Home › Forums › Closed Forums › Properties or Areas › RSF kicking out Fairbanks Ranch, Cielo, Crosby, Bridges, Whispering Palms
- This topic has 85 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 2 months ago by
davelj.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 7, 2008 at 9:02 AM #11426January 7, 2008 at 9:45 AM #130875
davelj
ParticipantIf the incorporation doesn’t affect where the kids go to school in these areas then it’s meaningless. If it does affect where the kids go to school then it’s probably a little meaningful. But a 50% drop? That seems excessive.
So the question is: Would this change affect the choice of schools the residents in the excluded areas would have, or is this just a mailing address issue? If changing a mailing address causes a 50% drop in home prices then all I can do is laugh at the stupidity of it all. I mean, please.
January 7, 2008 at 9:45 AM #131158davelj
ParticipantIf the incorporation doesn’t affect where the kids go to school in these areas then it’s meaningless. If it does affect where the kids go to school then it’s probably a little meaningful. But a 50% drop? That seems excessive.
So the question is: Would this change affect the choice of schools the residents in the excluded areas would have, or is this just a mailing address issue? If changing a mailing address causes a 50% drop in home prices then all I can do is laugh at the stupidity of it all. I mean, please.
January 7, 2008 at 9:45 AM #131123davelj
ParticipantIf the incorporation doesn’t affect where the kids go to school in these areas then it’s meaningless. If it does affect where the kids go to school then it’s probably a little meaningful. But a 50% drop? That seems excessive.
So the question is: Would this change affect the choice of schools the residents in the excluded areas would have, or is this just a mailing address issue? If changing a mailing address causes a 50% drop in home prices then all I can do is laugh at the stupidity of it all. I mean, please.
January 7, 2008 at 9:45 AM #131055davelj
ParticipantIf the incorporation doesn’t affect where the kids go to school in these areas then it’s meaningless. If it does affect where the kids go to school then it’s probably a little meaningful. But a 50% drop? That seems excessive.
So the question is: Would this change affect the choice of schools the residents in the excluded areas would have, or is this just a mailing address issue? If changing a mailing address causes a 50% drop in home prices then all I can do is laugh at the stupidity of it all. I mean, please.
January 7, 2008 at 9:45 AM #131061davelj
ParticipantIf the incorporation doesn’t affect where the kids go to school in these areas then it’s meaningless. If it does affect where the kids go to school then it’s probably a little meaningful. But a 50% drop? That seems excessive.
So the question is: Would this change affect the choice of schools the residents in the excluded areas would have, or is this just a mailing address issue? If changing a mailing address causes a 50% drop in home prices then all I can do is laugh at the stupidity of it all. I mean, please.
January 7, 2008 at 10:17 AM #130890raptorduck
ParticipantWhile I don’t disagree about the sillyness of a change in address in value, it is the reality. Up here Atherton is right next to East Palo Alto. That, of course, is much more of an extreme than say Escondido/RSF. But if they pushed the EPA border a few blocks to the west, those Former Atherton neighborhoods would see at least a 50% drop in values. Yes, your address does have an impact on the value of your home. One one street in Los Altos, the homes accross the street are Mountain View addresses and 40%/sf cheaper than those on the Los Altos side, and both are in the LA school district.
I also agree that the school issue is much more important as that also can impact home values. Parts of Mountain View up here are in the Los Altos school district and that results in higher home values for sure.
And as a buyer, yes buying in Escondido is very different to me than buying in RSF, but yes the school issues is even more important.
Future resident of RSF, dunno which part yet.
January 7, 2008 at 10:17 AM #131076raptorduck
ParticipantWhile I don’t disagree about the sillyness of a change in address in value, it is the reality. Up here Atherton is right next to East Palo Alto. That, of course, is much more of an extreme than say Escondido/RSF. But if they pushed the EPA border a few blocks to the west, those Former Atherton neighborhoods would see at least a 50% drop in values. Yes, your address does have an impact on the value of your home. One one street in Los Altos, the homes accross the street are Mountain View addresses and 40%/sf cheaper than those on the Los Altos side, and both are in the LA school district.
I also agree that the school issue is much more important as that also can impact home values. Parts of Mountain View up here are in the Los Altos school district and that results in higher home values for sure.
And as a buyer, yes buying in Escondido is very different to me than buying in RSF, but yes the school issues is even more important.
Future resident of RSF, dunno which part yet.
January 7, 2008 at 10:17 AM #131172raptorduck
ParticipantWhile I don’t disagree about the sillyness of a change in address in value, it is the reality. Up here Atherton is right next to East Palo Alto. That, of course, is much more of an extreme than say Escondido/RSF. But if they pushed the EPA border a few blocks to the west, those Former Atherton neighborhoods would see at least a 50% drop in values. Yes, your address does have an impact on the value of your home. One one street in Los Altos, the homes accross the street are Mountain View addresses and 40%/sf cheaper than those on the Los Altos side, and both are in the LA school district.
I also agree that the school issue is much more important as that also can impact home values. Parts of Mountain View up here are in the Los Altos school district and that results in higher home values for sure.
And as a buyer, yes buying in Escondido is very different to me than buying in RSF, but yes the school issues is even more important.
Future resident of RSF, dunno which part yet.
January 7, 2008 at 10:17 AM #131138raptorduck
ParticipantWhile I don’t disagree about the sillyness of a change in address in value, it is the reality. Up here Atherton is right next to East Palo Alto. That, of course, is much more of an extreme than say Escondido/RSF. But if they pushed the EPA border a few blocks to the west, those Former Atherton neighborhoods would see at least a 50% drop in values. Yes, your address does have an impact on the value of your home. One one street in Los Altos, the homes accross the street are Mountain View addresses and 40%/sf cheaper than those on the Los Altos side, and both are in the LA school district.
I also agree that the school issue is much more important as that also can impact home values. Parts of Mountain View up here are in the Los Altos school district and that results in higher home values for sure.
And as a buyer, yes buying in Escondido is very different to me than buying in RSF, but yes the school issues is even more important.
Future resident of RSF, dunno which part yet.
January 7, 2008 at 10:17 AM #131070raptorduck
ParticipantWhile I don’t disagree about the sillyness of a change in address in value, it is the reality. Up here Atherton is right next to East Palo Alto. That, of course, is much more of an extreme than say Escondido/RSF. But if they pushed the EPA border a few blocks to the west, those Former Atherton neighborhoods would see at least a 50% drop in values. Yes, your address does have an impact on the value of your home. One one street in Los Altos, the homes accross the street are Mountain View addresses and 40%/sf cheaper than those on the Los Altos side, and both are in the LA school district.
I also agree that the school issue is much more important as that also can impact home values. Parts of Mountain View up here are in the Los Altos school district and that results in higher home values for sure.
And as a buyer, yes buying in Escondido is very different to me than buying in RSF, but yes the school issues is even more important.
Future resident of RSF, dunno which part yet.
January 7, 2008 at 10:45 AM #131142davelj
ParticipantAnyone that pays a premium to have a certain mailing address – where there are no other mitigating factors such as quality of schools, etc. – deserves to lose 50% of the value of their home. I hope this proposal goes through. It sounds like the residents of these “excluded” – and clearly inferior – areas have been profiting off the good name of Rancho Santa Fe for long enough. Let’s stop the madness.
raptorduck, are you trying to tell me that you’d be willing to pay a meaningful premium simply to have your mail delivered to a RSF address? To have your checks with a RSF address? To be able to tell people at a cocktail party that, yes, your mailing address is in RSF? Same schools, same neighbors, same quality of housing, same weather, etc. – and you’d be willing to pay a premium just for the ADDRESS? That just seems absolutely mental illness crazy to me. But, hey, to each their own.
January 7, 2008 at 10:45 AM #131081davelj
ParticipantAnyone that pays a premium to have a certain mailing address – where there are no other mitigating factors such as quality of schools, etc. – deserves to lose 50% of the value of their home. I hope this proposal goes through. It sounds like the residents of these “excluded” – and clearly inferior – areas have been profiting off the good name of Rancho Santa Fe for long enough. Let’s stop the madness.
raptorduck, are you trying to tell me that you’d be willing to pay a meaningful premium simply to have your mail delivered to a RSF address? To have your checks with a RSF address? To be able to tell people at a cocktail party that, yes, your mailing address is in RSF? Same schools, same neighbors, same quality of housing, same weather, etc. – and you’d be willing to pay a premium just for the ADDRESS? That just seems absolutely mental illness crazy to me. But, hey, to each their own.
January 7, 2008 at 10:45 AM #131075davelj
ParticipantAnyone that pays a premium to have a certain mailing address – where there are no other mitigating factors such as quality of schools, etc. – deserves to lose 50% of the value of their home. I hope this proposal goes through. It sounds like the residents of these “excluded” – and clearly inferior – areas have been profiting off the good name of Rancho Santa Fe for long enough. Let’s stop the madness.
raptorduck, are you trying to tell me that you’d be willing to pay a meaningful premium simply to have your mail delivered to a RSF address? To have your checks with a RSF address? To be able to tell people at a cocktail party that, yes, your mailing address is in RSF? Same schools, same neighbors, same quality of housing, same weather, etc. – and you’d be willing to pay a premium just for the ADDRESS? That just seems absolutely mental illness crazy to me. But, hey, to each their own.
January 7, 2008 at 10:45 AM #131177davelj
ParticipantAnyone that pays a premium to have a certain mailing address – where there are no other mitigating factors such as quality of schools, etc. – deserves to lose 50% of the value of their home. I hope this proposal goes through. It sounds like the residents of these “excluded” – and clearly inferior – areas have been profiting off the good name of Rancho Santa Fe for long enough. Let’s stop the madness.
raptorduck, are you trying to tell me that you’d be willing to pay a meaningful premium simply to have your mail delivered to a RSF address? To have your checks with a RSF address? To be able to tell people at a cocktail party that, yes, your mailing address is in RSF? Same schools, same neighbors, same quality of housing, same weather, etc. – and you’d be willing to pay a premium just for the ADDRESS? That just seems absolutely mental illness crazy to me. But, hey, to each their own.
-
AuthorPosts
- The forum ‘Properties or Areas’ is closed to new topics and replies.