Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 8, 2009 at 11:56 PM in reply to: Highway 76 expansion breaking ground – thanks San Diego! – Temecula #326213January 8, 2009 at 11:56 PM in reply to: Highway 76 expansion breaking ground – thanks San Diego! – Temecula #326552
eclipxe
Participant[quote=paramount]To my knowledge this is what Temecula has in the pipeline currently:
1. It now appears the construction on the hospital will begin literally any day now. This will be a large hospital.
2. Super Wal Mart now under construction on 79 South. Like it or not, I think this will be a big boost to housing. Unless of course Albertson’s and other shopping areas become ghost towns as a result. Possible mixed results on this project.
3. Improvements to 76
4. Car pool lanes on I-15 starting at the 78 – this is huge.
Temecula will not only survive, Temecula will thrive (despite what people from San Diego want to believe).
PS: I use the terms “from San Diego” loosely since many people who live in San Diego are NOT from San Diego at all.
[/quote]
Awesome update – I didn’t know about the Super Wal Mart – what about the regular Wal Mart that is already there??
January 8, 2009 at 11:56 PM in reply to: Highway 76 expansion breaking ground – thanks San Diego! – Temecula #326621Participant[quote=paramount]To my knowledge this is what Temecula has in the pipeline currently:
1. It now appears the construction on the hospital will begin literally any day now. This will be a large hospital.
2. Super Wal Mart now under construction on 79 South. Like it or not, I think this will be a big boost to housing. Unless of course Albertson’s and other shopping areas become ghost towns as a result. Possible mixed results on this project.
3. Improvements to 76
4. Car pool lanes on I-15 starting at the 78 – this is huge.
Temecula will not only survive, Temecula will thrive (despite what people from San Diego want to believe).
PS: I use the terms “from San Diego” loosely since many people who live in San Diego are NOT from San Diego at all.
[/quote]
Awesome update – I didn’t know about the Super Wal Mart – what about the regular Wal Mart that is already there??
January 8, 2009 at 11:56 PM in reply to: Highway 76 expansion breaking ground – thanks San Diego! – Temecula #326640Participant[quote=paramount]To my knowledge this is what Temecula has in the pipeline currently:
1. It now appears the construction on the hospital will begin literally any day now. This will be a large hospital.
2. Super Wal Mart now under construction on 79 South. Like it or not, I think this will be a big boost to housing. Unless of course Albertson’s and other shopping areas become ghost towns as a result. Possible mixed results on this project.
3. Improvements to 76
4. Car pool lanes on I-15 starting at the 78 – this is huge.
Temecula will not only survive, Temecula will thrive (despite what people from San Diego want to believe).
PS: I use the terms “from San Diego” loosely since many people who live in San Diego are NOT from San Diego at all.
[/quote]
Awesome update – I didn’t know about the Super Wal Mart – what about the regular Wal Mart that is already there??
January 8, 2009 at 11:56 PM in reply to: Highway 76 expansion breaking ground – thanks San Diego! – Temecula #326724Participant[quote=paramount]To my knowledge this is what Temecula has in the pipeline currently:
1. It now appears the construction on the hospital will begin literally any day now. This will be a large hospital.
2. Super Wal Mart now under construction on 79 South. Like it or not, I think this will be a big boost to housing. Unless of course Albertson’s and other shopping areas become ghost towns as a result. Possible mixed results on this project.
3. Improvements to 76
4. Car pool lanes on I-15 starting at the 78 – this is huge.
Temecula will not only survive, Temecula will thrive (despite what people from San Diego want to believe).
PS: I use the terms “from San Diego” loosely since many people who live in San Diego are NOT from San Diego at all.
[/quote]
Awesome update – I didn’t know about the Super Wal Mart – what about the regular Wal Mart that is already there??
Participant[quote=Blissful Ignoramus]I just want to re-emphasize that in the long-run, I think Temecula has promise. It’s a good location in a region that over the next couple of decades should see strong growth. If you look at the (relatively) unpopulated areas of Southern California, Temecula Valley is probably the most promising.
