But I don't like that area. A house like that is not worth giving up the incredible outdoors lifestyle that the Seattle region offers.
I'm happy to live in a well-built, quiet condo that I pay a bit more for than "standard" condos or whatever. Don't really need a house. But even these are nearly impossible to come by. There's practically zero inventory.
FWIW if "incredible outdoors lifestyle" is what you seek and remote work is an option there are a number of better, cheaper places to live than Seattle.
It really depends what you are looking for but a short list of western cities which are superior outdoor destinations to Seattle at least in some ways (and are much cheaper) is Bozeman, Missoula, Salt Lake City, Rapid City, Reno, Boise, St George. If a city is not a requirement, the list is a lot longer.
Your mileage may vary depending on much or little you value things like remoteness, lack of traffic, mountains vs desert vs forest. Yes, if you're a hardcore mountaineer it might be tough to beat the north Cascades but for the rest of us there are a lot of good options.
A city's land is a scarce resource. It cannot just be doled out to anyone who "wants it". The whole problem of resource allocation is why we have capitalism in the first place.
I'm happy to live in a well-built, quiet condo that I pay a bit more for than "standard" condos or whatever. Don't really need a house. But even these are nearly impossible to come by. There's practically zero inventory.