Recommendation: Investment property in Temecula

[Ren]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]Personally I find that the higher end you go for rentals the more trouble you will have, as these people are generally not in the life time renter class and have a much different attitude toward renting than someone more inclined to rent for a long period of time. So I would not look at a rental home the same as one you would want to live in, but whatever you are most comfortable with I guess.
[/quote]

My point is just that you can’t buy an apartment conversion and think someone will say “oh good, an 11’x12′ master bedroom and a carport,” because they won’t. They’ll immediately cross you off the list. There’s a point where it’s large enough that it isn’t a pain in the ass to live in, but not so large that the tenant may as well buy something rather than pay that kind of rent. I definitely wouldn’t go high end on a rental. My 2000sf place is the largest I would consider.

You are far less likely to have trouble with tenants if you do a thorough reference/employment/credit check, and if you price below market, the good tenants (who can be choosy) will tend to gravitate to you.

[temeculaguy]

I’m conflicted because I haven’t acted on it and there is already too much competition, prices have jumped and inventory is low. I agree with Ren on a couple of points, especially the 1400-1700 townhouses with 2 car garages, the problem is that there are only about three in town and only in 92592. I would stay in 92592, it has the fewest rentals, there is only one apartment building in the Temecula parkway corridor and even now, while we are in the worst economic times in decades, the rental market in the South is tight. The casino employs a few thousand people who fit the rental demographic and there are limited rentals available without getting ont the freeway, once they are on the freeway, they have lots of choices. For S.D. commuters, the south is preferable as the freeway jams up going north, getting progressively worse, not that renters are commuters, but for appreciation, ppsf, etc (customs, land and other variables not included), prices go down as you travel north.

Personally, sfr’s are not the way to go up here, the rent multiplier isn’t as good and the taxes are higher. It’s not mello roos, but voter approved bond things and community assessment districts. The way they assess, sfr’s get more bite, the school tax costs each sfr lot $600 a year and each multi something like $200, there are a bunch of little add ons like that, driving the taxes for an sfr lot up a fixed dolar amount above the 1% tax rate between $100 and $300 per month, not based on value, while the townhouses/condo pretty much escape with $50 a month, so an hoa almost gets wiped out by the tax differential.
It’s hard to determine from redfin and last years taxes because they lowered them mid year, when they sell they get mid year adjustments, but the assesor web site will show the exact bill and what’s in it.

The older 1000-1400 sq ft sfr’s rent for the same as 1500 or 1600 sq ft condo, has the same carry cost when you add in a gardner and water (which landlords must pay up here) but they won’t appreciate as much. The sfr’s are holding their value on the low side but don’t rise as much in the bubble.

A 3/2 1600 sq ft 2 car attached garage townhouse rents for 1500 in a heartbeat and sells for 140k, it’s bubble price was 375k and it’s prebubble 2002 price was about 200k, they are just getting beat up more because of sterotypes. A 3/2 vail ranch 1300 sq fter, rents for 1500, had a bubble price of about 350k and they killing each other to get them for 160k right now.

The demographics of the renter for that little, older place is actually much more problematic than the townhouse, especially the no hoa places, where you can have 6 cars and pack em in, or park your monster trucks and play you music loud. The upscale condos mostly have 40-60 year old without little kids, many living alone, the one I’m looking at is clean and the hoa is is finacially secure. I think ren already owns one, unfortunately none are listed right now that aren’t shorts with offers. If I say anymore, I’ll never get mine. I’m actually losing faith that I will because there the shadow inventory there already cam out of the shadows, almost all the ones bought between 2004 and 2007 have already been turned over. Alright, here’s the ones I like, who cares, it’s gonna be a while before I do anything, I might wait another year.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/33618-Emerson-Way-92592/unit-A/home/12509138

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/41315-Ashton-Cir-92592/unit-C/home/12264525

This third one is a classic low end sfr in the same price range, it’s peak price was a 100k less, it rents for about the same, probably a little less and they look like crap. The demographics are worse.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/44881-Potestas-Dr-92592/home/6246851

I think the reason why it’s different is that there are so few condos, I do not like the numbers of the dr horton ones near pechanga parkway, they are way overpriced and too small. The temecula creek little ones are 100k, they pencil well, broke 300k in the bubble, i like em, but not as mych as the townhouses.

