3.4 new households for every new residential permit in SD

[flyer]

BG, I can understand how you would feel some choices today wrt living space are “unimaginable.” It would be interesting to know if people are living this way by choice, or because they are being forced to downsize their expectations.

I’ve seen all of these alternatives, and I’d probably feel the same as you do, but, it’s their life, and if they’re happy with it, that’s all that matters.

[Myriad]

[quote=bearishgurl]I want to close this side discussion by asking, “Do people really want to attempt to raise young families in sub-1000 sf home with stairs and little to no yard?” Is that really what today’s homebuyers will “settle” for?

I think not. It’s unimaginable to me … especially with kids.[/quote]

Yep, that’s exactly the right statement. Unimaginable to you!
Plenty of people around the world live in less space – NYC, Hong Kong, Tokyo, etc. The reality is that San Diego housing is fairly cheap compared to other major cities and with the quality of life here, SD will continue to attract people to move here – as long as jobs are available.
So yeah, SD will likely not have too many new SFR with large lots built in the future. But there will be new homes built and people will buy them.

[scaredyclassic]

our apt was less than 900 sq ft, my brother slept in a tiny side room, one bathroom, no yard.

everything turned out ok. my kids pretty much always lived on acreage. now they are ALL hankering to live in small apts in big city.

thats life

my moms been there since 1969. rent control.

[flyer]

Perfect example of how things are different for everyone, and still work out well, scaredy.

Regarding building. Eventually CA (coastal to 10-20 miles inland) will be built out (SAN is pretty close wrt buildable land from what my developer friends tell me) so it will be self-limiting.

[Coronita]

This thread just cracks me up.

Step 1: rant and complain
Step 2: post anecdote “evidence”
Step 3: wait for someone else to post real data disputing one’s claim
Step 4: post more anecdote “evidence”
Step 5: wait for a different person to post more real data disputing one’s claim
Step 6: find web url to something completely unrelated, to redirect attention
Step 7: get called out for the redirect
Step 8: run away and hide from this thread.

[flyer]

True, flu, and yet, hidden among all of your points above, are realities that will dictate the future living conditions of many people–which, I think–is what this thread is about.

[Coronita]

[quote=flyer]True, flu, and yet, hidden among all of your points above, are realities that will dictate the future living conditions of many people–which, I think–is what this thread is about.[/quote]

Nah, I beg to differ on that point. There’s plenty of decent sized homes in San Diego County. It’s a matter of how much you are willing to spend and where you want to live. Since there’s pretty healthy demand for these more expensive homes, there’s little incentive to build starter homes, for now. So the key would be to start small, and trade up. For anyone one with a decent education and decent career, you’ll do alright and reasonable at managing your money, you’ll do alright.

Now, if you’re someone that can’t exercise some fiscal prudence, when then that is a problem. Or if you let your skills and employability wither during your earning years, when then that is a a problem. If you don’t spend your time to manage your money beyond just sticking it in a 1%CD, well that too is a problem. People have all these variables to play with, the worst thing they could do is nothing. But then, doing nothing. well you can’t blame anyone else for that. The do nothing crowd is usually the most vocal about things being unfair.

Yes, kids, your house is more expensive that your parent’s house. Yes, kids, your parents probably can’t afford to live in the house you currently live in, because most likely their earning years are over. But no kids, some of us kids make a lot more money that our parents did…And yes kids, some even though we might make more money than our parents did, some of us also tend to spend a lot more than our parents did. So, again there’s all these variables one can play with.

[flyer]

Hope for those who need housing, you’re right.

[Coronita]

[quote=flyer]Hope for those who need housing, you’re right.[/quote]

I don’t know, I was talking with my parents awhile ago about their first home. I was complaining about how I was paying $2500/month on a 15 year mortgage that I absolutely hated…

They told me to “shut up”…because their first mortgage was around 15.4% for a 15 year. And for 10 years , they were making payments around $3000/month on a $85k household AGI back then when $1 meant a heck of a lot more than it does now…Then they were comparing notes with me and said things like.. When when we were your age right now,

1) We had still 10 years to go with our mortgage on our primary.
You, on the other had have 5 out of 6 homes free and clear.

2) We both had two 15 year old cars paid off , not 4 cars that were all paid off and thinking about a 5th one like you are.

