I dont think (and the operative word here is “think” since I dont know) that there is any government code that will enforce what type of people move into a neighborhood. I think if someone can get a mortgage and make the payments, that’s their right.
In theory, an HOA is supposed to enforce things like architectural integrity – or how the homes are cared for….which is supposed to guarantee that your neighbor does not paint her house purple, or let the fence fall to pieces, etc.
Personally, I would not buy into a community without a solid HOA. I would also look closely at the HOA’s financial situation. The place we just sold in Virginia had a horrible HOA – bickering neighbors who couldnt agree on a darn thing. In the meantime, the reserves were depleted, fences falling apart, etc. I thought our townhouse community was starting to look kind of ghetto by the time we moved.
But, the thing that really concerns me is all of the surplus of relatively inexpensive homes up here.
At the peak of the housing boom, people bought up here to find refuge from the inflated market in San Diego (or OC). Many were willing to commmute for the bigger McMansion.
However, times have changed. The vibe I’m getting is that people are sick of the commute. Especially with gas prices. It’s more crowded in the SD area than it was in even 2001, and the commute is a quality of life issue for some people.
So…back to my original thought: with all of the homes that were built – to accomodate those who wanted the bigger place and didnt mind the commute – but what happens now that the market is downturning and people are not as willing to drive hours every day to get to work?
On the other hand, with credit standards tightening, people who shouldnt really be homeowners probably wont be able to…
