Yet, if you can get past the region's overall unnerving share of unaffordable homes, the study confirms well-known house-hunting wisdom: The dream of Southern California homeownership is most likely found inland.

Why did the High Desert's Lancaster offer the best chance for first-time success, by this math?

Well, among the 52 local cities, it had the third-best score for affordability, ranked second for real estate market strength. The cost, so to speak, was for livability: Lancaster ranked a subpar 29th.

The other top five local cities for first-timers are also far from the Pacific Ocean.

– No. 2 Murrieta: seventh for affordability, No. 7 for market, No. 1 for livability and No. 109 U.S. rank.

– No. 3 Victorville: Tops for affordability, No. 5 for market, No. 32 for livability and No. 114 U.S. rank.

– No. 4 Temecula: Tenth for affordability, No. 3 for market, No. 4 for livability and No. 115 U.S. rank.

– No. 5 Palmdale: Eighth for affordability, No. 4 for market, No. 15 for livability and No. 137 U.S. rank.

The same math shows Santa Monica as the worst of the 52 local cities for first-timers. It had the region's worst affordability, ranked No. 47 for market strength and next-to-last for livability.

Oh, and Santa Monica was the second-worst city for first-timers nationally. The other members of Southern California's bottom five:

– No. 51 Santa Barbara: 51st for affordability, No. 44 for market, No. 23 for livability. Third-worst nationally.

– No. 50 Costa Mesa: 50th for affordability, No. 27 for market, No. 47 for livability. Seventh-worst nationally.

– No. 49 Los Angeles: 48th for affordability, No. 42 for market, No. 49 for livability. Eighth-worst nationally.

– No. 48 Glendale: 49th for affordability, No. 41 for market, No. 22 for livability. Tenth-worst nationally.

Jonathan Lansner is the business columnist for the Southern California News Group. He can be reached at jlansner@scng.com

Article by: