Is it ok to buy a house in Mountain House California?

Answer 1

Mountain House, CA is a planned community that has become one of the hardest hit during the housing market crash over the past 4 years. In 2008 it was estimated that 90% of existing residents owed more than their homes were worth, with an average of $122,000 in negative equity.

Choosing a community of this type to own a home should come with a great deal of consideration for your goals and lifestyle. The community has abundant distressed real estate with many areas of the community completely vacant. While this makes for attractive home pricing, there are many negatives that come with that. As developers were unable to sell newly completed homes, unable to complete partially developed lots, and as exisiting residents either left or lost homes as values plummeted, what remained is a community struggling with lost revenue, suburban blight in the form of vacant homes, and a perception of a failed development.

Communities fail or thrive based on the psychology of people: if people desire to live there it may thrive, if they don't it may fail. No one can accurately predict where Mountain House will be in 10 or 20 years. Will it be a failed wasteland of dilapidated streets and vacant run-down homes? Will the fire-sale home pricing attract enough new home buyers to fill the streets with families again? The answer may lie somewhere in the middle.

If you are looking for an investment, a home in Mountain House will not be likely to produce a return for some time. If you are looking for an inexpensive community in which to buy a nicer home, then it might be a good idea to visit the community and talk with residents, city housing representatives and local leaders. They should be willing to go over what the city has to offer and what challenges it faces. No one knows what the future holds for areas like this, so the best you can do is gather as much information as possible.

Property Taxes are another issue. Mountain House started as undeveloped farm s and ranch land with essentially no public services or municipal government to speak of in relation to the number of people moving in- until the recent past. The development of local services such as schools, police, fire, and so forth was funded by bond taxes tied to property values and the taxes pinned to those. As property values plummeted and people lost homes, the basis for these services did so as well, meaning that if the remaining citizens wanted the same pubic schools and other services, they would have to pay the same amount spread amongst fewer taxpayers. Currently in 2012 that amount is projected to be about 1.8-2.0% of property value per year in bond taxes, so on a $400,000 house this could be about $8000 per year in bond tax alone. Brand new schools don't pay for themselves. Still, this tax situation is comparable to other neighborhoods in the Bay Area.