All of the elementary schools in our district currently rate a 10 or better. The middle school is a 10 and the high school is a 9. My daughter’s elementary school also has a GATE Seminar program which is also a +. In addition, my commute to work in the morning is against traffic and takes me between 20-25 minutes. I personally would never move more than 30 minutes away from my job. Downtown is fun, but I don’t think its a place where I want my kids to be playing. I’ll wait until they are older before exposing them to transients and dead people on the sidewalk from meth/heroin overdose.
[quote]Actually, yamashi, millenials weren’t the first generation to have both parents working. I myself (and my siblings) grew up in a household in the ’50’s, ’60’s and ’70’s with both parents working and we weren’t alone. [/quote]
I’m not saying they were, I’m saying that is what I remember growing up. Also, McMansions are a product that happened during my time. 50’s-70’s homes were for the most part less than 2,000 sq ft. Not like the huge homes we have today.
[quote]If you’re speaking here of CA housing prices, yamashi, RE prices didn’t go up over the years in CA due ….[/quote]
Your rationale is all BS. Costs don’t determine prices, people do. To qualify for these higher mortgages people need to have dual incomes to cover the mortgage. Simple as that. All this other crap you talk about has nothing to do with anything. Large developers make products that people can afford. Without absorption, then the developers cannot find financing to finance their projects. I used to finance large developments (KB, Lennar, Pulte, etc) and the first thing I review is the feasibility of the absorption. This is prior to looking at the budget, hard and soft cost contingencies etc. If people can’t afford it, I could care less how much the developer spends; in many of the cases, this requires dual income. One person loses a job and bam 2008 happens all over again.[/quote]Then you know that developers don’t build for free … they build for a profit. They MUST be able to get all of their expenses back out of the sale of all the units in a subdivision or it is not even worth it for them to apply for a subdivision permit. It has been VERY costly to build in CA since the inception of the MR Act (year varies by county). A builder doesn’t have to worry about “absorption” in a CA coastal county. They WILL sell all of their units upon each phase they release as SoCal (esp coastal counties) has a “captive audience” and always have. Buyers aren’t setting prices of new construction. Builders are. And they have often used “creative financing” (such as builder-funded second TD’s) to make their prices more “palatable” to those buyers who have to get a mortgage but can’t qualify for enough to purchase.
“2008” can’t happen “all over again” unless lending standards are relaxed to the level they were from 2004 to 2008 and I doubt that will happen again. “2008” had little to do with with job loss of individual homeowners and everything to do with “qualifying” buyers for homes which they were unqualified to purchase and allowing same (unqualified) homeowners to remove equity from their homes, plain and simple.
As for downtown SD, I worked down there for over 25 years and never saw “dead people on the sidewalk from meth/heroin overdose,” nor have I recently and I have to go down there and park 1-2x month. The areas I suggested to you were in 92103 which is, for the most part, very quiet (in the residential areas). Not only that, it has beautiful architecture and streetscape and is prestigious and coveted by buyers from all over the world. PLENTY of “professionals” (mostly attorneys) I worked with downtown raised their kids in that area!
yamashi, you never told us if your kids are in daycare/afterschool care NOW and/or if you managed to “escape” from the lifestyle your parents provided for you. Inquiring minds are wondering ….