The problem is, what is someone moving into that $280K house going to do and how are they going to live NOW? Sure, telecommuting and alternative energy are going to improve the distance issue. I think we’re looking at at least a ten year window there, and in the meantime I think we’re going to see more Dec. 2007s than Dec. 2008s when it comes to fuel prices.
As for slums, sure, the Hemets and Perrises are in worse shape, and they aren’t slums. Well, not entirely…yet. The bubble JUST burst. It’s going to be years before the dust settles. As an example, look at Riverside and San Bernardino counties, and the wake of the 1990s real estate slump. There are a lot of areas there that turned pretty crappy pretty quickly. They re-expanded in the current bubble (and of course burst) but in the meantime the older parts (i.e., 1990 vintage) remained pretty rough around the edges. I can’t imagine how all of the current foreclosures are going to happen without some pretty serious effects on quality of life everywhere in the Inland Empire (and elsewhere, to a lesser extent).
I sincerely hope I am wrong about this. But even if I’m not, I think folks buying in the best areas with a 10+ year commitment to the region will do very well.[/quote]
I agree with you about the location. We’ll see how foreclosures play out, however just from my experience on the ground – the brown lawns are gone and decent places are getting multiple offers when they are priced right.
You asked how is someone moving into the $280k house going to make do now? Well 280k is closer to the higher end of the market now out here, but let’s say the family puts down 20%. A $224k loan at 3x income requires the family to make about 74k a year. Teachers, police officers, retail, Abbot factory line, restaurant manage, blackjack dealer etc. Local jobs with two wage earners can support a loan of that amount.
And remember, that is the high end of the market. 74k is also about the median household income. I would say that is a recipe for a stable community of owners that do not need to stretch or even commute to make do.
Now if we assume one wage earner does commute (at least 30 miles, maybe 50):
50 miles x 2 = 100 miles x 5 days/wk = 500 miles/wk
Car: 30mpg. 500/30 ~ 17 gallons a week.
Gas @ $5/gal = $85/wk -> $340/month
@ 5% interest and 20% down, the family is paying $1700/mo (principle, interest, tax @ 1.6%, insurance and $100 hoa). That doesn’t include the $291 dollar tax saving @ 25% tax rate.
Total monthly housing outlay, including gas @ $5/gal = $2034
This same house would rent in Orange County or San Diego for significantly more than $2034. Of course there is the issue of the cost of seat time for a commute and other soft variables, but just look at the hard numbers.
A family making $74k would take home about $4500/mo. After mortgage and gas, this leaves them with $2500 for food, savings, car payment, etc.
If gas was $10/gal, the total monthly outlay is only $2374. Let’s say they still take need to get around town and use a few gallons a month – $2500/mo.
So no matter how you slice it…3500 sq ft, new construction, excellent schools, low crime area. Minus the awful location (major street, no light left turn), but there are smaller homes with better locations for the same or less.
$2500/month at $10/gallon gas.
Now the folks that bought out here at the top of the bubble for 500, 600k? They’re in for a world a hurt but from what I’ve witnessed in my home search, there are plenty of people waiting on the sidelines with cash in hand to pick up those places for a reasonable, sustainable amount. I’ll get worried when we see a lack of buyers and full neighborhoods becoming distressed. So far, so good.
Participant[quote=Blissful Ignoramus]I just want to re-emphasize that in the long-run, I think Temecula has promise. It’s a good location in a region that over the next couple of decades should see strong growth. If you look at the (relatively) unpopulated areas of Southern California, Temecula Valley is probably the most promising.
The problem is, what is someone moving into that $280K house going to do and how are they going to live NOW? Sure, telecommuting and alternative energy are going to improve the distance issue. I think we’re looking at at least a ten year window there, and in the meantime I think we’re going to see more Dec. 2007s than Dec. 2008s when it comes to fuel prices.
