Woodland Park, CO.: Renters greatly outnumber homeowners. Why?

treeguy64

treeguy64

Hari Om, y'all!
Location
Austin, TX.
I am wanting to tap into the collective wisdom of SF members, so please input, here.

Janet and I have zeroed in, kinda/sorta, on Woodland Park, CO. As such, we're both, rightfully, reading all we can on this city sited at 8,500 feet.

A new stat hit me, today: Only 20% of the residents own their own homes, 80% rent their houses! What's going on, with that? In Austin, the ratio is, about, 50/50.

Are people not wanting to put down roots, here, for some reason? Are they waiting until they can find something in Colorado Springs, where many workers commute to, daily?

What really bothers me is the prospect of seeing our (renting) neighbors change out, yearly, if not sooner, after we buy a house. My neighbors, here in Austin, have been here almost as long as me, and I've been in my house for just over thirty years. I like the fact that I know the folks on either side of me, and directly across the street. We watch each other's houses, we keep up on neighborhood gossip. I'm not so sure I'll want to get so chummy with folks whom I know will be gone in no time at all.

So, weigh in, y'all. Would you be concerned with this renter scene? Do you have any ideas as to why it is the way it is? Do any of you know folks in Woodland Park, CO? If so, do they like it?

Thanks!
 

Ken N Tx said:
@treeguy64 Do you have any stat on the age of them??
Click to expand...
I have the general town demographics, including age, by percentage, but no stats on renters vs. owners, broken down by age.

13% are 65 and older. Hmm.... Yeah, I maybe get your drift, here: Perhaps that 13% is the majority of the 20% of the home owners. Interesting.
 

treeguy64 said:
I have the general town demographics, including age, by percentage, but no stats on renters vs. owners, broken down by age.

13% are 65 and older. Hmm.... Yeah, I maybe get your drift, here: Perhaps that 13% is the majority of the 20% of the home owners. Interesting.
Click to expand...

In the city, the population was spread out with 28.5% under the age of 18, 5.8% from 18 to 24, 32.9% from 25 to 44, 26.3% from 45 to 64, and 6.5% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 38 years.
 
I'm not sure if the climate plays a roll in renting vs owning a home in Woodland CO, but it probably would if I were moving there. According to Wikipedia the average daily temp in June, July & August is less than 60 degrees. Also, June, July & August are the only months where the average temp is above 50 degrees. That's chilly! Maybe a lot of folks aren't sure if they'll adjust well to the climate and decide to rent at first?

You moving from Texas to Woodland might be an eyeopener climate wise. If I were making this move, I would think of renting at first as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodland_Park,_Colorado#Climate
 
I saw a huge increase in renters after the mortgage bubble burst. Not only did people lose their homes, but they also damaged their credit and therefore were forced to rent. I saw this first hand when I lived in Florida. Speculators bought up houses for a song and then rented them out. People with bad credit were forced to pay higher rents than what a mortgage payment would be because of that. Could this be the residual effect there in Woodland Park??
 
Ken N Tx said:
In the city, the population was spread out with 28.5% under the age of 18, 5.8% from 18 to 24, 32.9% from 25 to 44, 26.3% from 45 to 64, and 6.5% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 38 years.
Click to expand...
Apparently, we're getting conflicting stats from different sites. Mine came from Livability.com:
20190808_091935.jpg
 
JimW said:
I'm not sure if the climate plays a roll in renting vs owning a home in Woodland CO, but it probably would if I were moving there. According to Wikipedia the average daily temp in June, July & August is less than 60 degrees. Also, June, July & August are the only months where the average temp is above 50 degrees. That's chilly! Maybe a lot of folks aren't sure if they'll adjust well to the climate and decide to rent at first?

You moving from Texas to Woodland might be an eyeopener climate wise. If I were making this move, I would think of renting at first as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodland_Park,_Colorado#Climate
Click to expand...

