San Diego Housing Market News and Analysis

Definitely NOT carmel valley because it won't cash flow.
Not to mention, the schools suck, the quality of housing there sucks, it's filled with migrant camps.

Definitely NOT mira mesa.... It's a dump there, and you have really sketchy renters, a lot of bums, and high unemployment with people who can't pay bills there...The future looks bleak there, because while there are some employers out there, they might go under and they might relocate out of the area. Take one employer, called Qualcomm. They might end up relocating to Mexico, or they might go out of business if people stop using smart phones... and when that happens, Mira Mesa is Dead with a capital D. In fact, Mira Mesa would end up like Detroit. You don't want to invest in an area like Detroit, do you? That's right. So don't even look there. Don't bid on property there. It's definitely not a good place to look...

I think some folks mentioned Chula Vista are good places and some think Santee are good places. You might want to ask some of the leading experts in that area.

Sarcasm detector ... beep Beep BEEEEP! Serious responses, please :)

And I'd invest in Detroit for sure. Urban farms are the hip new thing.

.........Then I would recommend the search button in the upper right hand corner, because the questions you're asking we've covered here....But to answer some of your questions...

*shadow inventory...Yes, possible. A lot of piggs here don't care, because we've come to the conclusion that banks versus retail buyer, retail buyer loses. Because either banks will hold on to the inventory, end up being landlords, or sell them in bulk to private investment groups, whom in turn will put it on the market close to retail. In any case, very very unlikely you will be seeing 50% off on a beachfront property.

*areas of rental property. No agreement here. I guess you just need to be in the ground floor or partnering with a trusted agent or others in the area to make a judgement call.. If you have to ask how much rent is an area XYZ, If you don't know which areas have mello ruse (sic), what the prevailing property tax is in a given area, and what the approximate HOA for a given condo/townhome/home in a given area should run, you probably don't know it well enough to be investing in that area yet imho. And, BTW, you're not the only one trying to get 7%+ on rental property..A LOT of people have been looking for some time.

*about listingbook.com...sdlookup.com is popular around here, as well as redfin, as well as houserebate.com

*about self representation without a RE license.. Good luck...I think most selling agents won't want to deal with you, unless you allow them to represent you. Because if it really is a good deal property, you can bet there will be more than one offer with representation, an in many cases multiple offers.

Not looking for 50% off beachfront, just looking for decent deals in the neighborhood of 7% cap. Basically, so it makes money rather than breaking even or being a financial drag in the short term. As far as bulk sales, they're a possibility, but they're moving forward cautiously and there's also legislation pending in the CA State Assembly to prohibit them.

Areas: I've identified at least one area. I was asking for opinions of that area, and other interesting areas. I have friends in the SD area, have done quite a bit of research, and have spoken to some trustworthy brokers. As well as pulling comps on rents. If you can't answer w/o being snide, don't bother at all.

Listingbook.com: thanks.

Self-representation: that's sort of bizarre and annoying. Where I live, it's typical to call up a broker or go to an open-house, view the property, and drop an offer via a one-liner e-mail or even verbally. Assuming a non-distressed sale, broker asks seller, broker gets back with a response or counter within a few days. Easy and oddly painless.

Inside joke...Sorry, you haven't been long enough here to understand. Anyway, some folks here thought they were waiting for 50% off of La Jolla.

And yes, what you're looking for is probably no different than I would say the majority of the people that are here who don't like looking at the 1.0% or so CD rate.

Rules are meant to be broken, especially in california.

Great, got a specific property in mind?

Lessons on getting advice on piggington. (1) Opinions are a dime of a dozen. (2) There is a concept of LETDLITA, and if you don't know what that is, do a search on it here and read about what it means, again for your benefit...I'm just making a mockery of this, because you know it's boring here sometimes, since we're all waiting for the killer deals...(3) "Advice" here is a lot like a relationship...You get it all, good and ugly, or nothing at all. Seriously, a lot of the questions you ask the same questions have been asked here already, and what you are probably looking for is already archived. Not that there's anything wrong with asking again about what we feel are good investment areas. Just, you're not going to get a good answer because of (1) and (2) above.

