ketchikanite's comment was blatantly rude, but this information is helpful to know as a key requirement for finding the right place for you. I have lived in Chaffee County (Salida / Buena Vista) and would certainly rule it out for your desired level of healthcare access, despite otherwise being a potentially good fit. I would agree that somewhere along the Front Range or the Grand Junction area would be the best regional areas to search. The medical care elsewhere in the state currently doesn't mesh well with your wants/needs.
My biggest concern in looking at Colorado would be your desire for low climate change risk. Given that you're young enough to hopefully live for another 40 years, I think that eliminates Colorado. I'm certainly no climate scientist, but between the ever-increasing wildfire risk, consistently depleting snowpack / water levels, and poorer air quality, I think Colorado would be a risky bet when it comes to limited climate impacts. I'm a relatively 'new' resident in that I've only been here for 7 years, but what I've witnessed in that short of a period of time has been dramatic. I'm only 33 and this risk keeps me up at night. I'm not sure where else in the Mountain West would have a dramatically lower climate risk level, though. Idaho? Montana? (places with more water) Maybe it's all about the same?
Another point worth considering is how much crowding / traffic matters to you. I noticed you mentioned you'd prefer not to be in a 'big city', but that can mean different sizes to different people. Some people don't mind the hustle and bustle of bigger places, but for others its insufferable. The Front Range is already extraordinarily busy, even outside of Denver proper, and is only projected to grow more and more in the coming decades. That growth will affect every part of the Front Range, including places that currently look 'small enough'. This could make Grand Junction a more attractive option if that matters to you. If not, the Front Range is probably a better fit.
I think your idea to 'try out' areas is excellent and will serve you well in your search. Since your budget is so flexible, I'd say you're in a good position to find exactly what you're looking for.
Good luck, OP!
Quote:
Originally Posted by davebarnes
How old are you?
When you are 70+, this is important.
I’m 65. Never worried about the quality of health care when deciding where to live. Live an active life, eat healthy, take care of yourself and it’ll all work out. Worrying about what doctor is down the street doesn’t hardly seem like living.
Thanks for the insight. The resource I consulted - I forgot to note it - said that Colorado was the 5th best state in the US in terms of climate risk in general, 7th best specifically for mosquito season increase, 5th best specifically for extreme heat, but admittedly 6th worst specifically for summer drought.
Grand Junction sounds like a good focal point, thanks.
Those Bests sound wrong. Really, really wrong. Drought now starts in late winter or early spring and lasts most of the year in large areas of CO. An already-insufficient water supply is getting worse, and this might be the new normal.
In addition to drought, the increasingly hot temperatures are hanging around much more than they used to. I’ve lived in CO for a total of 30 years. The climate shift has been more pronounced for the last 20 years.
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,548 posts, read 57,460,499 times
Reputation: 45903
Quote:
Originally Posted by CletusVanDam
Thanks for the insight. The resource I consulted - I forgot to note it - said that Colorado was the 5th best state in the US in terms of climate risk in general, ...s.
30 yrs in CO (#5) / WY (#6) for climate change risk
30 yrs in PNW (WA #38 for CC risk)... I will not be heading to CO wtshtf Climate caused, or 'other'. My WA location gets 100"+ 'drizzle' / yr (No restrictions on rain water collection) and I'm 1200ft above the nearest river (sea level+8' to Columbia river), but there is always the chance of another volcano or earthquake. There is HUGE diversity in climate / terrain in many states that have ocean frontage (Thus the "Climate Change Risk" indicator value for an entire state is not too meaningful or reliable.) Then there is the chance of "The Big One" (Yellowstone), or if you have ever been in a wildfire zone, you many have many close calls with "Big Ones" (Vigorous Fires that make their own weather). "Crowning" (burning tops of trees caught in up-drafts) can cross many miles and start your 'protected' space alight. Be prepared (to flee)
#2 NH is not a bad choice for CC and for medical access either (Very close to MA as well as great medical resources in NH) NH, also has varied climate options (including mild to wild), LOTS of recreation, and... income tax free! And NH is very close to Canada for wts (Really) htf.
Both climate and HC are issues to consider when choosing an early retirement home. CO worked for me during my first ER episode (pre-age 30), but I 'moved-on' for various and worthwhile reasons, and will not return to a CO domicile, tho still visit CO 6-10x / yr, and keep properties and vehicles there for frequent trips. Nicer to visit than to live there (for me) YMMV. I miss the great (and safe) biking. Still have many friends there (who still love it, and deal with the huge changes in politics, economy, weather, RULES and people (lots of people, and more coming real soon )
Gardening ... Colorado 'hailed' me out most yrs that the weather 'cooperated' enough to establish a good crop. Consider a covered garden.
PNW on the other hand... very, very easy to fill your freezer with garden and wild produce and wild game & fish. (But raising beef is not as tasty as CO fed cattle). Salmon / sturgeon fishing is 5 min away, vs few (very few) catch and release CO brook trout few hour drive away (if you can find an open access area). Great sport, but it you gotta eat (everyday / wtshtf)... CO fishing doesn't cut it. Probably more people than legal and available fish in Colorado. Just be wise and do your homework before selecting any place to invest (?) home $$$.
Last edited by StealthRabbit; 05-12-2022 at 02:12 AM..