As for slums, sure, the Hemets and Perrises are in worse shape, and they aren’t slums. Well, not entirely…yet. The bubble JUST burst. It’s going to be years before the dust settles. As an example, look at Riverside and San Bernardino counties, and the wake of the 1990s real estate slump. There are a lot of areas there that turned pretty crappy pretty quickly. They re-expanded in the current bubble (and of course burst) but in the meantime the older parts (i.e., 1990 vintage) remained pretty rough around the edges. I can’t imagine how all of the current foreclosures are going to happen without some pretty serious effects on quality of life everywhere in the Inland Empire (and elsewhere, to a lesser extent).
I sincerely hope I am wrong about this. But even if I’m not, I think folks buying in the best areas with a 10+ year commitment to the region will do very well.[/quote]
I agree with you about the location. We’ll see how foreclosures play out, however just from my experience on the ground – the brown lawns are gone and decent places are getting multiple offers when they are priced right.
You asked how is someone moving into the $280k house going to make do now? Well 280k is closer to the higher end of the market now out here, but let’s say the family puts down 20%. A $224k loan at 3x income requires the family to make about 74k a year. Teachers, police officers, retail, Abbot factory line, restaurant manage, blackjack dealer etc. Local jobs with two wage earners can support a loan of that amount.
And remember, that is the high end of the market. 74k is also about the median household income. I would say that is a recipe for a stable community of owners that do not need to stretch or even commute to make do.
Now if we assume one wage earner does commute (at least 30 miles, maybe 50):
50 miles x 2 = 100 miles x 5 days/wk = 500 miles/wk
Car: 30mpg. 500/30 ~ 17 gallons a week.
Gas @ $5/gal = $85/wk -> $340/month
@ 5% interest and 20% down, the family is paying $1700/mo (principle, interest, tax @ 1.6%, insurance and $100 hoa). That doesn’t include the $291 dollar tax saving @ 25% tax rate.
Total monthly housing outlay, including gas @ $5/gal = $2034
This same house would rent in Orange County or San Diego for significantly more than $2034. Of course there is the issue of the cost of seat time for a commute and other soft variables, but just look at the hard numbers.
A family making $74k would take home about $4500/mo. After mortgage and gas, this leaves them with $2500 for food, savings, car payment, etc.
If gas was $10/gal, the total monthly outlay is only $2374. Let’s say they still take need to get around town and use a few gallons a month – $2500/mo.
So no matter how you slice it…3500 sq ft, new construction, excellent schools, low crime area. Minus the awful location (major street, no light left turn), but there are smaller homes with better locations for the same or less.
$2500/month at $10/gallon gas.
Now the folks that bought out here at the top of the bubble for 500, 600k? They’re in for a world a hurt but from what I’ve witnessed in my home search, there are plenty of people waiting on the sidelines with cash in hand to pick up those places for a reasonable, sustainable amount. I’ll get worried when we see a lack of buyers and full neighborhoods becoming distressed. So far, so good.
Participant[quote=Blissful Ignoramus]I just want to re-emphasize that in the long-run, I think Temecula has promise. It’s a good location in a region that over the next couple of decades should see strong growth. If you look at the (relatively) unpopulated areas of Southern California, Temecula Valley is probably the most promising.
The problem is, what is someone moving into that $280K house going to do and how are they going to live NOW? Sure, telecommuting and alternative energy are going to improve the distance issue. I think we’re looking at at least a ten year window there, and in the meantime I think we’re going to see more Dec. 2007s than Dec. 2008s when it comes to fuel prices.
As for slums, sure, the Hemets and Perrises are in worse shape, and they aren’t slums. Well, not entirely…yet. The bubble JUST burst. It’s going to be years before the dust settles. As an example, look at Riverside and San Bernardino counties, and the wake of the 1990s real estate slump. There are a lot of areas there that turned pretty crappy pretty quickly. They re-expanded in the current bubble (and of course burst) but in the meantime the older parts (i.e., 1990 vintage) remained pretty rough around the edges. I can’t imagine how all of the current foreclosures are going to happen without some pretty serious effects on quality of life everywhere in the Inland Empire (and elsewhere, to a lesser extent).
