Those of You Who Have Moved to San Diego, Do You Have Any Regrets? For Those Considering a Move, Where Would You Go? (Orange: job market, neighborhood)

[NYSD1995]

Originally Posted by joosoon

Most people I know who still live in Temecula/Murrieta/etc bought there in the early aughts as a cheaper alternative to San Diego, but quickly came to hate it since they were doing the SD commute. Everyone else I know who owned prior to the explosion of housing cashed out and moved away. I personally find the entire IE claustrophobic.

I could live in Yucaipa but the rest of the IE is just not for me. I really like the Glendora, Claremont area in LA county but it's $$$. If I was going to move anywhere in Southern CA that would be ideal for me. Closer to the things I like to do than San Diego.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by joosoon

Twenty-something years ago, my wife and I stopped at a place in Rock Springs, Wyoming that was fairly new at the time and had definitely caught that trend. It turned out the owners had actually modeled the place after all the burgeoning brew pubs they saw on a trip to San Diego (or so they told us). The place is still in business as far as I can tell. I never really understood the appeal but I guess the model works.

Look at how many breweries are around that are in some rented warehouse and they do really well. There are like 6 just off the Convoy area.

[TacoSoup]

Originally Posted by joosoon

Most people I know who still live in Temecula/Murrieta/etc bought there in the early aughts as a cheaper alternative to San Diego, but quickly came to hate it since they were doing the SD commute. Everyone else I know who owned prior to the explosion of housing cashed out and moved away. I personally find the entire IE claustrophobic.

I had a lot of friends buy up there in the late 90’s when the commute was long, but not soul sucking like it is now. Most stayed and made a life for themselves up there with work.

I always thought it was a great location for the price being 45 minutes to the beach, 1 hour to SD, and 1.5 hours to the mountains. Now since I drive through it several times a month going to our place in the mountains I hate it. Still a nice place, but if I had to do that commute I’d take a lower paying job there.

My mom does have a lot of friends that have retired up there. I could see that? Have a paid off house with an extra couple hundred grand left over to augment retirement. And have your kids/grandkids drive up to you? We often drop my mom off and pick her up when we go to our cabin for the weekend and they have a blast going to the wineries and antique stores.

[stablegenius]

Originally Posted by TacoSoup

I had a lot of friends buy up there in the late 90’s when the commute was long, but not soul sucking like it is now. Most stayed and made a life for themselves up there with work.

I always thought it was a great location for the price being 45 minutes to the beach, 1 hour to SD, and 1.5 hours to the mountains. Now since I drive through it several times a month going to our place in the mountains I hate it. Still a nice place, but if I had to do that commute I’d take a lower paying job there.

My mom does have a lot of friends that have retired up there. I could see that? Have a paid off house with an extra couple hundred grand left over to augment retirement. And have your kids/grandkids drive up to you? We often drop my mom off and pick her up when we go to our cabin for the weekend and they have a blast going to the wineries and antique stores.

Temecula is not bad. Although it used to be better. I grew up in Redlands and used to think very highly of Temecula, but it has gotten very busy.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by stablegenius

Temecula is not bad. Although it used to be better. I grew up in Redlands and used to think very highly of Temecula, but it has gotten very busy.

I work with people that commute from there. They are insane.

[stablegenius]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

I work with people that commute from there. They are insane.

Well, yeah, I would never do that. When I was in Redlands Temecula was a step up. But now that I’m in San Diego, definitely not even crossing my mind. And if I had to commute anywhere, I probably wouldn’t live in California at all.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by stablegenius

Well, yeah, I would never do that. When I was in Redlands Temecula was a step up. But now that I’m in San Diego, definitely not even crossing my mind. And if I had to commute anywhere, I probably wouldn’t live in California at all.

Seriously, why bother. It'd be easier to just get a quick flight here for a weekend and avoid everything that is more expensive here. Which is everything.

[sdurbanite]

Great reads in this read, all. There are no wrong or right answers since everyone has a different perspective.

I don't have any plans to move right now, but Atlanta is a place I could live.

[Dub D]

Originally Posted by NYSD1995

Not decline in terms of built environment, but declining desirability for those with wealth. Homeowners being replaced with renters who spend money on services. On the surface, those renters are wealthier - they drive nicer cars, wear nicer clothes and spend freely. But the middle class homeowner they replaced, was actually far wealthier in terms of net worth, despite their lower income.

That is sort of the "LA-ification" that everyone laments. Unless you specifically want a vintage type of home, the primary attraction to central San Diego is access to bars and restaurants, which as said above, are everywhere now. I remember the first time I went to Indianapolis and realized they had the same ersatz former-warehouse-district-turned-entertainment-district as San Diego. That model has been replicated nearly everywhere.

That isn't LA at all. People in LA find the little bubble they live/can afford and stay there. With the goal of trying to buy somewhere close and usually failing hence why the SF Valley exist. Or they move back to their home state. LA homeowners don't sell. Average LA homeowner owns for 20 years, longest in the nation.

LA is the second most populated city. SD is 8th. About 120 miles apart.
That's like constantly comparing Houston (4th) and Austin (11th). About 160 miles apart.
Sure there are obvious similarities but not enough to constantly compare.

SD is part of the covid bump which seems to be fading. There isn't the same long term path in SD as LA. Sure, there's the psychos that live in Riverside County and commute to SD. Always has been and will be. We're seeing Austin, Phoenix, SF, and Seattle starting to fall in prices. I think SD will fall but not to the same degree. More so SD will become cheaper than LA again. Because right now, it feels like SD overall COL is higher than LA. I attribute that to most of SD having a better quality of life than most of LA. In LA, one block is nice and the next is death. Literally. Skid Row is about two blocks away from Little Tokyo.

[NYSD1995]

Originally Posted by Dub D

That isn't LA at all. People in LA find the little bubble they live/can afford and stay there. With the goal of trying to buy somewhere close and usually failing hence why the SF Valley exist. Or they move back to their home state. LA homeowners don't sell. Average LA homeowner owns for 20 years, longest in the nation.

LA in the 1960's was just endless single family homes outside of the downtown / westlake area. Just like San Diego.

If you look at West LA, Westwood it is unrecognizable from what it was 20-30 years ago.

the main difference, is LA has high paying jobs, which SD does not.