ER's flock to Seattle

[Gotadimple]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fermion Sorry, I couldn't hear you for the moss that is growing on my head from this miserable wet winter in Seattle.

Head east Young Man! A few days in the Palm Springs of the Northwest (Yakima) and you'll be sufficiently dry.

[REWahoo]

This should reduce home values in the Seattle area:

​Anticipating the next mega-quake

Quote:

The quake could displace a million people from northern California to southern Canada. Large parts of Seattle, Portland and Vancouver will crumble.

[supernova72]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fermion Eh, I have a waterfront home (riverfront) about 2/3 acre with 150 feet of frontage 40 min from Seattle and I will sell my 4500sqft home for the first $300k that comes along.

Which river? I'm guessing south or east of Seattle. Homes in Tacoma are probably half the price.

[bld999]

Quote:

Originally Posted by REWahoo This should reduce home values in the Seattle area: ​Anticipating the next mega-quake

We could all fit in Texas, though.

[REWahoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bld999 We could all fit in Texas, though.

Maybe - provided could you afford to buy an 1800 SF house in the suburbs of Muleshoe, which will then be priced at $1.5M.

[braumeister]

All kidding aside, I used to think Seattle was a pretty great city, but every time I've visited in the last ten years or so, I leave scratching my head and wondering how people can put up with that traffic.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by braumeister ... wondering how people can put up with that traffic.

Because it is still better than LA?

About the quake, they said the tsunami may cause the sea to rise 50 ft, but Seattle is deep in the Puget Sound, and the complex coastline will slow down the surge. Wonder if those waterfront homes on low-bank lots would be safe. Good thing I cannot afford one right now. After the quake hits, I will be up there home shopping.

[bld999]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound Because it is still better than LA? About the quake, they said the tsunami may cause the sea to rise 50 ft, but Seattle is deep in the Puget Sound, and the complex coastline will slow down the surge. Wonder if those waterfront homes on low-bank lots would be safe. Good thing I cannot afford one right now. After the quake hits, I will be up there home shopping.

Don't wait too long Plate tectonics is just like honey badger, it could take forever for the next big one. All that traffic is one indication of how little people include earthquake fears into their near term calculations. Look at the San Andreas, and So Cal is loaded with population.

Plus, once the price of oil goes back up and Texas starts injecting produced water, Muleshoe will be shakin' too.

[aja8888]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bld999 As usual, house prices are so relative: 700k /6000sf = $117/ sf, which might pay the hard construction costs only in Seattle. That leaves lot, entitlements, design and any other soft cost off the budget. Of course if oil rises to 75 in the next couple years, houses in your area will likely follow proportionally.

Doubt it, A 2,000 square foot home in The Woodlands (where I mentioned the price) was at this level during the high oil prices. Even in the nicest areas here in our area, $200/sq. ft. is about tops. And The Woodlands is a highly desirable area in the Houston metroplex and is becoming the oil and gas center of the area. I believe the lower prices have a lot to do with the abundance of cheap labor (large low educated Hispanic population) and lots of competition within the building trades.

Granted, in some of the "old money" exclusive areas of Houston, prices command higher per sq. ft. values.

[unclemick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rec7 50k for the same thing in a small town in Missouri

Amen. Just sold a three bedroom, one bathroom, 1000 sq ft, 1970, Leave it to Beaver house for 60k in a bedroom town North of Kansas City. Bought for 85k post Katrina.

heh heh heh - Ouch! Proceeds will go to remodel current 1922 Craftsman Bungalow. . Don't ya just love Mr Market er ? Location, location, location.

Seattle prices have always seemed high - except for the Boeing bust 1969-early 70's.

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by unclemick Seattle prices have always seemed high - except for the Boeing bust 1969-early 70's.

This is my take also. I have spent most of the last 50 years here,
and the Boeing Bust is the only time I can remember when it truly seemed a no-brainer to buy rentals here. From time to time you might speculate on neighborhood improvement, but it took skill and some luck to win.

There was a similar aerospace recession in LA about the same time, but LA was much more diversified so it didn't seem so important to all SoCal business the way Boeing's trouble did up here.

