[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]* chula vista has big lots and fewer mello roos.[/quote]

I just want to clear up this misconception. 50-60% of Chula Vista actually HAS Mello Roos. However, the City encompasses 5 zip codes and is approximately 7 miles long by 13 miles wide. 91910 has the most larger lots but 91911, 91913 and 91914 also have properties with big lots (9K + sf).

What has been going on in 4S and surrounds in the last 3 years already happened in 91915 (Otay Ranch and parts of Eastlake Trails) beginning early 2006. This area is slightly older than 4S (first tracts finished in 2000). The values in Otay Ranch are further along in normalizing. There is SOME shadow inventory still left but most distressed units there have been foreclosed on or are in the process. There have been a few successful mods that I know of. 91915 has the highest MR in South County but it is not as high as the 4S MR. Much of the MR in Otay Ranch is also paid down an additional 3-5 years over that of 4S. One tract in 91913 paid off their MR in May 2007. Another set of tracts in 91910 will have their “street-bond” MR’s paid off in 2012. Since the City of Chula Vista debuted the formation of CFD’s in San Diego County in 1987, the residents here have all witnessed the results of this “experiment” first-hand and we have now come full circle.

The reality is that household funds that would have been spent on paint, siding, roof, windows, sod, concrete, etc, over the years has often had to go to MR when a choice had to be made. Many of the late 80’s/early 90’s built homes in these affected tracts have not been properly maintained. In some areas, sheets were still up on many windows up to three years after community buildout.

It’s very clear to anyone who can do the math that exorbitant MR obligations are not sustainable on a yearly basis for the average homeowner. Especially for a first-time buyer with no impounds who has to consciously budget for it. It is one of THE key causes of default, IMO. Add HOA dues to the MR and it is a recipe for disaster for a young family, especially one that is growing and/or depends on only ONE income.

Besides most of the units in 4S and surrounds originally selling for inflated prices during the “bubble-era,” the exorbitant MR in combination with HOA dues are the reasons why there is currently such heavy distress in the area, IMHO.

I believe 4S and surrounds still have several years to go to see stabilization of values. Some of its CFD’s bond-payback periods are for 5-10 years longer than Otay Ranch. We have all yet to see how this area will come out of the wash.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]* chula vista has big lots and fewer mello roos.[/quote]

I just want to clear up this misconception. 50-60% of Chula Vista actually HAS Mello Roos. However, the City encompasses 5 zip codes and is approximately 7 miles long by 13 miles wide. 91910 has the most larger lots but 91911, 91913 and 91914 also have properties with big lots (9K + sf).

What has been going on in 4S and surrounds in the last 3 years already happened in 91915 (Otay Ranch and parts of Eastlake Trails) beginning early 2006. This area is slightly older than 4S (first tracts finished in 2000). The values in Otay Ranch are further along in normalizing. There is SOME shadow inventory still left but most distressed units there have been foreclosed on or are in the process. There have been a few successful mods that I know of. 91915 has the highest MR in South County but it is not as high as the 4S MR. Much of the MR in Otay Ranch is also paid down an additional 3-5 years over that of 4S. One tract in 91913 paid off their MR in May 2007. Another set of tracts in 91910 will have their “street-bond” MR’s paid off in 2012. Since the City of Chula Vista debuted the formation of CFD’s in San Diego County in 1987, the residents here have all witnessed the results of this “experiment” first-hand and we have now come full circle.

The reality is that household funds that would have been spent on paint, siding, roof, windows, sod, concrete, etc, over the years has often had to go to MR when a choice had to be made. Many of the late 80’s/early 90’s built homes in these affected tracts have not been properly maintained. In some areas, sheets were still up on many windows up to three years after community buildout.

It’s very clear to anyone who can do the math that exorbitant MR obligations are not sustainable on a yearly basis for the average homeowner. Especially for a first-time buyer with no impounds who has to consciously budget for it. It is one of THE key causes of default, IMO. Add HOA dues to the MR and it is a recipe for disaster for a young family, especially one that is growing and/or depends on only ONE income.