Yeah, we're going to hang around the town during different times of the year, before we pop for a home. Since I'll be paying cash, I am not worried about getting stuck with a mortgage. If we regret buying a home, after x amount of time, we'll just sell it and move on.

I was born and raised in Chicago. I walked a mile, four times a day, to school and back. Chicago winters were a favorite time of year, for me, although forty years in Austin may have softened me up, a bit, for snowy, cold winters, in my older age.

I have been in Colorado many times, including in the winter, so I'm not too worried. We went skiing in Yellowstone, WY., in the middle of winter, at -30°F, windchill, and I really liked it. Part of me misses the cold, and most of me HATES Austin's steam bath summers.

Life is for living, and if I can have some more adventures before I'm done, that'll be great!
 
My "Roots" are in Colorado, and I have lots of family there....mostly Denver, the I-70 corridor, and north. My Mother grew up in Central City, where her Dad owned a saloon for many years. Anywhere in the Rockies can be a beautiful place to live...IF you are in fairly good health and can withstand the altitude and cool/cold weather. Insofar as renting vs. owning....I would imagine that housing prices are quite high in most of the mountain towns, so lots of people just rent, rather than tying up $250K, or more for a modest house.....knowing that they might not make the mountains their long term home.
Other considerations you might think about.....access to medical care, and availability of nearby stores/shopping. Having to go somewhere during a period of heavy snowfall could present some issues if you have to go very far....even though the local crews do a good job of keeping the main roads clear.
Finally, the heavy forestation of evergreen trees is real nice....but during periods of drought, those trees are like standing cans of gasoline, and should a forest fire erupt in the area, things can quickly get out of hand. If I lived in such an area, I would chainsaw any evergreens within 50+ yards of the house.
I love the mountains, and spent a lot of time there in years past, and whenever we go to Denver to visit relatives, we always reserve a day for a visit to the peaks.....but, with our family roots here, now, Colorado is just for visits.
 
I thought Colorado was one of the faster growning states which would affect the supply. Throw in economic variables including mortgage qualifications, wages, job status, cost of living etc along with those who don't want the commitment and responsibility a house requires I can see low ownership.
 
Don M. said:
My "Roots" are in Colorado, and I have lots of family there....mostly Denver, the I-70 corridor, and north. My Mother grew up in Central City, where her Dad owned a saloon for many years. Anywhere in the Rockies can be a beautiful place to live...IF you are in fairly good health and can withstand the altitude and cool/cold weather. Insofar as renting vs. owning....I would imagine that housing prices are quite high in most of the mountain towns, so lots of people just rent, rather than tying up $250K, or more for a modest house.....knowing that they might not make the mountains their long term home.
Other considerations you might think about.....access to medical care, and availability of nearby stores/shopping. Having to go somewhere during a period of heavy snowfall could present some issues if you have to go very far....even though the local crews do a good job of keeping the main roads clear.
Finally, the heavy forestation of evergreen trees is real nice....but during periods of drought, those trees are like standing cans of gasoline, and should a forest fire erupt in the area, things can quickly get out of hand. If I lived in such an area, I would chainsaw any evergreens within 50+ yards of the house.
I love the mountains, and spent a lot of time there in years past, and whenever we go to Denver to visit relatives, we always reserve a day for a visit to the peaks.....but, with our family roots here, now, Colorado is just for visits.
Click to expand...
You can bet I will clear-cut any lot my new home is on, to a distance of 150' from the actual house. I haven't started getting into the tree ordinances and laws for WP, yet. Austin has some of the most restrictive tree laws in the country, and I must deal with them year-round, so I anticipate that any other tree laws I come up against will seem pretty tame, by comparison. (Fingers crossed, until I get ready to gun my saws.)
 
WhatInThe said:
I thought Colorado was one of the faster growning states which would affect the supply. Throw in economic variables including mortgage qualifications, wages, job status, cost of living etc along with those who don't want the commitment and responsibility a house requires I can see low ownership.
Click to expand...

My town, Austin, is generally acknowledged as being one of the fastest growing cities in the US. Still, we have about 50/50, on renters vs. owners.
 