I sincerely hope I am wrong about this. But even if I’m not, I think folks buying in the best areas with a 10+ year commitment to the region will do very well.[/quote]
I agree with you about the location. We’ll see how foreclosures play out, however just from my experience on the ground – the brown lawns are gone and decent places are getting multiple offers when they are priced right.
You asked how is someone moving into the $280k house going to make do now? Well 280k is closer to the higher end of the market now out here, but let’s say the family puts down 20%. A $224k loan at 3x income requires the family to make about 74k a year. Teachers, police officers, retail, Abbot factory line, restaurant manage, blackjack dealer etc. Local jobs with two wage earners can support a loan of that amount.
And remember, that is the high end of the market. 74k is also about the median household income. I would say that is a recipe for a stable community of owners that do not need to stretch or even commute to make do.
Now if we assume one wage earner does commute (at least 30 miles, maybe 50):
50 miles x 2 = 100 miles x 5 days/wk = 500 miles/wk
Car: 30mpg. 500/30 ~ 17 gallons a week.
Gas @ $5/gal = $85/wk -> $340/month
@ 5% interest and 20% down, the family is paying $1700/mo (principle, interest, tax @ 1.6%, insurance and $100 hoa). That doesn’t include the $291 dollar tax saving @ 25% tax rate.
Total monthly housing outlay, including gas @ $5/gal = $2034
This same house would rent in Orange County or San Diego for significantly more than $2034. Of course there is the issue of the cost of seat time for a commute and other soft variables, but just look at the hard numbers.
A family making $74k would take home about $4500/mo. After mortgage and gas, this leaves them with $2500 for food, savings, car payment, etc.
If gas was $10/gal, the total monthly outlay is only $2374. Let’s say they still take need to get around town and use a few gallons a month – $2500/mo.
So no matter how you slice it…3500 sq ft, new construction, excellent schools, low crime area. Minus the awful location (major street, no light left turn), but there are smaller homes with better locations for the same or less.
$2500/month at $10/gallon gas.
Now the folks that bought out here at the top of the bubble for 500, 600k? They’re in for a world a hurt but from what I’ve witnessed in my home search, there are plenty of people waiting on the sidelines with cash in hand to pick up those places for a reasonable, sustainable amount. I’ll get worried when we see a lack of buyers and full neighborhoods becoming distressed. So far, so good.
Participant[quote=Blissful Ignoramus]I just want to re-emphasize that in the long-run, I think Temecula has promise. It’s a good location in a region that over the next couple of decades should see strong growth. If you look at the (relatively) unpopulated areas of Southern California, Temecula Valley is probably the most promising.
The problem is, what is someone moving into that $280K house going to do and how are they going to live NOW? Sure, telecommuting and alternative energy are going to improve the distance issue. I think we’re looking at at least a ten year window there, and in the meantime I think we’re going to see more Dec. 2007s than Dec. 2008s when it comes to fuel prices.
As for slums, sure, the Hemets and Perrises are in worse shape, and they aren’t slums. Well, not entirely…yet. The bubble JUST burst. It’s going to be years before the dust settles. As an example, look at Riverside and San Bernardino counties, and the wake of the 1990s real estate slump. There are a lot of areas there that turned pretty crappy pretty quickly. They re-expanded in the current bubble (and of course burst) but in the meantime the older parts (i.e., 1990 vintage) remained pretty rough around the edges. I can’t imagine how all of the current foreclosures are going to happen without some pretty serious effects on quality of life everywhere in the Inland Empire (and elsewhere, to a lesser extent).
I sincerely hope I am wrong about this. But even if I’m not, I think folks buying in the best areas with a 10+ year commitment to the region will do very well.[/quote]
I agree with you about the location. We’ll see how foreclosures play out, however just from my experience on the ground – the brown lawns are gone and decent places are getting multiple offers when they are priced right.
You asked how is someone moving into the $280k house going to make do now? Well 280k is closer to the higher end of the market now out here, but let’s say the family puts down 20%. A $224k loan at 3x income requires the family to make about 74k a year. Teachers, police officers, retail, Abbot factory line, restaurant manage, blackjack dealer etc. Local jobs with two wage earners can support a loan of that amount.
