The property is listed for $20K less than what the buyer paid for it in 2007. Not the usual situation where someone buys a model and then resells it for a significant increase over the initial price, however they did get almost two years of rental income (at a rate that probably surpassed the deficiency).
GHM is an interesting area. It has not been received favorably by the REALTOR population, and conventionally speaking, that is probably a bad thing. That sort of reception will influence resale rates. At the same time, the individuals who bought here bought with more prudence than standard new construction buyers. They put skin in the game with decent money down. They bought due to the location, in the foothills, a half mile from Bear Creek Park, a bike ride to America the Beautiful for summertime concerts, Pikes Peak Views, etc. It is also the kind of place that has some interesting articles posted about it, some like Rick Tosches's article using firsthand observations over actual interviews or reports,while others do some research and actually rate higher on Google.
What's a buyer to do?
Talk to people they trust.
Decide for themselves.
In a slippery real estate market such as this one, this is not the kind of place that will have people clammoring with multiple offers anytime soon. The John Laing Chapter 11 filing is a short-term concern that may have ramifications equal to the long-term considerations of whether or not you can plant a vegetable garden. But yet another consideration, one that bucks the "environmental fear" argument is this one:
In commuter-crazy Colorado Springs, name a single new area this close to this much with new homes built the way the modern Gen X buyer or up and comming affluent buyer actually wants them? There isn't one. Now... name one where you can get a new home at $90 a square foot?
I'm usually pretty opinionated, but this is sort of like trying to figure out how to vote on 1A... the normal mortal enemies make for strange bedfellows.