Also, it's probably going to be difficult to get an opinion on a blanket questionon feasibility of a rental in area X, unless you got a specific property in mind or at least a specific complex in mind, in which case, some people here could probably chime in and tell you based on where they live and/or there experiences. Even in a given area, you can have a huge price difference simply because.. For example, in one area in 92130, people wonder why certain homes are commanding prices close to peak prices like in '05/'06 (cough Saratoga and Derby Hills), and the answer is because for whatever reason a lot of people value those homes being close to Sage Canyon and Ocean Air, and more likely a lot of these people are hell of a lot lucky bastards that cashed out on stock options.
Or for that matter, if you asked "Is paying $600k for a 3/3 in Crest a good deal?", I would tell you hell no, because current price in that community for 3/3 is closer to $500k because $600k is closer to peek price in '04/'05.

Welcome.

Well, I could be wrong, but I don't think you will get very far trying to represent yourself unless you also happen to have a license.

BTW: there are also 3 realtors that periodically posts on this board.

sdrealtor, SD Realtor, and urbanrealtor...Occasionally if you ask for an opinion, they'll give it to you.

spdrun, most of the condo complexes in the area of Rancho Mission Road and Friars (92108) are fairly new. This area is very, very congested, meaning it could take 40 minutes to drive from the Fashion Valley area to this area or the reverse, ESP during lunch hours in the middle of the business day. If you have rentals there, you would experience a LOT of competition for tenants. Yes, it IS convenient to the trolley, Qualcomm Stadium (football) and various well-known SD urban communities and 4 freeways.

You should be aware that this area lies both on and adjacent to the SD River bank and is considered to be a CA "Type A" floodplain. Therefore, the developments likely require flood insurance (pd by the assns). Most of the more recent condo developers around there have had to "shore up" the land they built condos on and also "shore up" the riverbank with what we call "glass breakwater" techniques using infill. This particular area of the riverbank is still inhabited by homeless camps, IIRC.

Luckily, the freeways are situated over and above this area, reducing much of the tire noise that would be present if the freeway was situated below these streets and condo complexes. Shopping is plentiful in the area except for grocery shopping which can be found in up the hill off Mission Village Drive off Sandrock (Mission Village), up Mission Gorge Rd (Allied Gardens) or up Qualcomm Drive (formerly "Texas St") on the south side of I-8 (North Park).

So...what religion are you?

In this instance, I'm a devotee of Mammon.

(And thanks for the informative response bearishgurl!!)

Mission valley is not that congested IMO. It can handle a lot more development.
I like Civita. We should encourage the tear down of old houses for new townhouses in the city, so more people can live closer to the core.

No Civita is bad. It is far flung and lizard infested new construction at least one hundred yards away from the prime locations in Mission Valley.

Do more people necessarily want to live closer to the core? This is San Diego, not Manhattan or Capitol Hill/DC. Given unlimited money, I'd probably take La Jolla or PB over the immediate downtown area/Little Italy.

We've owned investment real estate in the San Diego area for almost 25 years--mostly in the coastal areas.

It seems like everyone wants to get in the game now, so there is a lot of competition for investment properties.

At this point in time, your investment options will be limited to areas within your budget, and it sounds like you've received some good suggestions from previous posts here.

You may also want to take a look at various zip codes at sdlookup.com, to get an idea of what's out there, or work with a realtor who might be able to further assist you.

San Diego works differently from say NYC or SF...
SD downtown is much more dead than the burbs I think.
Assuming infinite amount of money, downtown never crossed my mind personally. Folks wanting "city life" probably shouldn't live in San Diego.

You should also note a LOT of downtown development was recent, overpriced, underwater, and with huge hoa fees.