Besides most of the units in 4S and surrounds originally selling for inflated prices during the “bubble-era,” the exorbitant MR in combination with HOA dues are the reasons why there is currently such heavy distress in the area, IMHO.

I believe 4S and surrounds still have several years to go to see stabilization of values. Some of its CFD’s bond-payback periods are for 5-10 years longer than Otay Ranch. We have all yet to see how this area will come out of the wash.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=UCGal]* chula vista has big lots and fewer mello roos.[/quote]

I just want to clear up this misconception. 50-60% of Chula Vista actually HAS Mello Roos. However, the City encompasses 5 zip codes and is approximately 7 miles long by 13 miles wide. 91910 has the most larger lots but 91911, 91913 and 91914 also have properties with big lots (9K + sf).

What has been going on in 4S and surrounds in the last 3 years already happened in 91915 (Otay Ranch and parts of Eastlake Trails) beginning early 2006. This area is slightly older than 4S (first tracts finished in 2000). The values in Otay Ranch are further along in normalizing. There is SOME shadow inventory still left but most distressed units there have been foreclosed on or are in the process. There have been a few successful mods that I know of. 91915 has the highest MR in South County but it is not as high as the 4S MR. Much of the MR in Otay Ranch is also paid down an additional 3-5 years over that of 4S. One tract in 91913 paid off their MR in May 2007. Another set of tracts in 91910 will have their “street-bond” MR’s paid off in 2012. Since the City of Chula Vista debuted the formation of CFD’s in San Diego County in 1987, the residents here have all witnessed the results of this “experiment” first-hand and we have now come full circle.

The reality is that household funds that would have been spent on paint, siding, roof, windows, sod, concrete, etc, over the years has often had to go to MR when a choice had to be made. Many of the late 80’s/early 90’s built homes in these affected tracts have not been properly maintained. In some areas, sheets were still up on many windows up to three years after community buildout.

It’s very clear to anyone who can do the math that exorbitant MR obligations are not sustainable on a yearly basis for the average homeowner. Especially for a first-time buyer with no impounds who has to consciously budget for it. It is one of THE key causes of default, IMO. Add HOA dues to the MR and it is a recipe for disaster for a young family, especially one that is growing and/or depends on only ONE income.

Besides most of the units in 4S and surrounds originally selling for inflated prices during the “bubble-era,” the exorbitant MR in combination with HOA dues are the reasons why there is currently such heavy distress in the area, IMHO.

I believe 4S and surrounds still have several years to go to see stabilization of values. Some of its CFD’s bond-payback periods are for 5-10 years longer than Otay Ranch. We have all yet to see how this area will come out of the wash.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ocrenter]But the pattern of behavior is clear and evident. everytime someone new on the board brings up a community within the 56 corridor, ie their desire to move there, here comes OBG going full force to try to get them to see that they can go to south county and buy a property on 2 acres with clear views of the carnage that is TJ. it has happened countless times and frankly I just got really sick of it.[/quote]

This is an utterly false statement. I have NEVER pushed South County here and only suggested it to new Pigg ER because he didn’t have a work location (worked out of his home).

Never have I referred to ANY SD County area as a “premier destination.” You had to have been 2 jokers short of a full deck to come up with that statement in reference to the “56 corridor,” of all places, lol!

You WERE joking, weren’t you, ocr??

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ocrenter]But the pattern of behavior is clear and evident. everytime someone new on the board brings up a community within the 56 corridor, ie their desire to move there, here comes OBG going full force to try to get them to see that they can go to south county and buy a property on 2 acres with clear views of the carnage that is TJ. it has happened countless times and frankly I just got really sick of it.[/quote]

This is an utterly false statement. I have NEVER pushed South County here and only suggested it to new Pigg ER because he didn’t have a work location (worked out of his home).

Never have I referred to ANY SD County area as a “premier destination.” You had to have been 2 jokers short of a full deck to come up with that statement in reference to the “56 corridor,” of all places, lol!

You WERE joking, weren’t you, ocr??

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ocrenter]But the pattern of behavior is clear and evident. everytime someone new on the board brings up a community within the 56 corridor, ie their desire to move there, here comes OBG going full force to try to get them to see that they can go to south county and buy a property on 2 acres with clear views of the carnage that is TJ. it has happened countless times and frankly I just got really sick of it.[/quote]

This is an utterly false statement. I have NEVER pushed South County here and only suggested it to new Pigg ER because he didn’t have a work location (worked out of his home).

