- This topic has 257 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 3 months ago by
an.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 1, 2011 at 9:22 PM #728120September 1, 2011 at 9:41 PM #727851
bearishgurl
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Isnt Eastern Chula Vista the home of obscene Mello Roos and HOA fees?
In the NCC prime areas, the Mello Roos are typically $400 or $800 per year and most homes have no MR. This is hardly crippling or obscene for people buying homes $700K and above. At my kids schools 2/3rd’s of the households pay $800/yr while the other 1/3rd does not pay MR. Comparable homes in Eastern Chula Vista have MR of $2,000 to $4,000 per year.
The one notable exception is Encinitas Ranch which is not where the school district buyers flock because it feeds into the lowest performing school in the area. The draw of Encinitas Ranch is a pristine golf course/ocean view community close to the freeway and beaches in a great own. there isnt another community like it in all of SD County. (disclaimer-I am not a fan of Encinitas Ranch)
[/quote]
I get where all the WTF vitriol came from now, lol. The highlighted portion of this post was not there when I replied to the first sentence of it a few hours ago. I only replied to the first sentence which was the entire post at that time. This is the first time I’ve seen the rest of the post.
sdr, I was not referring to “NCC” in any of my posts on this thread. I was referring to North County and primarily those communities located within the PUSD attendance areas.
I understand that MR is virtually non-existent west of I-5 and low or minimal in communities directly east of I-5.
In some cases, the annual HOA dues (pd once yr) for SFR tracts is worth it. It keeps all the roofs of the same quality, keeps the homes painted only approved colors and keeps recreational and broken down vehicles from being “stored” in the front of homes, etc. This uniform “look” to the area helps ALL homeowners values stabilize.
September 1, 2011 at 9:41 PM #727935Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Isnt Eastern Chula Vista the home of obscene Mello Roos and HOA fees?
In the NCC prime areas, the Mello Roos are typically $400 or $800 per year and most homes have no MR. This is hardly crippling or obscene for people buying homes $700K and above. At my kids schools 2/3rd’s of the households pay $800/yr while the other 1/3rd does not pay MR. Comparable homes in Eastern Chula Vista have MR of $2,000 to $4,000 per year.
The one notable exception is Encinitas Ranch which is not where the school district buyers flock because it feeds into the lowest performing school in the area. The draw of Encinitas Ranch is a pristine golf course/ocean view community close to the freeway and beaches in a great own. there isnt another community like it in all of SD County. (disclaimer-I am not a fan of Encinitas Ranch)
[/quote]
I get where all the WTF vitriol came from now, lol. The highlighted portion of this post was not there when I replied to the first sentence of it a few hours ago. I only replied to the first sentence which was the entire post at that time. This is the first time I’ve seen the rest of the post.
sdr, I was not referring to “NCC” in any of my posts on this thread. I was referring to North County and primarily those communities located within the PUSD attendance areas.
I understand that MR is virtually non-existent west of I-5 and low or minimal in communities directly east of I-5.
In some cases, the annual HOA dues (pd once yr) for SFR tracts is worth it. It keeps all the roofs of the same quality, keeps the homes painted only approved colors and keeps recreational and broken down vehicles from being “stored” in the front of homes, etc. This uniform “look” to the area helps ALL homeowners values stabilize.
September 1, 2011 at 9:41 PM #728121Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Isnt Eastern Chula Vista the home of obscene Mello Roos and HOA fees?
In the NCC prime areas, the Mello Roos are typically $400 or $800 per year and most homes have no MR. This is hardly crippling or obscene for people buying homes $700K and above. At my kids schools 2/3rd’s of the households pay $800/yr while the other 1/3rd does not pay MR. Comparable homes in Eastern Chula Vista have MR of $2,000 to $4,000 per year.
The one notable exception is Encinitas Ranch which is not where the school district buyers flock because it feeds into the lowest performing school in the area. The draw of Encinitas Ranch is a pristine golf course/ocean view community close to the freeway and beaches in a great own. there isnt another community like it in all of SD County. (disclaimer-I am not a fan of Encinitas Ranch)
[/quote]
I get where all the WTF vitriol came from now, lol. The highlighted portion of this post was not there when I replied to the first sentence of it a few hours ago. I only replied to the first sentence which was the entire post at that time. This is the first time I’ve seen the rest of the post.
sdr, I was not referring to “NCC” in any of my posts on this thread. I was referring to North County and primarily those communities located within the PUSD attendance areas.
I understand that MR is virtually non-existent west of I-5 and low or minimal in communities directly east of I-5.
In some cases, the annual HOA dues (pd once yr) for SFR tracts is worth it. It keeps all the roofs of the same quality, keeps the homes painted only approved colors and keeps recreational and broken down vehicles from being “stored” in the front of homes, etc. This uniform “look” to the area helps ALL homeowners values stabilize.
September 1, 2011 at 9:48 PM #727856Participant[quote=sdrealtor]…Comparable homes in Eastern Chula Vista have MR of $2,000 to $4,000 per year…[/quote]
Yes, true . . . in 91914 and 91915. Compare this to the “typical MR” for a similar-sized property on a similar-sized lot in 92127….for example.