Home ownership was, for a long time, considered the badge of "making it"- being financially able to own your own home. I don't believe that younger generations feel that way, anymore. They don't feel that renting is some kind of stigma. The home that I grew up in, has been sold; so, there's no "ancestral home" to back to. With no emotional ties to one place, I can live anywhere in the country that I want to. Anywhere which provides me a living. And that "where" is going to change. Today, nobody is going to work for the same company for 45 years-either you are going to leave or the company is going to leave- get bought out, downsized,,,,,,,Home ownership may not be the most economical solution to finding housing for the short term. I think the era of owning a Mcmansion on a cul de sac in the suburbs is coming to a close.
 
fuzzybuddy said:
,,,,,,,Home ownership may not be the most economical solution to finding housing for the short term. I think the era of owning a Mcmansion on a cul de sac in the suburbs is coming to a close.
Click to expand...

Which is why I'm puzzled as to what many younger people will spend on a home or talk like they are going to be with their current employer for ever. It's not just about an investment other than they think they will see at 'a' profit.

There are still alot of people in the work force that saw their parents and relatives do 30, get a watch and pension. Not the case anymore as noted.
 
fuzzybuddy said:
Home ownership was, for a long time, considered the badge of "making it"- being financially able to own your own home. I don't believe that younger generations feel that way, anymore. They don't feel that renting is some kind of stigma. The home that I grew up in, has been sold; so, there's no "ancestral home" to back to. With no emotional ties to one place, I can live anywhere in the country that I want to. Anywhere which provides me a living. And that "where" is going to change. Today, nobody is going to work for the same company for 45 years-either you are going to leave or the company is going to leave- get bought out, downsized,,,,,,,Home ownership may not be the most economical solution to finding housing for the short term. I think the era of owning a Mcmansion on a cul de sac in the suburbs is coming to a close.
Click to expand...
Thing is, I view renting as flushing your money down the toilet. Obviously, there are times when renting is, in fact, a wise choice, as you wrote. If one is going to school, taking a temporary work assignment, and the like, and knows that he/she will be moving on, in a comparatively short time, then I think renting is fine. For stays of three years, or more, I would have to buy, but that's just the way I am.

It may be that the younger generation views long-term renting as the way to go. Owning rent houses, I must admit that I have never had them empty for longer than a month, at a time, for over thirty years. All of my tenants have been younger than thirty- five. My properties are close to UT, Austin.
 
I don't know anything about the town, but is it a tourist area? Perhaps the "renters" are seasonal tourists or something...??? To me, that wouldn't be as bad as more permanent bad renters, but still not a great situation.
 
C'est Moi said:
I don't know anything about the town, but is it a tourist area? Perhaps the "renters" are seasonal tourists or something...??? To me, that wouldn't be as bad as more permanent bad renters, but still not a great situation.
Click to expand...
Pretty heavy tourist population, during the summer, from what I've read. Many take the short drive up from Colorado Springs.
 
We have owned 3 different condos over the last 32 years. My observation is that the people who were a PITA were usually renters.

I would look elsewhere.
 
Manatee said:
We have owned 3 different condos over the last 32 years. My observation is that the people who were a PITA were usually renters.

I would look elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I've rented my properties out to hundreds of folks, since 1986. In truth, less than twenty were PITA's. I am more concerned about the transitory nature of renters. That is to say, if Janet and I buy a house, and we're next door to rent houses, I will feel bad, and weird, when it comes to making new friends, only to see them move out in a year's time. I do know, though, that there's always the chance that a PITA rents next door to us. The odds of getting a PITA increase with rent houses, since they change out so often. However, the same thing could happen with a PITA buying a house next door, and then we're stuck with him/her/them for the long run.
 