Never have I referred to ANY SD County area as a “premier destination.” You had to have been 2 jokers short of a full deck to come up with that statement in reference to the “56 corridor,” of all places, lol!

You WERE joking, weren’t you, ocr??

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ocrenter]But the pattern of behavior is clear and evident. everytime someone new on the board brings up a community within the 56 corridor, ie their desire to move there, here comes OBG going full force to try to get them to see that they can go to south county and buy a property on 2 acres with clear views of the carnage that is TJ. it has happened countless times and frankly I just got really sick of it.[/quote]

This is an utterly false statement. I have NEVER pushed South County here and only suggested it to new Pigg ER because he didn’t have a work location (worked out of his home).

Never have I referred to ANY SD County area as a “premier destination.” You had to have been 2 jokers short of a full deck to come up with that statement in reference to the “56 corridor,” of all places, lol!

You WERE joking, weren’t you, ocr??

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ocrenter]But the pattern of behavior is clear and evident. everytime someone new on the board brings up a community within the 56 corridor, ie their desire to move there, here comes OBG going full force to try to get them to see that they can go to south county and buy a property on 2 acres with clear views of the carnage that is TJ. it has happened countless times and frankly I just got really sick of it.[/quote]

This is an utterly false statement. I have NEVER pushed South County here and only suggested it to new Pigg ER because he didn’t have a work location (worked out of his home).

Never have I referred to ANY SD County area as a “premier destination.” You had to have been 2 jokers short of a full deck to come up with that statement in reference to the “56 corridor,” of all places, lol!

You WERE joking, weren’t you, ocr??

[bearishgurl]

Agree, UCGal. You are correct in that the OP inquired as to the 56 corridor. He/she should be apprised of the fact that if they decide to purchase in certain areas of this corridor, that they could lose significant equity in the coming months/years until ALL the distressed inventory is flushed out (specifically 92127). No one knows what the true values will settle at until this happens.

I find it ridiculous that a Pigg can come on here and state that a far-flung area (consisting of primarily tract homes on substandard lots and lying within CFD’s), is a “premier destination” for newcomers and that no other areas “can compete” with its desirability.

We all know that EVERY area (yes, even LJ and DM) has its cons. Finding a suitable residence for your family is a highly personal decision based upon subjective criteria as well as resources available. Of course, sf2sd has stated a desired price range which will enable him/her to purchase in almost ANY highly desireable area in the County!

Although ocr started out by slamming Santee and Chula Vista (which were not even on the plate), his/her “premier destination” comment directed at this particular area just reeked of ignorance, in my mind.

[bearishgurl]

Agree, UCGal. You are correct in that the OP inquired as to the 56 corridor. He/she should be apprised of the fact that if they decide to purchase in certain areas of this corridor, that they could lose significant equity in the coming months/years until ALL the distressed inventory is flushed out (specifically 92127). No one knows what the true values will settle at until this happens.

I find it ridiculous that a Pigg can come on here and state that a far-flung area (consisting of primarily tract homes on substandard lots and lying within CFD’s), is a “premier destination” for newcomers and that no other areas “can compete” with its desirability.

We all know that EVERY area (yes, even LJ and DM) has its cons. Finding a suitable residence for your family is a highly personal decision based upon subjective criteria as well as resources available. Of course, sf2sd has stated a desired price range which will enable him/her to purchase in almost ANY highly desireable area in the County!

Although ocr started out by slamming Santee and Chula Vista (which were not even on the plate), his/her “premier destination” comment directed at this particular area just reeked of ignorance, in my mind.

[bearishgurl]

Agree, UCGal. You are correct in that the OP inquired as to the 56 corridor. He/she should be apprised of the fact that if they decide to purchase in certain areas of this corridor, that they could lose significant equity in the coming months/years until ALL the distressed inventory is flushed out (specifically 92127). No one knows what the true values will settle at until this happens.