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,548 posts, read 57,460,499 times
Reputation: 45903
Quote:
Originally Posted by CletusVanDam
... I figured I'd pose my questions here in order to gain the insight of those most familiar with Colorado.
My wife and I are 52 and in two years, when ours kids are out of the home, we want to move to the area which will eventually be our retirement spot, or one of the spots if we snowbird. And although we can live pretty much anywhere in the US due to our professions not requiring us to need to actually have to go into work in order to do our work, Colorado has always had a lure to us. And sure enough our research suggests it would be an ideal location, with a number of well regarded hospitals and high percentage of doctors per resident, low climate change risk, strong GDP growth forecasted, not bright blue or bright red in terms of politics, and a high ranking in terms of wellness, on top of all its natural beauty.
...As such, we've been focusing on areas in and around where the top hospitals are supposedly located, like Aurora, Parker, Fort Collins, Lone Tree, Denver, Lafayette, Loveland, and Colorado Springs. Places within an hour drive of one or more of those locations which rank high on lists of retirement communities include Estes Park, Evergreen, Federal Heights, Holly Hills, Monument, Littleton, and Golden.
Ultimately our goal is to come for an extended stay so as to "test drive" most if not all of these locations; however, I thought I'd see what folks here had to say about places well suited to younger retirees like us. In our cases, priorities are access to medical care, natural beauty, walkability, proximity to nice shopping and restaurants, and low crime. ...
Sorry for the long post, but any insight would be appreciated.
Masonville (pop 5) was home (low / winter) ranch for many yrs. 20 min to Ft Collins, 20 min to Loveland, 30 min to Windsor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medica...of_the_Rockies)
Estes was home (high/ summer) ranch for those same yrs. Traffic was bad then too... (1960 - 1970's) Winter was QUIET in EP!!!, skiing at Hidden Valley (closed now) and ice skating at the parking lot behind Movie theater, lot was also behind Bob and Tony's, bonfires, hot cocoa... big shovels to push off the snow, lots of parties.
Many, many high risk work tasks on the ranch, but we never needed a hospital. I did lose a few friends and neighbors to farm accidents (and a LOT due to flash floods). Watched neighbor kids get washed away trying to save their 4-H pigs.
Consider your 'seasons of retirement' (One place may not suit all your needs... for the next 40+ yrs)
If Colorado is a MUST... Go-Go yrs... Estes Park (EP), Evergreen, Woodland Park might meet your requirements. Several friends and co-workers used EP for these yrs, and many retained a condo / shared home there as they aged. But... crowds and $$ (CoL) have changed. Many great Drs live and practice in EP, as Drs enjoy living in nice places too!. Excellent 'advanced' care in Windsor, Boulder, or Denver, a very quick helicopter ride away (weather permitting).
No-Go yrs... Independent (or SNF) Care center in desired town. (BE sure to check out the new style care in some CO towns. Hopefully you will have even more choices by the time you need this level of care.
For preview trip... stay with and engage with locals (not a hotel or B&B) get the straight scoop, attend events as if you were living there. Try different times of the yr and different modes of transportation. CO is quite good for walking and biking (in the right towns).
Get a VIEW house for retirement, you finally can stay home and enjoy the view!
I fly a lot during retirement (100+ USA trips and 20+ international/ yr), and really like my current domicile that is in a National Protected Scenic Area (no new neighbors allowed) and 20 min to my boarding gate! I frequently travel internationally and often to Asia and Oceania. Being closer helps, as when I route from my CO or TX locations, the international flights are more hassle and longer. (Especially the trip to the Airport, if you really want to live in the mtns). SLC area might be a better choice if you fly a lot. Very nice mtn places near Logan.
Last edited by StealthRabbit; 05-12-2022 at 02:13 AM..
Friends are young retirees who moved to Louisville. They love it. It's walkable, nice views, small town in feel but less than 10 miles to Boulder; 20 miles from Denver and its top-ranked hospitals. Yes, it's pricey. But if you can afford it, it's a pretty nice place. Other options: Lafayette, Niwot, maybe Gunbarrel? (Yea... that's a town... part of Boulder)
Yeah, I’ve seen Colorado mentioned on lists of places to escape climate change. Makes as much sense as moving to Nevada to escape gambling.
Those lists seem to focus mainly on temperature and when you look at the details they're talking mostly about mountain towns still being a bit cooler due to their elevation. They don't seem to factor in wildfires and other climate issues very well, do they?
Those lists seem to focus mainly on temperature and when you look at the details they're talking mostly about mountain towns still being a bit cooler due to their elevation. They don't seem to factor in wildfires and other climate issues very well, do they?
Hard to say. Many such articles give only a cursory mention of methodology, or none at all.
For me the biggest concern is the wildfire risk. I lived in Colorado for 20 years, and my wife for more than 30 years. It's always been the default location we've had in mind for retirement, considering we have more friends and family there than anywhere else. I'm having second thoughts today, mostly because of the fire risk and the overcrowding. The latter can be mitigated by making trips to the mountains on weekdays (assuming an open schedule during retirement) and/or by choosing a home that's not on the Front Range.
Water is the other issue. Before choosing a location I'd want to know how secure the city water supplies are. The system of water rights is complicated, and even cities right next door to one another can differ greatly with respect to security of the water source(s).
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.
and people (lots of people, and more coming real soon 
)