And remember, that is the high end of the market. 74k is also about the median household income. I would say that is a recipe for a stable community of owners that do not need to stretch or even commute to make do.
Now if we assume one wage earner does commute (at least 30 miles, maybe 50):
50 miles x 2 = 100 miles x 5 days/wk = 500 miles/wk
Car: 30mpg. 500/30 ~ 17 gallons a week.
Gas @ $5/gal = $85/wk -> $340/month
@ 5% interest and 20% down, the family is paying $1700/mo (principle, interest, tax @ 1.6%, insurance and $100 hoa). That doesn’t include the $291 dollar tax saving @ 25% tax rate.
Total monthly housing outlay, including gas @ $5/gal = $2034
This same house would rent in Orange County or San Diego for significantly more than $2034. Of course there is the issue of the cost of seat time for a commute and other soft variables, but just look at the hard numbers.
A family making $74k would take home about $4500/mo. After mortgage and gas, this leaves them with $2500 for food, savings, car payment, etc.
If gas was $10/gal, the total monthly outlay is only $2374. Let’s say they still take need to get around town and use a few gallons a month – $2500/mo.
So no matter how you slice it…3500 sq ft, new construction, excellent schools, low crime area. Minus the awful location (major street, no light left turn), but there are smaller homes with better locations for the same or less.
$2500/month at $10/gallon gas.
Now the folks that bought out here at the top of the bubble for 500, 600k? They’re in for a world a hurt but from what I’ve witnessed in my home search, there are plenty of people waiting on the sidelines with cash in hand to pick up those places for a reasonable, sustainable amount. I’ll get worried when we see a lack of buyers and full neighborhoods becoming distressed. So far, so good.
Participant[quote=Blissful Ignoramus]I just want to re-emphasize that in the long-run, I think Temecula has promise. It’s a good location in a region that over the next couple of decades should see strong growth. If you look at the (relatively) unpopulated areas of Southern California, Temecula Valley is probably the most promising.
The problem is, what is someone moving into that $280K house going to do and how are they going to live NOW? Sure, telecommuting and alternative energy are going to improve the distance issue. I think we’re looking at at least a ten year window there, and in the meantime I think we’re going to see more Dec. 2007s than Dec. 2008s when it comes to fuel prices.
As for slums, sure, the Hemets and Perrises are in worse shape, and they aren’t slums. Well, not entirely…yet. The bubble JUST burst. It’s going to be years before the dust settles. As an example, look at Riverside and San Bernardino counties, and the wake of the 1990s real estate slump. There are a lot of areas there that turned pretty crappy pretty quickly. They re-expanded in the current bubble (and of course burst) but in the meantime the older parts (i.e., 1990 vintage) remained pretty rough around the edges. I can’t imagine how all of the current foreclosures are going to happen without some pretty serious effects on quality of life everywhere in the Inland Empire (and elsewhere, to a lesser extent).
I sincerely hope I am wrong about this. But even if I’m not, I think folks buying in the best areas with a 10+ year commitment to the region will do very well.[/quote]
I agree with you about the location. We’ll see how foreclosures play out, however just from my experience on the ground – the brown lawns are gone and decent places are getting multiple offers when they are priced right.
You asked how is someone moving into the $280k house going to make do now? Well 280k is closer to the higher end of the market now out here, but let’s say the family puts down 20%. A $224k loan at 3x income requires the family to make about 74k a year. Teachers, police officers, retail, Abbot factory line, restaurant manage, blackjack dealer etc. Local jobs with two wage earners can support a loan of that amount.
And remember, that is the high end of the market. 74k is also about the median household income. I would say that is a recipe for a stable community of owners that do not need to stretch or even commute to make do.
Now if we assume one wage earner does commute (at least 30 miles, maybe 50):
50 miles x 2 = 100 miles x 5 days/wk = 500 miles/wk
Car: 30mpg. 500/30 ~ 17 gallons a week.