September 1, 2011 at 9:48 PM #727940Participant[quote=sdrealtor]…Comparable homes in Eastern Chula Vista have MR of $2,000 to $4,000 per year…[/quote]
Yes, true . . . in 91914 and 91915. Compare this to the “typical MR” for a similar-sized property on a similar-sized lot in 92127….for example.
September 1, 2011 at 9:48 PM #728122Participant[quote=sdrealtor]…Comparable homes in Eastern Chula Vista have MR of $2,000 to $4,000 per year…[/quote]
Yes, true . . . in 91914 and 91915. Compare this to the “typical MR” for a similar-sized property on a similar-sized lot in 92127….for example.
September 1, 2011 at 9:54 PM #727861sdrealtor
ParticipantYou are the only one talking about 92127. The prime school district that everyone hear has been referring to is San Dieguito which serves the coastal areas for Jr/Sr high and Del Mar/Solana Beach/Cardiff/Encinitas which together serve the elementary school needs of these areas. Truthfully, if we even want to address 92127, most of the homes there have no MR but again we werent talking about that area only you were.
Still waiting for even a single word rebutting my elementary school points
……..crickets……….crickets………..
September 1, 2011 at 9:54 PM #727944ParticipantYou are the only one talking about 92127. The prime school district that everyone hear has been referring to is San Dieguito which serves the coastal areas for Jr/Sr high and Del Mar/Solana Beach/Cardiff/Encinitas which together serve the elementary school needs of these areas. Truthfully, if we even want to address 92127, most of the homes there have no MR but again we werent talking about that area only you were.
Still waiting for even a single word rebutting my elementary school points
……..crickets……….crickets………..
September 1, 2011 at 9:54 PM #728123ParticipantYou are the only one talking about 92127. The prime school district that everyone hear has been referring to is San Dieguito which serves the coastal areas for Jr/Sr high and Del Mar/Solana Beach/Cardiff/Encinitas which together serve the elementary school needs of these areas. Truthfully, if we even want to address 92127, most of the homes there have no MR but again we werent talking about that area only you were.
Still waiting for even a single word rebutting my elementary school points
……..crickets……….crickets………..
September 1, 2011 at 9:59 PM #727871Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=joec]. . . no idea why you like to always add blurbs on HOA/MR, it gets old and makes you look less open minded / wise to meaningful discussions or what anyone has to say.[/quote]
The reason I use those terms (more MR than HOA, actually) is because that is precisely the “bill of goods” that parents and potential parents are sold when deciding to buy in a particular area solely for the school scores. The parents are no doubt also attracted by the newer school facilities (pd for w/MR bonds). The reason they are purchasing solely for the area school scores is because there is more often than not no other redeeming qualities to the property in question. It is often inferior in location, build quality and lot size to older properties of the same size in the more established areas as well as being identical or a mirror image to every fifth house on the block. You can’t deny that the right to attend particular school(s) is the foremost and only reason why most young parents flock to a particular area when they are in the market to buy. Nothing else seems to matter. We have recently discussed ad infinitum on this board how these “school-score chasing” parents are outbidding each other in certain tracts in these *coveted* school attendance areas and driving up these properties’ prices well over their actual worth.
Before “API scores” even came out or became a “hot topic” of debate, what criteria do you think families in coastal CA used to purchased homes?
How about . . . close to other relatives and/or best location they could afford?
Now, location doesn’t seem to matter anymore to the biggest segment of the buying public. It’s all about finding a quickly-built tract thrown up in lizard-land to reside in the attendance area of that *newer* sterile-looking “high-scoring” school with the desert landscaping.
The most important fundamental of buying RE in CA coastal counties has always been “location, location, location.” Obviously, this basic fundamental has taken a back seat in recent years to “elementary school, middle school and high school” (no matter what the additional encumbrances are). The 22-45 year-old age group is the biggest buying segment of the population. The vast majority of the over 45 age group and especially the over-55 age group already has all the housing they need and want (and then some). We just didn’t buy it in the same way. We bought for the most convenient and/or best location we could afford and (hopefully) appreciation.
I don’t have a personal “area bias” for or against here as MR is all over the county.[/quote]
Again here you are referring to coastal CA and the prime school districts people chase after which I just outlined in my prior post. Nowhere is 4S or 92127 mentioned in this opost our anywhere on this thread until you got called on the carpet. It is yourt lame fall back postion, because you dont know WTF you are talking about. You reference additional encumberances which are in reality relatively modest in these prime school district communities. In these communities it is not about schools or location it is about schools AND location. It is about having it all.