[temeculaguy]

I’m conflicted because I haven’t acted on it and there is already too much competition, prices have jumped and inventory is low. I agree with Ren on a couple of points, especially the 1400-1700 townhouses with 2 car garages, the problem is that there are only about three in town and only in 92592. I would stay in 92592, it has the fewest rentals, there is only one apartment building in the Temecula parkway corridor and even now, while we are in the worst economic times in decades, the rental market in the South is tight. The casino employs a few thousand people who fit the rental demographic and there are limited rentals available without getting ont the freeway, once they are on the freeway, they have lots of choices. For S.D. commuters, the south is preferable as the freeway jams up going north, getting progressively worse, not that renters are commuters, but for appreciation, ppsf, etc (customs, land and other variables not included), prices go down as you travel north.

Personally, sfr’s are not the way to go up here, the rent multiplier isn’t as good and the taxes are higher. It’s not mello roos, but voter approved bond things and community assessment districts. The way they assess, sfr’s get more bite, the school tax costs each sfr lot $600 a year and each multi something like $200, there are a bunch of little add ons like that, driving the taxes for an sfr lot up a fixed dolar amount above the 1% tax rate between $100 and $300 per month, not based on value, while the townhouses/condo pretty much escape with $50 a month, so an hoa almost gets wiped out by the tax differential.
It’s hard to determine from redfin and last years taxes because they lowered them mid year, when they sell they get mid year adjustments, but the assesor web site will show the exact bill and what’s in it.

The older 1000-1400 sq ft sfr’s rent for the same as 1500 or 1600 sq ft condo, has the same carry cost when you add in a gardner and water (which landlords must pay up here) but they won’t appreciate as much. The sfr’s are holding their value on the low side but don’t rise as much in the bubble.

A 3/2 1600 sq ft 2 car attached garage townhouse rents for 1500 in a heartbeat and sells for 140k, it’s bubble price was 375k and it’s prebubble 2002 price was about 200k, they are just getting beat up more because of sterotypes. A 3/2 vail ranch 1300 sq fter, rents for 1500, had a bubble price of about 350k and they killing each other to get them for 160k right now.

The demographics of the renter for that little, older place is actually much more problematic than the townhouse, especially the no hoa places, where you can have 6 cars and pack em in, or park your monster trucks and play you music loud. The upscale condos mostly have 40-60 year old without little kids, many living alone, the one I’m looking at is clean and the hoa is is finacially secure. I think ren already owns one, unfortunately none are listed right now that aren’t shorts with offers. If I say anymore, I’ll never get mine. I’m actually losing faith that I will because there the shadow inventory there already cam out of the shadows, almost all the ones bought between 2004 and 2007 have already been turned over. Alright, here’s the ones I like, who cares, it’s gonna be a while before I do anything, I might wait another year.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/33618-Emerson-Way-92592/unit-A/home/12509138

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/41315-Ashton-Cir-92592/unit-C/home/12264525

This third one is a classic low end sfr in the same price range, it’s peak price was a 100k less, it rents for about the same, probably a little less and they look like crap. The demographics are worse.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/44881-Potestas-Dr-92592/home/6246851

I think the reason why it’s different is that there are so few condos, I do not like the numbers of the dr horton ones near pechanga parkway, they are way overpriced and too small. The temecula creek little ones are 100k, they pencil well, broke 300k in the bubble, i like em, but not as mych as the townhouses.

[temeculaguy]

I’m conflicted because I haven’t acted on it and there is already too much competition, prices have jumped and inventory is low. I agree with Ren on a couple of points, especially the 1400-1700 townhouses with 2 car garages, the problem is that there are only about three in town and only in 92592. I would stay in 92592, it has the fewest rentals, there is only one apartment building in the Temecula parkway corridor and even now, while we are in the worst economic times in decades, the rental market in the South is tight. The casino employs a few thousand people who fit the rental demographic and there are limited rentals available without getting ont the freeway, once they are on the freeway, they have lots of choices. For S.D. commuters, the south is preferable as the freeway jams up going north, getting progressively worse, not that renters are commuters, but for appreciation, ppsf, etc (customs, land and other variables not included), prices go down as you travel north.