I don't think dtn SD is dead. I was just down there today (a weekend) and it was hopping. There are a lot of tourists down there and the Gaslamp/Horton Plaza was busy. However, SD's "city life" doesn't compare to SF and I'm sure it doesn't compare to NYC (never been there).

Agree about overbuilding of condos which were/are underwater but I think this area is slowly recovering as some of the complexes originally built to sell are being converted to rentals. The HOAs there DO tend to have high dues because many are full-service with 24-hr staff and amenities such as gyms. However, the sound levels when opening windows or standing on a balcony are very high there, day and night, especially those complexes directly over the nightlife at the Gaslamp, within earshot of Petco Park and the ones up on Bankers Hill (with noise from airport landings and I-5).

spdrun, in decades past, downtown workers DID want to live close to downtown (even those who had families). However, I'm not sure very many of today's families with school-age children want to live in SD's urban core. The vast majority of young parents on this board seem to have issues with the schools although there is really nothing wrong with 80% of SD's schools located in the urban core, IMO. Excluding military bases, what has happened over the years in SD County is that dtn SD, Kearny Mesa, Mission Valley, Mira Mesa, Scripps Ranch and later, what is now known as the "Golden Triangle" WERE the "work centers" of 25+ years ago (in that order by amt of workers employed in them). Now that most of the aerospace and defense contractors have left, SD has "high-tech" and "biotech" centers which employ the most workers. The majority of these job centers are located in the Golden Triangle, Sorrento Mesa, Sorrento Valley and surrounds. Tract housing and condos sprung up around these work centers, attracting nearby workers and their families. Of course, these companies draw workers from the entire county but the workers who don't live nearby have to commute daily on crowded freeways in and out of these work centers.

LJ, although fairly close to the *new* work centers, is too expensive for the vast majority of these workers. PB is a little less expensive than LJ but most of these workers are young and do not care for the older housing stock (either in PB OR LJ). In CA coastal counties, the older stock in the best locations typically has substantially larger lots than newer tract-housing does. Schools aside, the younger cohort of Gen X and Gen Y typically do not want to spend time or money on extensive landscape and staunchly refuse to raise their children in a 1400-2200 sf house when they can get a 3000+ sf house in the far-flung lizard-infested stix for the same price or less. They would rather spend their time commuting and have their air conditioner regularly serviced.

To each his own :=0

I have no doubt Civita will be a successful development that will hold value well.

I say let the market decide. New developments near the urban core sell well. People don't wan't far flung as much as they want new, clean and comfortable at a reasonable price.

BG sounds like a selfish old person who wants no new building near the urban core. But then she laments that people are moving to far flung areas. Those 2 positions are not realistically compatible.

Progress is about embracing change and newcomers. Your San Diego of 30 years ago is not what people want. It was never yours to begin with.

Sure. If you say so chief.

WOW, brian! Where did this vitriol come from? And how did you come to this conclusion??

I actually like all the mid-century-wannabe condo bldgs in East Village! HOWEVER, the units in them have not been selling well in recent years. Along with several other languishing projects, I passed by the "Strata" today and it looks like its mgmt is STILL trying to rent these units after initially converting them to rentals nearly three years ago. Perhaps Pigg UR can tell us if more buyers have been showing interest of late in some of these *new* buildings. I think these new condos and apt bldgs, along with the redevelopment of the Gaslamp District, expansion of the SD Convention Center, completion of Petco Park, etc., has significantly improved SD's dtn for the better. These projects replaced old, dilapidated SFR's and comm'l buildings where the homeless slept under the eaves and lived on every corner with all their worldly possessions. Not to mention it eliminated scores of "porta-pottis" set out for the homeless on vacant lots near 14th and Market Sts (just NE of where the homeless were able to obtain sack breakfasts and lunches from charities for years - sometimes straight out of the backs of vehicles). The difference in dtn SD due to the rampant development of recent years is night and day!

