Is Boulder, CO an anomaly?

Just to clarify my earlier comment, we engaged a realtor, and could offer 600k with 50% down for something with 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, a small garage and a yard in the Longmont/Louisville/ Boulder/Golden general area.  Outside of major renovation projects, she could not find anything.

By the way, 2014 makes perfect sense. That year was only four years removed from the peak of the financial crisis, and the real estate market had not fully recovered by then. 

I think Edge may mean surrounding foothills. There's also the option of what we did 45 years ago (Boulder was expensive even then) -- bought a condo. It depends on what you're willing to sacrifice to live here and get into the market, which is always appreciating. 

I love this idea that being six hours from the New is the selling point for Delaware. (Yes I'm aware this was tongue-in-cheek.)

Move to Tallahassee! It's only 6 hours from Horse Pens 40.

Reno

Frank Stein wrote:

Just to clarify my earlier comment, we engaged a realtor, and could offer 600k with 50% down for something with 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, a small garage and a yard, in the Longmont/Louisville, Boulder/Golden general area.  Outside of major renovation projects, she could not find anything.

Weird, my previous 3 BR house in Bloomfield/Westminster (20 mins away from Eldo entrance) is currently valued @ ~500K. Granted inventory is tight everywhere and the neighborhood is anything but hip, still for 600K you can find decent place w/ some patience.

Frazer wrote:

  Is there anywhere else in the country like this but with more of the average us home price?  I would say the amount of climbing does not need to be as substantial

The current median US home price is $375,000.
Boulder proper is north of $1 mill

Reno is over $600k

SLC is $560

Flagstaff is $560

Nothing being mentioned is close to the median. But don’t forget, that number means 1/2 are more, 1/2 are less. The median home price in Bishop, CA is $480, but you can get a very livable 1400 sq ft 2 bed 2 bath manufactured home in a mobile community there for $80k. 

Frazer wrote:

To any of you SLC folk, what are your thoughts on Ogden... same bad air, religion, traffic etc?

Ogden native, same bad air, religion is better then southern Wasatach, traffic is steadily getting worse.  Lots of local stuff in all diciplines of climbing and 4 hours from a million different places.  Climbing spots are generally way less crowded then Salt Lake. If you're interested in more PM me. 

Frazer wrote:

Hey MP,

I have always enjoyed reading the threads about best cities for climbing.  But, these have never fit the bill for something I would search for.  Boulder is like 150K people with a lot of jobs, extremely bike friendly, and one can rope up within thirty minutes or less (but the cost of living is oppressive).  Is there anywhere else in the country like this but with more of the average us home price?  I would say the amount of climbing does not need to be as substantial.

Cheers

idaho

A V wrote:

Lander, Wyoming. Redmond, Oregon. B-ham Washington. All have their flaws but are still leagues better than living in a big city where the prick per square meter ratio is simply too high for sustainable happiness in life. 

I have pursued remote work and it's actually been pretty successful so far thanks to the pandemic. If you have a remote job, you can live anywhere there is reliable internet. That, in my mind, is luxury of the highest order. It would take a lot of money and convincing for me to ever live in a city again. it's just too nice living with diverse climbing access of like ~10/20 minutes away with only a few people - most of whom are your friends - climbing at certain crags that are designated as the hang. Boulder is too crowded with too many gargantuan egos and too little rock to accommodate everybody. The Boulder bubble is real. Its a good idea to live somewhere else - where it is a little more remote and the climbing access is still good - plenty of that available in the front range if you are willing to compromise on whats hip and whats not. Though I would recommend going further west - you end up getting a better climbing sampler (alpine rock, alpine ice, world class trad, big walling, world class sport, world class bouldering, etc) than you would get in CO - and you get significantly less people (I know, California is not included in this definition), which is always a good thing in my book. 

In defense of Boulder, for whatever it's worth:

There are ~5,000 routes in Boulder alone between Eldo, the Flatirons, and Boulder Canyon (which together offer a huge diversity of climbing -- granite sport, single- and multi-pitch trad, fantastic sandstone/conglomerate sport in the Flatirons, and perhaps the best/most scrambling in the country). This is not including the amount of rock within a 30 minute radius (North Table, CCC, St Vrain) or within an hour (RMNP, Indian Peaks Wilderness, countless other crags). If you go to Animal World or try and climb Rewritten on a Saturday you are going to have a terrible time, but to say there is not enough rock for everyone is, in my opinion, completely wrong. If you're willing to hike ~25 minutes or climb non-classics (there are really some gems buried deep in the Flatirons!) you can go the whole day seeing only a few (or no) people.

I've met a few people that fully live up to the Boulder climber stereotype, but no more than I have in the Gunks, the Valley, etc. For the most part those I've climbed with in Boulder are lovely people -- super psyched, driven, genuine folks who love to get outside.

I agree that the cost of living is very high by Colorado/western standards and that living in/near town (within range of pre- or post-work weekday cragging) is a huge privilege. 