Personally, sfr’s are not the way to go up here, the rent multiplier isn’t as good and the taxes are higher. It’s not mello roos, but voter approved bond things and community assessment districts. The way they assess, sfr’s get more bite, the school tax costs each sfr lot $600 a year and each multi something like $200, there are a bunch of little add ons like that, driving the taxes for an sfr lot up a fixed dolar amount above the 1% tax rate between $100 and $300 per month, not based on value, while the townhouses/condo pretty much escape with $50 a month, so an hoa almost gets wiped out by the tax differential.
It’s hard to determine from redfin and last years taxes because they lowered them mid year, when they sell they get mid year adjustments, but the assesor web site will show the exact bill and what’s in it.

The older 1000-1400 sq ft sfr’s rent for the same as 1500 or 1600 sq ft condo, has the same carry cost when you add in a gardner and water (which landlords must pay up here) but they won’t appreciate as much. The sfr’s are holding their value on the low side but don’t rise as much in the bubble.

A 3/2 1600 sq ft 2 car attached garage townhouse rents for 1500 in a heartbeat and sells for 140k, it’s bubble price was 375k and it’s prebubble 2002 price was about 200k, they are just getting beat up more because of sterotypes. A 3/2 vail ranch 1300 sq fter, rents for 1500, had a bubble price of about 350k and they killing each other to get them for 160k right now.

The demographics of the renter for that little, older place is actually much more problematic than the townhouse, especially the no hoa places, where you can have 6 cars and pack em in, or park your monster trucks and play you music loud. The upscale condos mostly have 40-60 year old without little kids, many living alone, the one I’m looking at is clean and the hoa is is finacially secure. I think ren already owns one, unfortunately none are listed right now that aren’t shorts with offers. If I say anymore, I’ll never get mine. I’m actually losing faith that I will because there the shadow inventory there already cam out of the shadows, almost all the ones bought between 2004 and 2007 have already been turned over. Alright, here’s the ones I like, who cares, it’s gonna be a while before I do anything, I might wait another year.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/33618-Emerson-Way-92592/unit-A/home/12509138

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/41315-Ashton-Cir-92592/unit-C/home/12264525

This third one is a classic low end sfr in the same price range, it’s peak price was a 100k less, it rents for about the same, probably a little less and they look like crap. The demographics are worse.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/44881-Potestas-Dr-92592/home/6246851

I think the reason why it’s different is that there are so few condos, I do not like the numbers of the dr horton ones near pechanga parkway, they are way overpriced and too small. The temecula creek little ones are 100k, they pencil well, broke 300k in the bubble, i like em, but not as mych as the townhouses.

[temeculaguy]

I’m conflicted because I haven’t acted on it and there is already too much competition, prices have jumped and inventory is low. I agree with Ren on a couple of points, especially the 1400-1700 townhouses with 2 car garages, the problem is that there are only about three in town and only in 92592. I would stay in 92592, it has the fewest rentals, there is only one apartment building in the Temecula parkway corridor and even now, while we are in the worst economic times in decades, the rental market in the South is tight. The casino employs a few thousand people who fit the rental demographic and there are limited rentals available without getting ont the freeway, once they are on the freeway, they have lots of choices. For S.D. commuters, the south is preferable as the freeway jams up going north, getting progressively worse, not that renters are commuters, but for appreciation, ppsf, etc (customs, land and other variables not included), prices go down as you travel north.

Personally, sfr’s are not the way to go up here, the rent multiplier isn’t as good and the taxes are higher. It’s not mello roos, but voter approved bond things and community assessment districts. The way they assess, sfr’s get more bite, the school tax costs each sfr lot $600 a year and each multi something like $200, there are a bunch of little add ons like that, driving the taxes for an sfr lot up a fixed dolar amount above the 1% tax rate between $100 and $300 per month, not based on value, while the townhouses/condo pretty much escape with $50 a month, so an hoa almost gets wiped out by the tax differential.
It’s hard to determine from redfin and last years taxes because they lowered them mid year, when they sell they get mid year adjustments, but the assesor web site will show the exact bill and what’s in it.

The older 1000-1400 sq ft sfr’s rent for the same as 1500 or 1600 sq ft condo, has the same carry cost when you add in a gardner and water (which landlords must pay up here) but they won’t appreciate as much. The sfr’s are holding their value on the low side but don’t rise as much in the bubble.

A 3/2 1600 sq ft 2 car attached garage townhouse rents for 1500 in a heartbeat and sells for 140k, it’s bubble price was 375k and it’s prebubble 2002 price was about 200k, they are just getting beat up more because of sterotypes. A 3/2 vail ranch 1300 sq fter, rents for 1500, had a bubble price of about 350k and they killing each other to get them for 160k right now.

