Median price of a single family home in San Diego: $612,750 (Oceanside: for sale, rental)

[RosieSD]

San Diego Realtors Report ‘Dramatic Reduction’ in Inventory Slowed December Sales

A “dramatic reduction” in inventory led to a 15 percent year-over-year decline in sales of existing single-family homes in December, the Greater San Diego Association of Realtors reported Tuesday.

In its monthly report, the association said sales of condominiums and townhomes declined 12 percent year-over-year, and sales of all types of homes were off 3 percent for the year as a whole compared to 2016.

“The number of homes for sale, the average days on the market, and housing affordability are challenging for prospective buyers in this San Diego market,” said association President Steve Fraioli. “The only thing that’s certain in this 2018 housing climate is that sellers have the upper hand and should achieve their asking price…or better.”

The median price of a single-family home was $612,750 in December, an 8 percent increase over the year. Condominiums and townhomes finished at a median price of $407,000, 12 percent higher than a year ago.

In December, the zip codes in San Diego County with the most single-family home sales were:

92026 (Fallbrook) with 44
92027 (Escondido East) with 42
92057 (Oceanside North) with 40
92071 (Santee) with 40
92078 (San Marcos South) with 39

The most expensive single-family property sold in December was a single-level home in Rancho Santa Fe, built in 2017, with 8,250 square feet, 7 bedrooms, and 7 baths. The sale price was $10.85 million.

https://timesofsandiego.com/business...ecember-sales/

[RosieSD]

Zillow has put San Diego in it's top 10 list for ciities where the available housing inventory is at "crisis levels."

Zillow notes that available housing inventory for sale in the San Diego metro area is over 20% less than last year at this time.

US cities with the worst housing shortages, according to Zillow - Business Insider

[msgsing]

The market is certainly is a bonanza for folks who have owned homes long term. My cousin bought a modest home back in the 70's and just stayed and never moved. Their house has a current evaluation of 1.3 million. The icing on the cake is that they fall under the provisions of prop 13. Annual property tax $ 1,300.00.

[Ultrarunner]

It would be a bonanza for those wanting to cash out...

For the rest of us we still need someplace to live so no bonanza.

In 30 to 40 years I hope to be in the same situation as your cousin...

Too many don't realize the same path is open to all... and I fully intend to be one of those chosen in 30 to 40 years from now.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by msgsing

The market is certainly is a bonanza for folks who have owned homes long term. My cousin bought a modest home back in the 70's and just stayed and never moved. Their house has a current evaluation of 1.3 million. The icing on the cake is that they fall under the provisions of prop 13. Annual property tax $ 1,300.00.

Good for them, as it should be. Without it they'd probably have to sell because they couldn't afford the property tax and that entire neighborhood would be just rich people not just paper wealthy from buying a property a long time ago. I know I couldn't buy my own house back right now.

[jnojr]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

Good for them, as it should be. Without it they'd probably have to sell because they couldn't afford the property tax and that entire neighborhood would be just rich people not just paper wealthy from buying a property a long time ago. I know I couldn't buy my own house back right now.

I wish I could be amazed at the number of people who think/say, "Your house is worth $X? You're rich! You didn't work for that! You need to pay more! You're hoarding badly-needed money from the poor and the sick and the elderly and the children! It isn't fair that you aren't paying the same as someone who's paying more (as long as we aren't talking about income taxes, of course)!"

[someguy10]

Originally Posted by jnojr

I wish I could be amazed at the number of people who think/say, "Your house is worth $X? You're rich! You didn't work for that! You need to pay more! You're hoarding badly-needed money from the poor and the sick and the elderly and the children! It isn't fair that you aren't paying the same as someone who's paying more (as long as we aren't talking about income taxes, of course)!"

As someone without a dog in the hunt (ATM anyway), one option would be to have people pay the regular 1% ongoing but have some type of deferred or accumulating charge that is paid only when the property is sold. That way, no old-timer gets forced to sell because they can't afford RE tax on a hugely-appreciated property, but it's more fair to newer residents. It'd be a little bit like how you can take depreciation against a rental property to offset (lower) current income from it, but if/when you sell and (hopefully) realize a big cap gain, you have to recapture that depreciation.

Of course a large percentage of long-time owners would go nuts. But a lot of those are the same going nuts over the crappy roads, infrastructure, traffic, lack of school busing, etc. that many other less expensive and often less wealthy areas of the country take for granted.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by someguy10

As someone without a dog in the hunt (ATM anyway), one option would be to have people pay the regular 1% ongoing but have some type of deferred or accumulating charge that is paid only when the property is sold. That way, no old-timer gets forced to sell because they can't afford RE tax on a hugely-appreciated property, but it's more fair to newer residents. It'd be a little bit like how you can take depreciation against a rental property to offset (lower) current income from it, but if/when you sell and (hopefully) realize a big cap gain, you have to recapture that depreciation.

Of course a large percentage of long-time owners would go nuts. But a lot of those are the same going nuts over the crappy roads, infrastructure, traffic, lack of school busing, etc. that many other less expensive and often less wealthy areas of the country take for granted.

We get paid less for the same job than many areas because so many want to live here. That and many people bought at the peak and have lost money so do they get their losses made up at sale? Not every house in S Cal appreciated.
Also, how is asphalt and rocks any more expensive here than other States? 1% on a 600,000 dollar house yields the State more than 2% on a 200,000 dollar house like many other States (or parts of this State) so they are still squeezing us for more than other States. Enough to make up for the cost of more expensive labor to turn that into a road. California has a spending problem not a revenue from property tax problem.

[shmoov_groovzsd]

Thanks for sharing RosieSD.

This is San Diego, where when it gets hot, it gets really hot.
I am happy for folks that bought a modest home decades ago. Nothing special, but a decent home to see it appreciate to mind numbing heights.

But a part from that crowd, I wonder just how sustainable this combination really is between mortgage rates, prices, jobs and broader economy play a role for the long term?

Its been quite the run up from where we were almost a decade ago, but a correction from that? Seems to be overcorrecting? I guess only time will tell at this point.

[jnojr]

Originally Posted by someguy10

As someone without a dog in the hunt (ATM anyway), one option would be to have people pay the regular 1% ongoing but have some type of deferred or accumulating charge that is paid only when the property is sold.

Why would that be good? What is that other than government grabbing a huge amount of money from someone, for what? Why should those folks be locked in their home forever, unable to sell and move? Why shouldn't they be able to leave an estate to their heirs, because the grasping hands of government will be there to seize it? Why wouldn't that huge sap on the value of the property be reflected in rents?

Why do I "owe" anything to anyone because I committed the unpardonable sin of saving, living below my means, and buying a house?