September 1, 2011 at 9:59 PM #727954Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=joec]. . . no idea why you like to always add blurbs on HOA/MR, it gets old and makes you look less open minded / wise to meaningful discussions or what anyone has to say.[/quote]
The reason I use those terms (more MR than HOA, actually) is because that is precisely the “bill of goods” that parents and potential parents are sold when deciding to buy in a particular area solely for the school scores. The parents are no doubt also attracted by the newer school facilities (pd for w/MR bonds). The reason they are purchasing solely for the area school scores is because there is more often than not no other redeeming qualities to the property in question. It is often inferior in location, build quality and lot size to older properties of the same size in the more established areas as well as being identical or a mirror image to every fifth house on the block. You can’t deny that the right to attend particular school(s) is the foremost and only reason why most young parents flock to a particular area when they are in the market to buy. Nothing else seems to matter. We have recently discussed ad infinitum on this board how these “school-score chasing” parents are outbidding each other in certain tracts in these *coveted* school attendance areas and driving up these properties’ prices well over their actual worth.
Before “API scores” even came out or became a “hot topic” of debate, what criteria do you think families in coastal CA used to purchased homes?
How about . . . close to other relatives and/or best location they could afford?
Now, location doesn’t seem to matter anymore to the biggest segment of the buying public. It’s all about finding a quickly-built tract thrown up in lizard-land to reside in the attendance area of that *newer* sterile-looking “high-scoring” school with the desert landscaping.
The most important fundamental of buying RE in CA coastal counties has always been “location, location, location.” Obviously, this basic fundamental has taken a back seat in recent years to “elementary school, middle school and high school” (no matter what the additional encumbrances are). The 22-45 year-old age group is the biggest buying segment of the population. The vast majority of the over 45 age group and especially the over-55 age group already has all the housing they need and want (and then some). We just didn’t buy it in the same way. We bought for the most convenient and/or best location we could afford and (hopefully) appreciation.
I don’t have a personal “area bias” for or against here as MR is all over the county.[/quote]
Again here you are referring to coastal CA and the prime school districts people chase after which I just outlined in my prior post. Nowhere is 4S or 92127 mentioned in this opost our anywhere on this thread until you got called on the carpet. It is yourt lame fall back postion, because you dont know WTF you are talking about. You reference additional encumberances which are in reality relatively modest in these prime school district communities. In these communities it is not about schools or location it is about schools AND location. It is about having it all.
September 1, 2011 at 9:59 PM #728125Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=joec]. . . no idea why you like to always add blurbs on HOA/MR, it gets old and makes you look less open minded / wise to meaningful discussions or what anyone has to say.[/quote]
The reason I use those terms (more MR than HOA, actually) is because that is precisely the “bill of goods” that parents and potential parents are sold when deciding to buy in a particular area solely for the school scores. The parents are no doubt also attracted by the newer school facilities (pd for w/MR bonds). The reason they are purchasing solely for the area school scores is because there is more often than not no other redeeming qualities to the property in question. It is often inferior in location, build quality and lot size to older properties of the same size in the more established areas as well as being identical or a mirror image to every fifth house on the block. You can’t deny that the right to attend particular school(s) is the foremost and only reason why most young parents flock to a particular area when they are in the market to buy. Nothing else seems to matter. We have recently discussed ad infinitum on this board how these “school-score chasing” parents are outbidding each other in certain tracts in these *coveted* school attendance areas and driving up these properties’ prices well over their actual worth.
Before “API scores” even came out or became a “hot topic” of debate, what criteria do you think families in coastal CA used to purchased homes?
How about . . . close to other relatives and/or best location they could afford?
Now, location doesn’t seem to matter anymore to the biggest segment of the buying public. It’s all about finding a quickly-built tract thrown up in lizard-land to reside in the attendance area of that *newer* sterile-looking “high-scoring” school with the desert landscaping.
The most important fundamental of buying RE in CA coastal counties has always been “location, location, location.” Obviously, this basic fundamental has taken a back seat in recent years to “elementary school, middle school and high school” (no matter what the additional encumbrances are). The 22-45 year-old age group is the biggest buying segment of the population. The vast majority of the over 45 age group and especially the over-55 age group already has all the housing they need and want (and then some). We just didn’t buy it in the same way. We bought for the most convenient and/or best location we could afford and (hopefully) appreciation.
I don’t have a personal “area bias” for or against here as MR is all over the county.[/quote]
Again here you are referring to coastal CA and the prime school districts people chase after which I just outlined in my prior post. Nowhere is 4S or 92127 mentioned in this opost our anywhere on this thread until you got called on the carpet. It is yourt lame fall back postion, because you dont know WTF you are talking about. You reference additional encumberances which are in reality relatively modest in these prime school district communities. In these communities it is not about schools or location it is about schools AND location. It is about having it all.
September 1, 2011 at 10:07 PM #727891ParticipantLOL, either he can’t read or he’s had too much of a good thing again tonite, lol . . . .
sdr, you still haven’t told us about how the HS’s did on their CACI’s in your neck of the woods….
September 1, 2011 at 10:07 PM #727974ParticipantLOL, either he can’t read or he’s had too much of a good thing again tonite, lol . . . .
sdr, you still haven’t told us about how the HS’s did on their CACI’s in your neck of the woods….
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.