Gas @ $5/gal = $85/wk -> $340/month
@ 5% interest and 20% down, the family is paying $1700/mo (principle, interest, tax @ 1.6%, insurance and $100 hoa). That doesn’t include the $291 dollar tax saving @ 25% tax rate.
Total monthly housing outlay, including gas @ $5/gal = $2034
This same house would rent in Orange County or San Diego for significantly more than $2034. Of course there is the issue of the cost of seat time for a commute and other soft variables, but just look at the hard numbers.
A family making $74k would take home about $4500/mo. After mortgage and gas, this leaves them with $2500 for food, savings, car payment, etc.
If gas was $10/gal, the total monthly outlay is only $2374. Let’s say they still take need to get around town and use a few gallons a month – $2500/mo.
So no matter how you slice it…3500 sq ft, new construction, excellent schools, low crime area. Minus the awful location (major street, no light left turn), but there are smaller homes with better locations for the same or less.
$2500/month at $10/gallon gas.
Now the folks that bought out here at the top of the bubble for 500, 600k? They’re in for a world a hurt but from what I’ve witnessed in my home search, there are plenty of people waiting on the sidelines with cash in hand to pick up those places for a reasonable, sustainable amount. I’ll get worried when we see a lack of buyers and full neighborhoods becoming distressed. So far, so good.
Participant[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]Blissful,
I for one believe in three things,
1) We will have cars that get 100 MPG.
2) The Internet will create many more work from
home opportunities.3) Long term SoCal Population grows at about 1600 people per day, That’s about two Temecula Valleys per year. (maybe not this year but things will get back on track soon), at some point T.V. will not seem very far from the major business centers in San Diego or O.C. (Just look at L.A. average commutes and you will see the future).
[/quote]Excellent points. You know I was just talking to my Dad about his first home purchase in the far-flung exurb of Mission Viejo (during the very first home release and community opening). At the time most of his co-workers (in LA) laughed at his commute out to the boonies of Orange County and were quick to predict the decline of the area. “There are no jobs there!”
“Gas @ $0.50 will DESTROY the area”Well we all know how that worked out. Development brought homes to the area with a large number of commuters to Los Angeles. Los Angeles sprawl spread, jobs were created closer to home and those original pioneers in Mission Viejo, Laguna Niguel, Irvine, etc, etc have seen their cities become the “new” job centers. I’m not saying the same will happen in Temecula/Murrieta (the distance from the coast is a factor in home desirability but high coastal land costs limits business desirability) but the area has been carefully planned to follow similar patterns. (Patterns that match South OC growth rather than LA suburban growth – see Riverside and San Bernardino for examples of how to do it the wrong way)
Participant[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]Blissful,
I for one believe in three things,
1) We will have cars that get 100 MPG.
2) The Internet will create many more work from
home opportunities.3) Long term SoCal Population grows at about 1600 people per day, That’s about two Temecula Valleys per year. (maybe not this year but things will get back on track soon), at some point T.V. will not seem very far from the major business centers in San Diego or O.C. (Just look at L.A. average commutes and you will see the future).
[/quote]Excellent points. You know I was just talking to my Dad about his first home purchase in the far-flung exurb of Mission Viejo (during the very first home release and community opening). At the time most of his co-workers (in LA) laughed at his commute out to the boonies of Orange County and were quick to predict the decline of the area. “There are no jobs there!”
“Gas @ $0.50 will DESTROY the area”Well we all know how that worked out. Development brought homes to the area with a large number of commuters to Los Angeles. Los Angeles sprawl spread, jobs were created closer to home and those original pioneers in Mission Viejo, Laguna Niguel, Irvine, etc, etc have seen their cities become the “new” job centers. I’m not saying the same will happen in Temecula/Murrieta (the distance from the coast is a factor in home desirability but high coastal land costs limits business desirability) but the area has been carefully planned to follow similar patterns. (Patterns that match South OC growth rather than LA suburban growth – see Riverside and San Bernardino for examples of how to do it the wrong way)
Participant[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]Blissful,
I for one believe in three things,
1) We will have cars that get 100 MPG.
