The-where-should-RyanD-move thread - Page 6

Stonemans_rowJ · #**101** Posted **Jul 8, 2015, 1:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jubguy3

If you want a more urban city than Denver you're going to have to pay more. Paying more means a crappier home and by the time you get to a nice city you'll be living in a van down by the river. jk

But really just stay where you are because Denver is nice for how much you pay

Chicago is far more urban and cheaper, even more so if you include transportation costs. Not to take anything away from Denver which is a very liveable city, but only a few neighborhoods could be considered urban, and the rental prices and housing prices are reaching a tipping point.

RyanD · #**102** Posted **Jul 8, 2015, 3:21 PM**

^ Yep. Exactly. We were talking about only needing one car if we moved out there, and I know for sure I would use the 🞵🞵🞵🞵 out of the CTA. Good intercity transit is very farfetched here in Denver whereas it's absolutely fantastic in Chicago.

Maria and I did the 'what can you afford at your household income' and, as of right now (with property taxes, mortgage insurance, and $1k of misc monthly expenses), it put us just shy of $250,000. So our choices are very subruban Commerce Cirty / Broomfield / Aurora / Littleton, etc. OR urban Chicago / Philly.

I told so many people, the day I get priced out of Denver proper and have to drop 'Denver' from my address is the day I consider leaving it. We would have to make double at this point if we want to survive buying property in Denver, and that's not going to happen overnight.

bunt_q · #**103** Posted **Jul 8, 2015, 4:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanD

We would have to make double at this point if we want to survive buying property in Denver, and that's not going to happen overnight.

Catching up is never going to happen so long as we are seeing 14% year-over-year price appreciation, as we saw in June. I don't know many people getting 28% annual raises.

Sure is great if you already own something, though. It's no surprise we don't see a big push to address the affordability situation; people are naturally selfish, and those who are already in are making a killing. I just hope in 20 years they're all panicking when it comes time to sell and there are no move-up folks who can afford to buy because the bottom never developed.

Stonemans_rowJ · #**104** Posted **Jul 8, 2015, 4:44 PM**

I'd definitely rent if I were you for a year or two until you get to know any city. The nice thing about Chicago is there are tons of good rentals. $2000/month goes so much farther there for a rental than it does here.

And unlike Denver where RE prices are going up 10% a year, if you wait a couple years, find the perfect neighborhood, maybe live in a few different neighborhoods, get set up in a good job, etc. RE prices will only be slightly higher so you won't feel like you "missed out."

$400,000 there can get you a really nice 2/2 condo in Lakeview, Bucktown, even Lincoln Park etc. What can you get in Denver's best neighborhoods for $400,000?

As far as property taxes go, yes they are higher, but you also get access to transit. Here most people need 2 cars for a household and look at the annual registration fees for cars! Average cars cost upwards of $8,000 or more a year. This cost is typically decoupled from COL indices.

RyanD · #**105** Posted **Jul 8, 2015, 5:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

I'd definitely rent if I were you for a year or two until you get to know any city. The nice thing about Chicago is there are tons of good rentals. $2000/month goes so much farther there for a rental than it does here.

And unlike Denver where RE prices are going up 10% a year, if you wait a couple years, find the perfect neighborhood, maybe live in a few different neighborhoods, get set up in a good job, etc. RE prices will only be slightly higher so you won't feel like you "missed out."

$400,000 there can get you a really nice 2/2 condo in Lakeview, Bucktown, even Lincoln Park etc. What can you get in Denver's best neighborhoods for $400,000?

As far as property taxes go, yes they are higher, but you also get access to transit. Here most people need 2 cars for a household and look at the annual registration fees for cars! Average cars cost upwards of $8,000 or more a year. This cost is typically decoupled from COL indices.

That's the plan. There are a ton of rentals at amazing prices all over the place in Chicago. I think, if we do this, we will start out on the North side (Uptown / Edgewater / Andersonville) or the Northwest side (Logan Square / Wicker Park). Those are the two areas I'm personally comfortable with. We would probably buy in 2017/2018 if we like the city.

There are 2/2 or 2/1.5 condos on the north side sub 250k. It's a pretty amazingly cheap market. I can't even get a 1946 🞵🞵🞵🞵 original stock house in Cory-Merrill for sub 500k.

This is our planning month to see if we can actually do it in 2015. If not, it'll be in 2016 for sure. I'll have a definitive answer in August, as October 1st would be our move in date.

TakeFive · #**106** Posted **Jul 8, 2015, 7:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Ugh, not this again.

hehehe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

For example, this neighborhood is denser than this one. That happens because rowhouse neighborhoods have tighter streets and fill every nook and cranny with English basements and carriage houses, while highrises are stuck with huge lobbies, on-site gyms, and parking garages. And because many of the rowhouses are split up into apartments or condos.

I loves your links

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Pittsburgh is awesome, and I've heard Cincinnatti is very affordable and has an incredible stock of historic architecture and built urban environment. The second tier rust belt cities will have some seriously good value, and great old housing stock.

My wife and I are strongly considering Chicago as well, and St. Louis.

Clearly not what RyanD is looking for but I'd agree.

