Temecula (the City proper) is the only part of the Inland Empire that I would even consider living in. The rest of the Inland Empire has nasty smog and many areas have really bad schools and a generally low education level among residents. Traffic is horrible anywhere in the IE, including Temecula, but at least the air is clear and the schools are good. Murrieta is very similar to Temecula but the traffic is worse. French Valley has ridiculous traffic – it’s hard to even get to the mall from there – so no way would I live there.
If you work in Temecula, it’s a nice place to live but I would *NOT* try and do the commute to the OC or even San Diego. You won’t save a dime once you get done paying for gas and buying a new car every few years. Your job performance may also suffer due to the commute. Not worth it.
As far as the market bottom, I think the costs of owning have to fall back in line with rents – that would be about a 50% drop for most tract homes. I think condos will get hammered much worse than single family houses but the same thing applies. It should cost no more to own than rent. If it doesn’t pencil out, just keep on renting. When you do get serious on buying, look for an area with low Mello-Roos if possible. Houses built in the late 90’s probably will not have Mello-Roos and will still be up to the latest construction codes. Anything after say ’99 will probably have a sick tax rate so you’d have to offer even less to make the purchase pencil out. That’s partially why I think condo’s will take a dump – the tax rates are usually high plus you pay a fat HOA fee on top of that. Makes the price you’d be willing to pay even lower. Also, there’s just too many condos around here and most people really want houses. So, buy a condo if you want but make sure it doesn’t cost you more than it would to rent.