2) The Internet will create many more work from
home opportunities.3) Long term SoCal Population grows at about 1600 people per day, That’s about two Temecula Valleys per year. (maybe not this year but things will get back on track soon), at some point T.V. will not seem very far from the major business centers in San Diego or O.C. (Just look at L.A. average commutes and you will see the future).
[/quote]Excellent points. You know I was just talking to my Dad about his first home purchase in the far-flung exurb of Mission Viejo (during the very first home release and community opening). At the time most of his co-workers (in LA) laughed at his commute out to the boonies of Orange County and were quick to predict the decline of the area. “There are no jobs there!”
“Gas @ $0.50 will DESTROY the area”Well we all know how that worked out. Development brought homes to the area with a large number of commuters to Los Angeles. Los Angeles sprawl spread, jobs were created closer to home and those original pioneers in Mission Viejo, Laguna Niguel, Irvine, etc, etc have seen their cities become the “new” job centers. I’m not saying the same will happen in Temecula/Murrieta (the distance from the coast is a factor in home desirability but high coastal land costs limits business desirability) but the area has been carefully planned to follow similar patterns. (Patterns that match South OC growth rather than LA suburban growth – see Riverside and San Bernardino for examples of how to do it the wrong way)
Participant[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]Blissful,
I for one believe in three things,
1) We will have cars that get 100 MPG.
2) The Internet will create many more work from
home opportunities.3) Long term SoCal Population grows at about 1600 people per day, That’s about two Temecula Valleys per year. (maybe not this year but things will get back on track soon), at some point T.V. will not seem very far from the major business centers in San Diego or O.C. (Just look at L.A. average commutes and you will see the future).
[/quote]Excellent points. You know I was just talking to my Dad about his first home purchase in the far-flung exurb of Mission Viejo (during the very first home release and community opening). At the time most of his co-workers (in LA) laughed at his commute out to the boonies of Orange County and were quick to predict the decline of the area. “There are no jobs there!”
“Gas @ $0.50 will DESTROY the area”Well we all know how that worked out. Development brought homes to the area with a large number of commuters to Los Angeles. Los Angeles sprawl spread, jobs were created closer to home and those original pioneers in Mission Viejo, Laguna Niguel, Irvine, etc, etc have seen their cities become the “new” job centers. I’m not saying the same will happen in Temecula/Murrieta (the distance from the coast is a factor in home desirability but high coastal land costs limits business desirability) but the area has been carefully planned to follow similar patterns. (Patterns that match South OC growth rather than LA suburban growth – see Riverside and San Bernardino for examples of how to do it the wrong way)
Participant[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]Blissful,
I for one believe in three things,
1) We will have cars that get 100 MPG.
2) The Internet will create many more work from
home opportunities.3) Long term SoCal Population grows at about 1600 people per day, That’s about two Temecula Valleys per year. (maybe not this year but things will get back on track soon), at some point T.V. will not seem very far from the major business centers in San Diego or O.C. (Just look at L.A. average commutes and you will see the future).
[/quote]Excellent points. You know I was just talking to my Dad about his first home purchase in the far-flung exurb of Mission Viejo (during the very first home release and community opening). At the time most of his co-workers (in LA) laughed at his commute out to the boonies of Orange County and were quick to predict the decline of the area. “There are no jobs there!”
“Gas @ $0.50 will DESTROY the area”Well we all know how that worked out. Development brought homes to the area with a large number of commuters to Los Angeles. Los Angeles sprawl spread, jobs were created closer to home and those original pioneers in Mission Viejo, Laguna Niguel, Irvine, etc, etc have seen their cities become the “new” job centers. I’m not saying the same will happen in Temecula/Murrieta (the distance from the coast is a factor in home desirability but high coastal land costs limits business desirability) but the area has been carefully planned to follow similar patterns. (Patterns that match South OC growth rather than LA suburban growth – see Riverside and San Bernardino for examples of how to do it the wrong way)
-
AuthorPosts