The demographics of the renter for that little, older place is actually much more problematic than the townhouse, especially the no hoa places, where you can have 6 cars and pack em in, or park your monster trucks and play you music loud. The upscale condos mostly have 40-60 year old without little kids, many living alone, the one I’m looking at is clean and the hoa is is finacially secure. I think ren already owns one, unfortunately none are listed right now that aren’t shorts with offers. If I say anymore, I’ll never get mine. I’m actually losing faith that I will because there the shadow inventory there already cam out of the shadows, almost all the ones bought between 2004 and 2007 have already been turned over. Alright, here’s the ones I like, who cares, it’s gonna be a while before I do anything, I might wait another year.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/33618-Emerson-Way-92592/unit-A/home/12509138

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/41315-Ashton-Cir-92592/unit-C/home/12264525

This third one is a classic low end sfr in the same price range, it’s peak price was a 100k less, it rents for about the same, probably a little less and they look like crap. The demographics are worse.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/44881-Potestas-Dr-92592/home/6246851

I think the reason why it’s different is that there are so few condos, I do not like the numbers of the dr horton ones near pechanga parkway, they are way overpriced and too small. The temecula creek little ones are 100k, they pencil well, broke 300k in the bubble, i like em, but not as mych as the townhouses.

[temeculaguy]

I’m conflicted because I haven’t acted on it and there is already too much competition, prices have jumped and inventory is low. I agree with Ren on a couple of points, especially the 1400-1700 townhouses with 2 car garages, the problem is that there are only about three in town and only in 92592. I would stay in 92592, it has the fewest rentals, there is only one apartment building in the Temecula parkway corridor and even now, while we are in the worst economic times in decades, the rental market in the South is tight. The casino employs a few thousand people who fit the rental demographic and there are limited rentals available without getting ont the freeway, once they are on the freeway, they have lots of choices. For S.D. commuters, the south is preferable as the freeway jams up going north, getting progressively worse, not that renters are commuters, but for appreciation, ppsf, etc (customs, land and other variables not included), prices go down as you travel north.

Personally, sfr’s are not the way to go up here, the rent multiplier isn’t as good and the taxes are higher. It’s not mello roos, but voter approved bond things and community assessment districts. The way they assess, sfr’s get more bite, the school tax costs each sfr lot $600 a year and each multi something like $200, there are a bunch of little add ons like that, driving the taxes for an sfr lot up a fixed dolar amount above the 1% tax rate between $100 and $300 per month, not based on value, while the townhouses/condo pretty much escape with $50 a month, so an hoa almost gets wiped out by the tax differential.
It’s hard to determine from redfin and last years taxes because they lowered them mid year, when they sell they get mid year adjustments, but the assesor web site will show the exact bill and what’s in it.

The older 1000-1400 sq ft sfr’s rent for the same as 1500 or 1600 sq ft condo, has the same carry cost when you add in a gardner and water (which landlords must pay up here) but they won’t appreciate as much. The sfr’s are holding their value on the low side but don’t rise as much in the bubble.

A 3/2 1600 sq ft 2 car attached garage townhouse rents for 1500 in a heartbeat and sells for 140k, it’s bubble price was 375k and it’s prebubble 2002 price was about 200k, they are just getting beat up more because of sterotypes. A 3/2 vail ranch 1300 sq fter, rents for 1500, had a bubble price of about 350k and they killing each other to get them for 160k right now.

The demographics of the renter for that little, older place is actually much more problematic than the townhouse, especially the no hoa places, where you can have 6 cars and pack em in, or park your monster trucks and play you music loud. The upscale condos mostly have 40-60 year old without little kids, many living alone, the one I’m looking at is clean and the hoa is is finacially secure. I think ren already owns one, unfortunately none are listed right now that aren’t shorts with offers. If I say anymore, I’ll never get mine. I’m actually losing faith that I will because there the shadow inventory there already cam out of the shadows, almost all the ones bought between 2004 and 2007 have already been turned over. Alright, here’s the ones I like, who cares, it’s gonna be a while before I do anything, I might wait another year.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/33618-Emerson-Way-92592/unit-A/home/12509138

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/41315-Ashton-Cir-92592/unit-C/home/12264525

This third one is a classic low end sfr in the same price range, it’s peak price was a 100k less, it rents for about the same, probably a little less and they look like crap. The demographics are worse.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/44881-Potestas-Dr-92592/home/6246851

I think the reason why it’s different is that there are so few condos, I do not like the numbers of the dr horton ones near pechanga parkway, they are way overpriced and too small. The temecula creek little ones are 100k, they pencil well, broke 300k in the bubble, i like em, but not as mych as the townhouses.