I believe dtn SD got overbuilt and then underwater due to builders having excess liquidity and initial buyers being able to buy with "funny money." But this is one area that WILL eventually "catch up to itself," IMO.

I am completely against urban sprawl for a whole host of reasons, not the least of which it has had the unintended consequence of completely decimating the finances of so many CA cities and counties.

The "urban renewal" that has taken place in dtn SD is NOT "urban sprawl," nor is "Civita" in MV. Whether or not any buildings existed on those sites prior to what is there now, they are considered infill. The two are completely different animals.

BG, density comes with traffic and if there is traffic we have to find ways to manage it.

Who cares is there is overbuilding? All the better for buyers and renters. Its much better than under building.

You can't have your large mid-century large lot ranch houses without urban sprawl. Urban sprawl is part of california history.

In CA coastal counties, the older stock in the best locations typically has substantially larger lots than newer tract-housing does. Schools aside, the younger cohort of Gen X and Gen Y typically do not want to spend time or money on extensive landscape and staunchly refuse to raise their children in a 1400-2200 sf house when they can get a 3000+ sf house in the far-flung lizard-infested stix for the same price or less.

I read it, understand it, but still don't "get" it:

PB seems to have a lot of cute older houses on small lots. Typically used as rentals, but I wouldn't feel beneath living in one myself, and I'm in my early 30s. Are my tastes warped by being from the the East Coast, where age of housing doesn't matter so much as quality? (Avg build date of homes in my immediate family is something like 1920).

Who cares is there is overbuilding? All the better for buyers and renters. Its much better than under building.

Since this has turned into a philosophical discussion... :D

Really depends WHAT is being built. Cheap garbazhe that will fall apart within 5 years and need expensive repairs/raise maintenance to nightmare levels, or good quality housing. The former suits nobody; not buyers, not the environment, not builders who get mired in litigation.

Also, if buyers buy, then the market gets glutted with cheap new-build homes, you end up with a situation much like that in Phoenix. Yeah, prices have recovered a bit there, but they're still down 40-50% over the peak years.

I owned an investment condo in Mission Valley. We purchased it in 03 or 04, not a great time to buy, and sold in 07. It did not cash flow well but we made a nice profit with regards to the appreciation.

As far as tenant quality, we had strong demand for very well qualified tenants. We ended up getting an engineer who eventually purchased from us.

No Civita is bad! I have heard rumors of their plans for plumbing. Even worse they are planning to encase the plumbing in 2x4 studs and drywall. Some may consider these walls but I know better. I saw this happen in MM twenty nine years ago.

They always do these days.
Even when things are what they are, inevitably there is always someone of the most bizarre opinions for/against something from arguably LETDLITA, maybe not necessarily from experience. Some of us, have decided when we are serious about RE investing we take it offline and PM people back and forth.

I haven't looked in Mission Valley as an investment option. And I don't like making shit up when I don't know. So sarcasm aside, I have no comment specifically on MV. Sorry.

My suggestion for you is find out where the big/high paying employers are, and plan accordingly. That I do know, but folks will some folks will probably want to argue about that, just for argument sake too.

SDR how the heck did you pull his off? Wow 04 was near peak... Props to you.

migrant camps? do you mean the type of migrants from India, China, Korea, and Taiwan? and the camps, you meant those shanty town built by Pardee?

definitely a lot less migrants in Santee, true red white and blue blooded Americans live there.

I believe it. we bought a condo in 2004 as well. sold in 2005 for a nice six figure profit. our buyer ended up selling in 2008 for the same price. the comparable at the bottom ended up $100k lower than our purchase price in '04.

migrant camps? do you mean the type of migrants from India, China, Korea, and Taiwan? and the camps, you meant those shanty town built by Pardee?

definitely a lot less migrants in Santee, true red white and blue blooded Americans live there.

I think that you don't get sarcasm even when it pops you one on the jaw.

you definitely do not want drywall if the property is subject to flood. remember the great Qualcomm Stadium flood of 2010? you have been forewarned!!!