[quote=SD Realtor]This is an interesting thread. A few comments I would like to add. First off the Mills Act is very cool, my brother bought a place near Balboa Park and the block that he is on has been going through the process of qualification. They are near completion but it has been a long process that started well before he bought the home.
San Diego never ceases to amaze me in terms of the diversity of the population. The amount of money in in the County is staggering, in terms of old money and new money. I think the compression (squish down) mentioned in MH and PL will indeed happen over time. I am toying with the notion that these areas may depreciate a bit quicker over time then other areas that are NOT LIKE them but offer better schools. I think that the demand for the young family looking for good schools far outweighs the professionals looking for an older nice home with a nice place to garden. No disrespect JP or any others. Thus I think that supply in places like MH or PL will linger longer.
I think that the supply of young people writing code for a Sorrento Valley company, while not inexhaustible, is much stronger and will continue to support the desired school districts.[/quote]
SDR, what about High Tech High and Point Loma High? MH students have the choice of SD High or Mission Bay High, or can even choice into High Tech High. There’s nothing wrong with these schools. When I was looking at different API scores a few days ago, I noticed the demographics of “coveted” Torrey Pines High (which CV feeds into) is OVERWHELMINGLY ASIAN. “Whites” and Hispanics” did not do as well on their API tests in that school or near as well as they did in other county schools. Some of these better-performing schools for Whites and Hispanics were NOT on Piggs’ “preferred list.” The Hispanic scores were DREADFUL at TPHS. If your child is NOT Asian, what’s the draw of TPHS? This leads me to believe that the teachers as TPHS cater to and teach to the Asian population, specifically.
This endless “supply of young people writing code” would be a more volatile group of homeowners (some w/families), I would think, than gay couples, retired boomers, senior citizens and DINKS. A few years back and likely a few years hence, their best opportunities did/could lie in another locale, i.e. Silicon Valley, NC, Denver, Seattle, etc.
These young high-tech employees are mostly entirely dependent on W-2 income, due to age. This does not lend itself well to stability in any one place. These firms tend to hire and lay off with the tides and how well their stock is doing at the moment.
If these young people were all classified civil servants, this would be another story.
No offense to any Piggs, but I would prefer to live in a stable area where the majority of homeowners aren’t 1-6 paychecks away (not counting retirement accts) from foreclosure, due to high HOA, MR, child expenses, gas exp etc. And UI is only 62.5% of gross pay. My preference has nothing to do with avg property value and everything to do with how many surrounding homeowners can live indefinitely in their homes even if they don’t “work.”
I guess I’m deathly afraid of being the “last one standing” in one of CA’s future “ghost towns,” as was discussed on a recent thread :={
SDR, I disagree here in that I don’t see CA’s most established and finest coastal communities losing future value faster than newer outlying tracts which attract families. I agree that inventory in these established areas may linger longer due to inability of many potential buyers to qualify to purchase the more expensive “rehabbed versions” that are currently being marketed today.
Young “families” in and of themselves are currently the most volatile type of homeowner nationwide. It is precisely in these areas that attracted young families and first-timers that the vast majority of distressed property lie.