[paramount]

Consider buying investment property in north county where the average income is lower than in the valley.

[paramount]

Consider buying investment property in north county where the average income is lower than in the valley.

[paramount]

Consider buying investment property in north county where the average income is lower than in the valley.

[paramount]

Consider buying investment property in north county where the average income is lower than in the valley.

[paramount]

Consider buying investment property in north county where the average income is lower than in the valley.

[Ren]

[quote=temeculaguy]The upscale condos mostly have 40-60 year old without little kids, many living alone, the one I’m looking at is clean and the hoa is is finacially secure. I think ren already owns one, unfortunately none are listed right now that aren’t shorts with offers. If I say anymore, I’ll never get mine. I’m actually losing faith that I will because there the shadow inventory there already cam out of the shadows, almost all the ones bought between 2004 and 2007 have already been turned over. Alright, here’s the ones I like, who cares, it’s gonna be a while before I do anything, I might wait another year.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/33618-Emerson-Way-92592/unit-A/home/12509138

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/41315-Ashton-Cir-92592/unit-C/home/12264525
[/quote]

Those are the ones I was most serious about, but didn’t end up buying one. I do think they would make great rentals. That’s where I’ll look first when it’s time to buy again.

Thanks for the info on the taxes, I had no idea condos got a break.

[Ren]

[quote=temeculaguy]The upscale condos mostly have 40-60 year old without little kids, many living alone, the one I’m looking at is clean and the hoa is is finacially secure. I think ren already owns one, unfortunately none are listed right now that aren’t shorts with offers. If I say anymore, I’ll never get mine. I’m actually losing faith that I will because there the shadow inventory there already cam out of the shadows, almost all the ones bought between 2004 and 2007 have already been turned over. Alright, here’s the ones I like, who cares, it’s gonna be a while before I do anything, I might wait another year.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/33618-Emerson-Way-92592/unit-A/home/12509138

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/41315-Ashton-Cir-92592/unit-C/home/12264525
[/quote]

Those are the ones I was most serious about, but didn’t end up buying one. I do think they would make great rentals. That’s where I’ll look first when it’s time to buy again.

Thanks for the info on the taxes, I had no idea condos got a break.

[Ren]

[quote=temeculaguy]The upscale condos mostly have 40-60 year old without little kids, many living alone, the one I’m looking at is clean and the hoa is is finacially secure. I think ren already owns one, unfortunately none are listed right now that aren’t shorts with offers. If I say anymore, I’ll never get mine. I’m actually losing faith that I will because there the shadow inventory there already cam out of the shadows, almost all the ones bought between 2004 and 2007 have already been turned over. Alright, here’s the ones I like, who cares, it’s gonna be a while before I do anything, I might wait another year.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/33618-Emerson-Way-92592/unit-A/home/12509138

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/41315-Ashton-Cir-92592/unit-C/home/12264525
[/quote]

Those are the ones I was most serious about, but didn’t end up buying one. I do think they would make great rentals. That’s where I’ll look first when it’s time to buy again.

Thanks for the info on the taxes, I had no idea condos got a break.

[Ren]

[quote=temeculaguy]The upscale condos mostly have 40-60 year old without little kids, many living alone, the one I’m looking at is clean and the hoa is is finacially secure. I think ren already owns one, unfortunately none are listed right now that aren’t shorts with offers. If I say anymore, I’ll never get mine. I’m actually losing faith that I will because there the shadow inventory there already cam out of the shadows, almost all the ones bought between 2004 and 2007 have already been turned over. Alright, here’s the ones I like, who cares, it’s gonna be a while before I do anything, I might wait another year.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/33618-Emerson-Way-92592/unit-A/home/12509138

http://www.redfin.com/CA/Temecula/41315-Ashton-Cir-92592/unit-C/home/12264525
[/quote]

Those are the ones I was most serious about, but didn’t end up buying one. I do think they would make great rentals. That’s where I’ll look first when it’s time to buy again.

Thanks for the info on the taxes, I had no idea condos got a break.

[Author]

Posts