3) We were just starting to think about your college expenses, while you already have funded your kid’s 529k account since the day your kid was born.

4) Buying you a computer cost us $5000… Your kid started having their own laptop in kindergarten that you paid $300 for… (I corrected them. It was $0, because I got it free from a Google I/O conference)

It’s not doom and gloom as many make it out to be..It’s not a walk in the park, and you have to put some effort into it (unless you happened to be born into a family with money). The only question is really, are you willing to put the effort in it/

[PCinSD]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=Rich Toscano][quote=bearishgurl]I watched this video… [snip]

Notice that the owner is single and the only one living there.
[/quote]

This is a perfect specimen of a BG post. Somewhat pedantically noting a minor detail, with added emphasis to stress the import of her keen observation.

Except, the video in question is titled “Small Portland prefab home stacks space to fit family of 3.” Sorry, I’ll translate that to BG-speak: “Small Portland prefab home stacks space to fit family of 3.” And said family of 3 is featured almost constantly throughout the video.

Simply perfect.[/quote]

I see the problem now. I’ve had two clients in and out this morning and DID click on brian’s link but it is now clear that we weren’t watching the same video. All I can think of is that I stopped the video and then when I came back to the utube page, I ended up watching a different video. I cannot now find the video I watched but it was NOT the same video as brian listed. The architect’s house was also remodeled to ~700 sf (he bought it originally at ~350 sf). I have no idea how he himself was able to conduct all his activities in it (3 story, incl the tiny garage), let alone a couple with a baby!

Most people endeavor to find something a little larger than 700 sf after their baby starts crawling around and needs a lot of “equipment,” lol ….[/quote]

LOL.

Hopefully the clients aren’t more people you defrauded as a foreclosure consultant.

Imagine for a minute if BG had not failed the SDPD psych exam. She would’ve been roaming our streets with a gun.

*shudders*

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN][quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN]BG, what you see on the street doesn’t jive with the data. You can look it up yourself. LA city have a density of 8000 people/square-mile. SD city have a density of 4000 people/square-mile.[/quote]I was comparing the entire counties, NOT just the cities of LA and SD.[/quote]
Your argument breaks down even worse when comparing county. LA County have a density of ~2100 people/sq-mile. While SD County have a density of ~680 people/sq-mile.[/quote]

AN, since we’re both looking at the same wiki pages, let’s dive for more data, shall we?

SD County has a land mass of 4207 square miles. It’s 2015 population (acc to the census) was 3,299,521, a 6.6% increase over its 2010 census count, which was 3,095,308.

LA County has a land mass of 4058 square miles. It’s 2015 population (acc to the census) was 10,170,292, a 3.6% increase over its 2010 census count, which was 9,818,605.

However, there is a HUGE difference in the two counties in the disbursement of their urban population centers. While LA County’s urban population centers take up half its land mass (50% or mostly southern half), SD County’s urban population centers take up just 1/6 of its land mass (~17% or western sixth). Excepting Castaic, Palmdale and Lancaster, the northern half of LA County is sparsely populated, rural and even rugged in places as is the farthest northwest portion (Camp Pendleton) and eastern 5/6 of SD County. In fully 3/4 of San Diego County’s land mass, it is extremely likely that utilities are not even available! I’ve driven thru almost ALL of SD County’s backcountry and taken some roads multiple times. I would classify the sixth of it which is closest to the Imperial County line as very rugged.

