[quote=davelj][quote=sdrealtor]DLJ
Here’s one data point. My rent in 1995 was $750 for a place that would rent for $1500 today.[/quote]
I bought a condo in 2000 (sold in 2004) where the other units were renting for $1,100. Today these units rent for $1,600. This is all purely anecdotal of course. (And I know the aggregate data is out there somewhere.)
If I had to guess, I’d say that rents in the U.S. have probably increased at around 3% annually over the last 15 years while rents in SD have increased at about 4% annually. Again, that’s just a semi-educated guess. That would equate to a cumulative difference in rents of 16% (and by extension, values) over the period. I’ll try to dig up the real numbers at some point. Although perhaps the esteemed Professor already has access to such data?[/quote]
The results are in (thanks to Rich for the link).
According to the BLS, rents in San Diego increased 4.5% annually between 1995 and 2010 (using first half data for 2010). Rents in the U.S. as a whole increased 3.1% annually between 1995 and 2010 (again, using first half data for 2010).
Consequently, rents in San Diego rose by a cumulative 23% greater than rents in the U.S. as a whole over the last 15 years. The crude implication (“crude” being the operative word) is that the attractiveness of San Diego as a place to live – to the average citizen of the Republic – has risen by 23% more than the rest of the US as a whole since 1995 (since folks have been willing to accept a 23% increase in rents relative to the rest of the US in order to live here).
Now, this says nothing about absolute home values. But it does have implications for the RELATIVE increase in home values in San Diego versus the rest of the country since 1995. So, clearly *something* has changed about the perception of San Diego as a place to live relative to the US as a whole over the last 15 years.