I'd also put Ann Arbor near the top of such a list. St. Louis has its pluses but I hated the winters there much more than in Denver. I'd live in Indianapolis before Chicago but that's me.

TakeFive · #**107** Posted **Jul 8, 2015, 7:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanD

I told so many people, the day I get priced out of Denver proper and have to drop 'Denver' from my address is the day I consider leaving it. We would have to make double at this point if we want to survive buying property in Denver, and that's not going to happen overnight.

I have to wonder if Denver has the depth of quality jobs it will need to sustain the current housing environment. OTOH it wouldn't (I assume) have the depth of housing stock that these other cities have so who knows.

seventwenty · #**108** Posted **Jul 9, 2015, 4:06 AM**

Ann Arbor's small though. I get the feeling Ryan's looking for something bigger (and more urban) than Denver.

hammersklavier · #**109** Posted **Jul 9, 2015, 4:13 AM**

I have a friend who bought a rowhome in deep South Philly a couple of years ago for $110k. Put about $50k of renovations in and now it's worth closer to $200k.

Philadelphia is a super-affordable city for rowhomes and small multiunit structures. Not only do we have incredible bones, but our infill is at the rowhome scale and you can definitely buy a shiny new rowhome for less than $500k. You also get our nice shiny 10-year property tax abatement on those, too.

Also, while Philadelphia isn't close to things like the Front Range, it's very much a misnomer that we don't have mountains nearby, or rugged terrain. For example, this...

manayunk.com

planphilly.com

...is entirely within the city, while this...

innathickoryrun.com

littleviews.com

...is only a day trip away.

I'm not saying living in Philly is all rainbows and unicorns -- but we do have our perks.

Cirrus · #**110** Posted **Jul 9, 2015, 4:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

it's very much a misnomer that we don't have mountains nearby

Well, Philadelphia has hills nearby.

But it's all good because the things Denver calls rivers are not rivers. I'd like to see someone try and park a battleship on the Platte.

TakeFive · #**111** Posted **Jul 9, 2015, 5:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

I'd like to see someone try and park a battleship on the Platte.

hammersklavier · #**112** Posted **Jul 9, 2015, 7:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Well, Philadelphia has hills nearby.

But it's all good because the things Denver calls rivers are not rivers. I'd like to see someone try and park a battleship on the Platte.

Or an aircraft carrier!

seventwenty · #**113** Posted **Jul 9, 2015, 2:14 PM**

Cirrus we had this argument last year, and you lost.

hammersklavier · #**114** Posted **Jul 10, 2015, 12:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Well, Philadelphia has hills nearby.

But it's all good because the things Denver calls rivers are not rivers. I'd like to see someone try and park a battleship on the Platte.

Also our hills are hillier than Chicago's terminal moraine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seventwenty

Cirrus we had this argument last year, and you lost.

River:

wikipeida

"River":

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanD

Centennial Gardens - 03 by

Creek:

stroudcenter.com

We also have "runs" and the people down in Baltimore have some "falls" as well.

Sidenote: What they call "rivers" in Providence, RI, aren't rivers either.

Cirrus · #**115** Posted **Jul 10, 2015, 12:38 AM**

Philadelphia has plenty of streams with kayak-able rapids. Those aren't rivers.

They also have one of these. And one of these. Hey, and one of these.

Scottk · #**116** Posted **Jul 10, 2015, 1:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

"River"

Actually, the waterway in that photo Ryan took is known as The Cherry Creek

Brock Landers · #**117** Posted **Jul 10, 2015, 3:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakeFive

I have to wonder if Denver has the depth of quality jobs it will need to sustain the current housing environment. OTOH it wouldn't (I assume) have the depth of housing stock that these other cities have so who knows.

These numbers seem quite high to me but certainly a red flag...

Denver Post: $1,696 rent for a Denver 3BR home more affordable than buying

Quote:

A three-bedroom rental home in Denver County averages $1,696 a month and requires 39 percent of median household income, compared with an average monthly mortgage payment of $2,190 that requires 51 percent of income, according to the housing research firm's report.

seventwenty · #**118** Posted **Jul 10, 2015, 3:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottk

actually, the waterway in that photo ryan took is known as the cherry creek

Thank you Scott. Someone had to call Cirrus on his blatent misrepresentation of water.

bunt_q · #**119** Posted **Jul 10, 2015, 4:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock Landers

These numbers seem quite high to me but certainly a red flag...

Denver Post: $1,696 rent for a Denver 3BR home more affordable than buying

That's actually pretty low, and only represents the mortgage. Insurance, taxes and mortgage insurance would bring that "average" house from $2,190 closer to $2,600. Unless a person happens to have $70,000 laying around for 20% down. (Of course, with appreciation at 14% per year, you can re-fi in two years and have that 20% equity. Good deal if you can get in.)

wong21fr · #**120** Posted **Jul 10, 2015, 4:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

That's actually pretty low, and only represents the mortgage. Insurance, taxes and mortgage insurance would bring that "average" house from $2,190 closer to $2,600. Unless a person happens to have $70,000 laying around for 20% down. (Of course, with appreciation at 14% per year, you can re-fi in two years and have that 20% equity. Good deal if you can get in.)

What's this 20% down you speak of? You mean you can't buy a house for 0% down? Bummer.