Ha

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aja8888 Granted, in some of the "old money" exclusive areas of Houston, prices command higher per sq. ft. values.

Aja, would that be like River Oaks?

Ha

[OrcasIslandBound]

Pacific NW, San Juan Islands, Seattle and a bunch of landmass is, yes, in the Cascadia subduction fault zone. The potentially large earthquake that can result here will make the SF earthquake seem like a walk in the park. Furthermore, the PNW gov didn't even realize this and actually change the building code until about 1995. So... Even with all this, I'm very glad to be planning on moving to Orcas Island in 5 1/2 months. We've kind of decided that this will be the price to pay for living there, even if it might kill us.

That being said, I think I would think twice about buying some sort of condo in Seattle built in the 70's. Multi-story + pre-earthquake code does not sound like a good recipe. Our house on Orcas, luckily, was built in 2001 and probably will withstand the big one, we hope. Many parts of Orcas are solid rock, a somewhat different substrate then certain areas around Seattle that will likely amplify an earthquake.

Also, I think the real fault line is a bit out to sea in the west, so hopefully the little bit of distance will slightly reduce the impact strength.

[daylatedollarshort]

One of the things I found interesting here in Nor Cal is that with many of the townhomes and condos we looked, the HOA did not seem to carry, or require homeowners to carry, earthquake insurance. I wasn't sure what would happen if we bought into a multi-housing unit of some type and had quake damage or had to do a complete rebuild. With our single family home, worst case we would probably just rebuild a smaller house on the same lot we have now. I'm not sure what would happen if we had a townhouse and we could rebuild but our attached neighbors did not have the savings to do so, which seems like a high probability scenario given average savings rates.

I used to work with geologists and they helped me pick a suburb to live in not directly over any of the known major faultlines, but a big enough quake or an unmapped faultline is still always a risk.

[Gotadimple]

Quote:

Originally Posted by daylatedollarshort One of the things I found interesting here in Nor Cal is that with many of the townhomes and condos we looked, the HOA did not seem to carry, or require homeowners to carry, earthquake insurance. I wasn't sure what would happen if we bought into a multi-housing unit of some type and had quake damage or had to do a complete rebuild. With our single family home, worst case we would probably just rebuild a smaller house on the same lot we have now. I'm not sure what would happen if we had a townhouse and we could rebuild but our attached neighbors did not have the savings to do so, which seems like a high probability scenario given average savings rates.

With a condo, EQ insurance held by the unit owner only protects the unit owner. The association owns the buildings, the unit-owner owns from the interior walls into the contents of the unit.

I would be more concerned if the association DID NOT hold EQ insurance, if you are looking in an area prone to many small quakes. That said, the deductible will still have the association fixing/assessing for most modest damage.

In the Seattle urban area, in a small townhouse complex, the deductible is $25,000 per building. Most townhouse complexes have multiple buildings.

Secondly, if you are serious about buying a condo, you should look at the Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions document (CCR's) for the clause that explains what happens in the event of a total loss. Most likely, earthquake total loss is not the top reason for total loss, but fire.

- Rita

[cooch96]

From the models I've seen, as long as you don't live in Seattle proper, directly on the coast, or in the Fife lowlands, you should be fine.

My boss said a few years ago that he used to not like seismic retrofit jobs because it felt like stealing from future work (he was mostly joking of course). But he's been in the business 40 years and never had to replace a bridge due to earthquake damage. So retrofits have proven to be good for the construction business.

If this fault waits another 30 years (not so long for a these things, it might wait another century) we could be mostly ready for it.

[RetireAge50]

If you live through the earthquake you should be fine financially even if the house is destroyed. The value is mostly the dirt in the Seattle area.

[Fermion]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RetireAge50 If you live through the earthquake you should be fine financially even if the house is destroyed. The value is mostly the dirt in the Seattle area.

Except when the dirt slides into Puget Sound like it has in certain parts already.

[aja8888]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha Aja, would that be like River Oaks? Ha

Yes, that's one area that has a lot of old money.

[OrcasIslandBound]

This link gives a pretty good description of the Cascadia Fault http://www.alternet.org/environment/...ive-earthquake

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Early Retirement Forum mobile app