That's not to say we need more people here -- by all means, move to Lander or Redmond ;)

A V wrote:

Lmao I always screw those two up. MT? I think it’s MT.

I bet that there are some great grain silos and bridges to climb in MO - tons of FAs await the intrepid for sure.. just gotta go claim em

https://www.climbing.com/places/missouri-americas-lesser-known-climbing-destination/ 

Granite Grant wrote:

idaho

STFU.

OP, yes Boulder is an anomaly. Move to CO, maybe look into Golden. 

Back at ya, Grant K! 

A V wrote:

Lander, Wyoming. Redmond, Oregon. B-ham Washington. All have their flaws but are still leagues better than living in a big city where the prick per square meter ratio is simply too high for sustainable happiness in life. 

I have pursued remote work and it's actually been pretty successful so far thanks to the pandemic. If you have a remote job, you can live anywhere there is reliable internet...

Sadly, I think what I am seeing in the thread is that Boulder is an anomaly and the likelihood of finding a smaller place to live that has "real" jobs (where one could go into their office), but is affordable is likely not a reality.

Lander, Fayetteville, Rumney (or Plymouth), Idaho Falls, etc. would all be sweet if there was an job market that could support those who wanted to come.  Some rando search on the interwebs:

I am just going to posture a guess and say that finding a job that pays $75K+ in a smaller town is improbable.

Redmond/B-ham both look to have median prices in the 500/600Kish zone.  I have seen the same thing posited in other posts, if you want to live somewhere nice you gotta pay for it... sad day

Cherokee Nunes wrote:

Tucson. Pick the right neighborhoods closer to Santa Catalinas. Go to Boulder 3 months every summer ;)

Tucson is great but housing is rapidly climbing because of pandemic remote work opportunities.  Every other sold home I see has CA, CO or WA plates in front.  In my neighborhood alone I've seen two CO'ers move in complete with vans.  I suspect the strategy is: 1. get a remote job 2. buy a van and an affordable home in Tucson 3. vanlife around w/ Tus as your home base. 

For reference, median home price in Tus is hovering around $290k, but the market is extremely competitive in certain neighborhoods.  There's a lot of really shitty housing here that drags that median down...I estimate that median home price for a "desireable" home in Tus is closer to $350-450k. Still affordable compared to Boulder etc., but you'll still need a decent job.

The climbing here can be absolutely stellar but you have to form some thicker skin with regard to conditions, approaches and amenities, and broaden your goals/preferences.  If you're a "bouldering is the only type of climbing" type person, you're gonna have a bad time.  If you're a "I only climb when it's under 60 degrees and not too wet or too dry" type person, you're gonna have a bad time. 

Honestly, I'm surprised no one has mentioned Vegas.  There's a reason Honnold & Siegrist live there, among many others. 

Jordan Wilson wrote:

Ogden native, same bad air, religion is better then southern Wasatach, traffic is steadily getting worse.  Lots of local stuff in all diciplines of climbing and 4 hours from a million different places.  Climbing spots are generally way less crowded then Salt Lake. If you're interested in more PM me. 

Another Ogden local checking in. This guy gets it. Sure, Salt Lake has more climbing. But the drive to get to LCC/BCC can take 30-45+ minutes on a busy day. Ogden, you can be roped up and starting your first pitch in 15-20. If climbing after work is something you value, Ogden makes it so much easier. Besides, you can always do the commute down south on the weekends for a day in one of the "big canyons". And if you like winter sports, your commute To Snowbasin/Powder is about half the time and congestion as going to one of the Salt Lake resorts. 

People have mentioned Ogden not having a big nightlife and I have to disagree. There are tons of really cool bars in and surrounding 25th street (Alleged, Funk 'n Dive, Harp and Hound, City Club...) and they're always busy. Plus, the drinks (along with living in general) are going to be a lot cheaper than Salt Lake. 

Ouray. 

caughtinside wrote:

There is a reason - those guys only live there part time.  

Fair point but this seems to be an increasingly common way to go even for non-pro climbers. Remote work (or seasonal work) means you don’t really need to be tied to one place, so may as well find somewhere that is affordable enough and has decent enough climbing to be a home base for 6-9 months a year then spend the rest on the road. 

I’m pretty sure we’ve entered the era of “pick two” when it comes to “affordable, good local economy and year-round outdoor activities with perfect conditions”.

Quit trying to find perfect and figure out how to be happy with what you can make work! 

Sheridan WY. 

Rapid City (or Spearfish), SD

Aaron Kolb wrote:

Ouray is expensive af

It's not easy to find a job in Ouray either. You'll be looking for blue collar work in Ridgeway and be lucky.

Old lady H wrote:

STFU.

OP, yes Boulder is an anomaly. Move to CO, maybe look into Golden. 

Back at ya, Grant K! 

 

i lived in boulder. when it got too expensive, i moved to golden. when golden got just as expensive as boulder was, i moved to lakewood. now my house is easily worth twice what i paid for it 6 years ago and i cringe when i think of people trying to afford living in this area now. this is out of control.

western slope is looking better and better every day...