http://www.zipmap.net/California/Los_Angeles_County.htm

http://www.zipmap.net/California/San_Diego_County.htm

Realizing that there are scattered small (inconsequential for our numbers) rural populations in both counties, the reality is that SD County’s population is concentrated into just ~17% of its land mass (816 square miles or 4044 people per urbanized square mile) and LA County’s population is concentrated into ~50% of its land mass (2029 square miles or 5012 people per urbanized square mile). There is a marked difference in density between the west side of dtn LA and the east side, where high rise residential towers and massive blocks-long aging apt complexes (ex: Santa Monica and a few other cities) do not exist. This phenomenon (and scattered multifamily infill projects) causes the density to be much higher in pockets of the west side than the southeast and east sides. The southwest area cities (ex Long Beach, Lakewood, etc) have a lot of single family homes but those lot sizes tend to be 6K on average. On the southeast side, going towards Whitter and Hacienda Heights, they get a little larger and east of La Puente, even larger still. In the eastern SGV, it is not uncommon at all to find ~8500 sf lots (on avg) in entire subdivisions. This just doesn’t happen with any consistency in SD County. These are NOT “luxury home” tracts. They are hundreds of tracts of 50’s through ’80’s ranch homes from 1350 sf to 2000 sf in about 27 cities. These tracts do NOT have multifamily (apts/condos) mixed in with them as many established communities (or SFR tracts within CFD’s) in SD City/County do. These communities are very well planned and don’t “feel” crowded to be in. SD County doesn’t have this type of stock in anywhere near the numbers of LA County or level of SFR selection for Joe and Jane 6p worker-bee to choose from in any way, shape or form in any of its cities or unincorporated areas. A homebuyer in SD County is lucky if they find 1-2 active “affordable” SFR listings fitting the above description in any one zip code. In recent years, it has not been unusual to find none available in a particular zip code for months, especially with an asking price under $650K.

It would be interesting to see the difference in the percentages of population growth in the two counties for the 1990 and 2000 census. By 1990, CFD formation took hold with a vengeance in Riverside and SD Counties, and later and to a lesser extent, Orange and San Bernardino counties. I would surmise that LA County has grown in population far less than SD County has over that time period. IIRC, SD County had approximately 1.1 million people in 1986. The first CFD’s were formed in SD County that same year and the first tracts within them were sold in 1987 (Eastlake Shores 91913). In May thru August of 2017, those 30-year bonds will finally be paid off in five subdivisions (3 SFR and 2 multifamily). It seems like yesterday to me that the (man-made) lake was dug :=0

I haven’t been to all the “dense” areas on the Westside of LA in recent years, but in many ways, I think LA County’s leaders of decades past did a great job of planning. The decisions they made back then really contribute positively to the quality of life in its communities today.

*****

Remember that no CFD’s were formed in LA County (where the vast majority of upzoning since 1986 in SD County was approved).

I find it ridiculous that in 91915 (the latest annexation of the City of Chula Vista) the “SFR” density (actually PUDs with “zero-lot-lines”) were actually built 20 units to one acre in a handful of subdivisions. The “city streets” are so narrow in these tracts (with parked cars lined up solid on each side for block after block) that only one vehicle can pass at a time, with the oncoming vehicle slightly pulled over (depending on size of vehicles, of course). They are no wider than “easements” or narrow alleys in a more established neighborhood. It’s a travesty that people actually buy these crapshacks within spitting distance of each other, only to pay HOA dues to 2 or more assns and MR on 2-3 CFD’s. Of course, they could have purchased a SFR which was at least 200 sf larger, situated on a 6000 to 7500 sf lot and on a standard city street in an older area of the city or another city in the county with no HOA/MR.

So yeah, SD County homebuyers/renters DO have choices. Many of them chose to buy/rent a residence in a poorly-located, low-quality, high-density newer construction tract when they had other (better) options in their price range. And flyer is right … buyers’ housing choices are on them.

However, in LA County, I really do believe that location is absolutely everything wrt where one’s job is. All other home choices are secondary … unless one is retired. It once took me 5.5 hours to travel 51 miles from the far eastern portion of the county to a place located just west of LAX. One injury accident and another tractor trailer mishap . . . well, I don’t need to tell you the rest of the story . . . :=0

[bearishgurl]

[quote=PCinSD][quote=bearishgurl][quote=Rich Toscano][quote=bearishgurl]I watched this video… [snip]

Notice that the owner is single and the only one living there.
[/quote]

This is a perfect specimen of a BG post. Somewhat pedantically noting a minor detail, with added emphasis to stress the import of her keen observation.

Except, the video in question is titled “Small Portland prefab home stacks space to fit family of 3.” Sorry, I’ll translate that to BG-speak: “Small Portland prefab home stacks space to fit family of 3.” And said family of 3 is featured almost constantly throughout the video.

Simply perfect.[/quote]

I see the problem now. I’ve had two clients in and out this morning and DID click on brian’s link but it is now clear that we weren’t watching the same video. All I can think of is that I stopped the video and then when I came back to the utube page, I ended up watching a different video. I cannot now find the video I watched but it was NOT the same video as brian listed. The architect’s house was also remodeled to ~700 sf (he bought it originally at ~350 sf). I have no idea how he himself was able to conduct all his activities in it (3 story, incl the tiny garage), let alone a couple with a baby!