I looked at city-data statistics. For Woodland Park, the median household income is just under $70,000. (for the math impaired, median is the point above which and below which 50% of the cases lie --- it is totally different from 'average).
Anyhoo, rule of thumb is that house should not be more than 2.5 times median income. Median house/condo price is $325,000. That would suggest houses priced too high for the income levels. And, if 'properly' purchasing a house, you want a minimum 10% down. So, you're talking $30,000+ just for the downstroke on the house.
This is what is happening all over the country. I'm in a far Chicago burb and was totally surprised to find out how many people were renting in our area. It's just too difficult, with wage stagnation in this country, to save for downpayment plus save the thousands you need to purchase items you need to maintain a house and/or pay contracters to fix things. Plus you should have 6 months personal emergency fund, so now you're talking minimum of $50,000 saved just to put into the median house. How many people can get that together and still save for retirement, especially with median rent of $1200 a month in your area.
 
Last edited:
retiredtraveler said:
I looked at city-data statistics. For Woodland Park, the median household income is just under $70,000. (for the math impaired, median is the point above which and below which 50% of the cases lie --- it is totally different from 'average).
Anyhoo, rule of thumb is that house should not be more than 2.5 times median income. Median house/condo price is $325,000. That would suggest houses priced too high for the income levels. And, if 'properly' purchasing a house, you want a minimum 10% down. So, you're talking $30,000+ just for the downstroke on the house.
This is what is happening all over the country. I'm in a far Chicago burb and was totally surprised to find out how many people were renting in our area. It's just too difficult, with wage stagnation in this country, to save for downpayment plus save the thousands you need to purchase items you need to maintain a house and/or pay contracters to fix things. Plus you should have 6 months personal emergency fund, so now you're talking minimum of $40,000 saved just to put into the median house. How many people can get that together and still save for retirement, especially with median rent of $1200 a month in your area.
Click to expand...
Similar problem here.... house prices are through the roof here in London and the South of England...far more expensive than the rest of the UK. One bed apartment in my area.. median price is around £175 K ....3 bed average terrace or semi-datched home, median price, £400,000......detached home with land, any size...you can name your price, the sky is the limit!!!! (remember I'm outside of London...prices in the city are even worse!! )
 
"......Similar problem here.... house prices are through the roof here in London and the South of England...far more expensive than the rest of the UK. One bed apartment in my area.. median price is around £175 K ....3 bed average terrace or semi-datched home, median price, £400,000......detached home with land, any size...you can name your price, the sky is the limit!!!! .......

Yeah. I always look at realtors windows in any of the towns I'm walking through to see prices. I am aware of ridiculous prices all over the UK. What I don't know, if you can answer, is percentage of renters versus owners. Of course, that will vary by area, as in the states, I would assume (?).
 
retiredtraveler said:
"......Similar problem here.... house prices are through the roof here in London and the South of England...far more expensive than the rest of the UK. One bed apartment in my area.. median price is around £175 K ....3 bed average terrace or semi-datched home, median price, £400,000......detached home with land, any size...you can name your price, the sky is the limit!!!! .......

Yeah. I always look at realtors windows in any of the towns I'm walking through to see prices. I am aware of ridiculous prices all over the UK. What I don't know, if you can answer, is percentage of renters versus owners. Of course, that will vary by area, as in the states, I would assume (?).
Click to expand...
In England only... ( not the whole of the UK)...according to the Govt stats.. 63 % of the population are home-owners.. the biggest percentage of home owners (surprisingly given that it's the most expensive area in the whole of the UK) live here in the South of England , with the exception of London..where the vast majority are renting either Privately (extremely high rents in London) or from a Social Landlord, subsidized rent..there's over 1 million people in the whole of the UK (Scotland England Wales and Northern Ireland ) waiting to be allocated social housing who are currently living in privately rented accommodation and more applying every day ..but very few houses being built for that purpose (we're a small Island with 67 million people here accounted for, so land is at a premium)

According to Wiki ... the USA and the UK are almost Parity when it comes to home ownership...


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
 
Last edited:
My son/dil moved from Houston area to Denver area two years ago. They rented for a year or so, and then bought a home when they decided where they wanted to be.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top