[quote=bearishgurl][quote=paramount][quote=bearishgurl]
Just jog your memory a little as to what happened in your well-established “hometown,” Pt Loma (SD) between 2008 and 2011, paramount. It had a few MAJOR fixers which sold 30-40% under the market during that time frame and a few (VERY few) short sales (not sure HOW short). But for the most part, the PL market was stagnant to improving there during that time frame, depending on micro-area of the listing. There were never very many listings at one time there because when sellers don’t HAVE to sell in a stagnant or down market, they won’t list!
The major difference in residential RE values between the IE cities and the established cities in coastal counties (for example) is primarily due to the differences in types of owners. In the established areas, the owners have far less debt than a homeowner in a new or newer construction tract, on average, regardless of their income or the value of surrounding homes. In many established micro areas, most of the homes are owned free and clear. Long-term owner solvency has EVERYTHING to do with RE values remaining stable.[/quote]
BG: Markets change. And yes, the 1%ers will always do well (coastal. RSF, etc…) and were not as affected by the 2008 crash like the 99%ers in Temecula. San Diego like the Bay Area is also positively gentrified.
There is little doubt that many Temecula shoppers also shop the areas you mentioned, most – by far – see the value in Temecula.
Also allow me to remind you that the Temecula Valley has a population somewhere north of 300k.[/quote]
Chula Vista has increased in population as well … from 52K in 1986 to about 277K today. But that hasn’t made the quality of life better … for ANY resident. Instead, it’s been eroded. Just like Temecula, the freeways are choked down here for at least four hours per day and a large portion of the worker bees residing in newer construction located along the SR 125 corridor (a toll road) are apparently taxed to the max (MR and 1-3 HOAs) so much so that they can’t see fit to use their toll road for commuting purposes. Instead, they make 8-12 mile jaunts thru OUR surface streets from I-5 or I-805 eastward to and from work every day turning a simple four mile drive on H street or Telegraph Cyn Rd into a 35 minute ordeal for the rest of us.
I’m going to be passing thru Temec and beyond this week (up to the SR-91) and am NOT looking forward to the Temec/Murrietta parking lot on I-15. It’s even worse up there since the road was widened … absolutely horrific. I have NO IDEA how Temec residents even get their errands done.
Having “north of 300K” residents hasn’t done anything for your quality of life, paramount. You could get around faster in Pt Loma, … h@ll, even during sub-base and SPAWARS “rush hours.”[/quote]
Come on let’s be real here. Temecula’s booming population has been awesome for real estate re-appreciation. Folks that bought low or folks that held on did well. Very well. Probably closet doubling since bottom. That definitely beats any of my properties I bought. Traffic there is no worse or better than any other congested freeway if you’re heading the wrong commute direction.
I regret not buying a home there when the opportunity arose. I was stupid not to. I’m happy for the folks for whatever reason took advantage of it (whether they actively bought, or just held on and got lucky…)Whatever…. The point isn’t why one bought or held on…The only thing that matters in the end results, which is all the same.
And maybe if people bought more real estate, they don’t need to deal with commute traffic. Because maybe in the future they don’t need to go to work during commute hours. It’s sure one of my goals in the future.