Most people endeavor to find something a little larger than 700 sf after their baby starts crawling around and needs a lot of “equipment,” lol ….[/quote]

LOL.

Hopefully the clients aren’t more people you defrauded as a foreclosure consultant.

Imagine for a minute if BG had not failed the SDPD psych exam. She would’ve been roaming our streets with a gun.

*shudders*[/quote]pablo, as usual, your ego is getting the better of you and your mysogynistic tendencies are again rearing their ugly head.

In addition, you have your “facts” all wrong … could it be due to the onset of dementia?

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flyer]True, flu, and yet, hidden among all of your points above, are realities that will dictate the future living conditions of many people–which, I think–is what this thread is about.[/quote]flyer, I honestly believe that many millenials (now working in their fields) can save a downpayment and buy a regular house. The $64M questions are, do they actually want to save for a downpayment and will they actually buy a house they can afford which will serve them (and their possible future families) for many years to come?

By “regular house,” I wasn’t referring to a sub-1000 sf crapshack traincar with stairs, no yard with HOA/MR equal to 1.7% of their assessed value … on top of their property taxes.

[bearishgurl]

Back to the OP’s link:

…Housing Starts: Nevertheless, Los Angeles has been registering a strong level of new home groundbreakings. Its residential building permit count of 14,582 units year to date in 2016 is exactly the same as for New York, according to the Census Bureau…

I’m going to take an educated guess that this permit count represents mainly conversions. There are many aging, very large low-rise apt complexes concentrated in a handful of communities on LA’s west side which are likely planned for condo conversions and possible teardowns to the studs for “remodel” to modern rental apts. And perhaps a small percentage of permits issued represent scattered infill custom homes (after complete teardown) all over the county and major remodels of existing SFRs.

…Next best for dwelling permits so far in 2016, on the West Coast, is Seattle (8,694 units). Portland (6,072) and San Francisco (6, 063) are almost even as they vie for third spot…

Again, same for SF. Except in this case, aging (old, actually) 4-12 unit bldgs are being razed for mid-rise and even high-rise (in districts where permitted) apt/condo projects to serve the SV worker-bee set.

[flyer]

[quote=flu][quote=flyer]Hope for those who need housing, you’re right.[/quote]

I don’t know, I was talking with my parents awhile ago about their first home. I was complaining about how I was paying $2500/month on a 15 year mortgage that I absolutely hated…

They told me to “shut up”…because their first mortgage was around 15.4% for a 15 year. And for 10 years , they were making payments around $3000/month on a $85k household AGI back then when $1 meant a heck of a lot more than it does now…Then they were comparing notes with me and said things like.. When when we were your age right now,

1) We had still 10 years to go with our mortgage on our primary.
You, on the other had have 5 out of 6 homes free and clear.

2) We both had two 15 year old cars paid off , not 4 cars that were all paid off and thinking about a 5th one like you are.

3) We were just starting to think about your college expenses, while you already have funded your kid’s 529k account since the day your kid was born.

4) Buying you a computer cost us $5000… Your kid started having their own laptop in kindergarten that you paid $300 for… (I corrected them. It was $0, because I got it free from a Google I/O conference)

It’s not doom and gloom as many make it out to be..It’s not a walk in the park, and you have to put some effort into it (unless you happened to be born into a family with money). The only question is really, are you willing to put the effort in it/[/quote]

I agree that everyone’s situation is different. Even before attending college and starting my airline career, then moving onto other interests, I was involved in real estate (residential and commercial) with my parents when I was a teenager.

This early start in the business enabled us to acquire real estate at extremely low costs even during that period of time, and these holdings will benefit our kids and their kids for many years to come.

That said, I think both your situation and my situation are exceptions to the rule, since we both had early beginnings in CA real estate, which gave us advantages that those relocating here (or even young people trying to stay here after they leave their parent’s home) may not enjoy–and that was more to my point concerning the topic of this thread.

We’ll probably never know how it all plays out for those who choose to take the real estate plunge in CA from this point forward, but, imo, it’s going to be challenging.

[Author]

Posts