I find it ridiculous that a Pigg can come on here and state that a far-flung area (consisting of primarily tract homes on substandard lots and lying within CFD’s), is a “premier destination” for newcomers and that no other areas “can compete” with its desirability.

We all know that EVERY area (yes, even LJ and DM) has its cons. Finding a suitable residence for your family is a highly personal decision based upon subjective criteria as well as resources available. Of course, sf2sd has stated a desired price range which will enable him/her to purchase in almost ANY highly desireable area in the County!

Although ocr started out by slamming Santee and Chula Vista (which were not even on the plate), his/her “premier destination” comment directed at this particular area just reeked of ignorance, in my mind.

[bearishgurl]

Agree, UCGal. You are correct in that the OP inquired as to the 56 corridor. He/she should be apprised of the fact that if they decide to purchase in certain areas of this corridor, that they could lose significant equity in the coming months/years until ALL the distressed inventory is flushed out (specifically 92127). No one knows what the true values will settle at until this happens.

I find it ridiculous that a Pigg can come on here and state that a far-flung area (consisting of primarily tract homes on substandard lots and lying within CFD’s), is a “premier destination” for newcomers and that no other areas “can compete” with its desirability.

We all know that EVERY area (yes, even LJ and DM) has its cons. Finding a suitable residence for your family is a highly personal decision based upon subjective criteria as well as resources available. Of course, sf2sd has stated a desired price range which will enable him/her to purchase in almost ANY highly desireable area in the County!

Although ocr started out by slamming Santee and Chula Vista (which were not even on the plate), his/her “premier destination” comment directed at this particular area just reeked of ignorance, in my mind.

[bearishgurl]

Agree, UCGal. You are correct in that the OP inquired as to the 56 corridor. He/she should be apprised of the fact that if they decide to purchase in certain areas of this corridor, that they could lose significant equity in the coming months/years until ALL the distressed inventory is flushed out (specifically 92127). No one knows what the true values will settle at until this happens.

I find it ridiculous that a Pigg can come on here and state that a far-flung area (consisting of primarily tract homes on substandard lots and lying within CFD’s), is a “premier destination” for newcomers and that no other areas “can compete” with its desirability.

We all know that EVERY area (yes, even LJ and DM) has its cons. Finding a suitable residence for your family is a highly personal decision based upon subjective criteria as well as resources available. Of course, sf2sd has stated a desired price range which will enable him/her to purchase in almost ANY highly desireable area in the County!

Although ocr started out by slamming Santee and Chula Vista (which were not even on the plate), his/her “premier destination” comment directed at this particular area just reeked of ignorance, in my mind.

[bearishgurl]

That’s a good point, Eugene. I DO think there is a high percentage of vacancies in very distressed parts of the country, such as Detroit, MI. However, many, many people have vacation homes which are never rented and always left furnished with supplies for family and friends to visit. I believe the bulk of vacation homes nationwide are owned free and clear. Whenever I visit certain lakes in the southwest part of the country in the summer, I see many vacant homes, some with private boathouses and quite a few are over 2500 sf with multiple garages. The lawn is mowed and all is well.

The same is true of homes here in SD county which are owned by persons living in other countries (such as Mexico). Many are “vacant” with an alarm system, pool servicer and gardener and the owners come and enjoy them whenever they are able to :=]

I think this vacancy figure (that needs to be absorbed thru sales) is high but I can’t say by how much.

[bearishgurl]

That’s a good point, Eugene. I DO think there is a high percentage of vacancies in very distressed parts of the country, such as Detroit, MI. However, many, many people have vacation homes which are never rented and always left furnished with supplies for family and friends to visit. I believe the bulk of vacation homes nationwide are owned free and clear. Whenever I visit certain lakes in the southwest part of the country in the summer, I see many vacant homes, some with private boathouses and quite a few are over 2500 sf with multiple garages. The lawn is mowed and all is well.

The same is true of homes here in SD county which are owned by persons living in other countries (such as Mexico). Many are “vacant” with an alarm system, pool servicer and gardener and the owners come and enjoy them whenever they are able to :=]

I think this vacancy figure (that needs to be absorbed thru sales) is high but I can’t say by how much.

[Author]

Posts