Shiller: The Suburbs are not coming back!

[The-Shoveler]

Fallbrook/bonsall the area’s close to the 76 seem very buildable and there is quite a bit of land there yet, I could imagine 100-200K population there someday, they are getting the 76 ready I think for some of that expansion already.
The hilly/Rocking north/east areas are definitely much much harder to build on, especially as you get into De-luz
But there is still quite a bit of buildable land,
I think eventually (20+years) there will be a rail that serves the TV/Fallbrook areas and connects to the Oceanside metro.
Is it good/Bad don’t know, but it IS inevitable.

[briansd1]

[quote=pri_dk]Stressing over urban sprawl is a perfect example of a “first world problem.”[/quote]

Yes. Weight loss, obesity, psychological health, etc… are first world problems too.

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]

I don’t know Santee’s plans
[/quote]

Drive east on Mission Gorge into Santee. You’ll see a huge tract that they are grading.

[quote=bearishgurl]
but Grantville (SD) is zoned comm’l, light industrial and has a few moderate/low-income apt complexes. Are you suggesting the city will throw out all this (needed) biz and rezone for massive residential building? Do you know what you’re asking here?
[/quote]

There is a ready mix quarry in Grantville (or just east, depending how you define it). It will be developed like the quarries in Mission Valley and Mira Mesa.

[quote=briansd1]
Most of the small farms, ranches and corrals (with SFR’s) in 92019 are owned by persons with Prop 13 protection and several have already been passed down with same. These families are NOT going to go for upzoning of their “area,” EVER. You can’t wait until they die because their offspring will take title to the land.
[/quote]

Well, I know a guy who owns avocado groves inherited from his grandparents. He was in talks with major builders just before the recession.

[quote=briansd1]
Actually, brian, the reverse is true. If you, as a developer, wish to redevelop infill lots with aging bldgs currently sitting on them, the world is your oyster (within the current zoning ordinances, of course)!
[/quote]

bull… the permitting process is onerous, frustrating and costly. I know someone who had to do a “remodel” and replicate everything down the ugly rock facade of the 60s. Stupid and dumb.

[quote=briansd1]
SF is “fun” and “interesting.”
[/quote]

To each his own. Compared to “world class” cities, San Diego is boring.

[quote=briansd1]
brian, I don’t think you know the what would have to happen for your “dream utopia” to be built in SoCal (which seems to be turning it in a massive Asian city). It appears you want to (1) repeal longtime state legislation; (2) change (relax) city/county ordinances; and (3) “upzone” wholesale entire swaths of desirable land in CA coastal counties.

Ain’t gonna happen.
[/quote]

That’s why America is falling behind. We are not taking on big projects to modernize the country.

I mean look at those shacks in old areas of San Diego — rinky-dink heaters on the wall, no air-conditioning, creaky floors, bad plumbing and bad insulation. And you want Americans to pay a lot to live in those hell-holes, in the 21st century?

Did you read the article about Hollywood rezoning. We should do the same for North Park, Hillcrest, Clairemont, Kearny Mesa, etc….

[bearishgurl]

[quote=briansd1]There is a ready mix quarry in Grantville (or just east, depending how you define it). It will be developed like the quarries in Mission Valley and Mira Mesa.[/quote]

Of course. The quarry is in keeping with Grantville’s existing zoning.

Do you think tracts of SFR’s will be built in this area? If so, WHERE? And WHAT will they replace?

[quote=briansd1]Well, I know a guy who owns avocado groves inherited from his grandparents. He was in talks with major builders just before the recession.[/quote]

Are these groves in 92019? Does he still own them? If so, what happened to the talks he had with the builders??

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]Actually, brian, the reverse is true. If you, as a developer, wish to redevelop infill lots with aging bldgs currently sitting on them, the world is your oyster (within the current zoning ordinances, of course)![/quote]bull… the permitting process is onerous, frustrating and costly. I know someone who had to do a “remodel” and replicate everything down the ugly rock facade of the 60s. Stupid and dumb.[/quote]

Actually, brian, remodeling is NOT treated the same by planning offices as *redevelopment,* ESP if the parcel(s) in question is already located in “redevelopment zones.” If there is an eyesore currently standing there, I’m sure you will find those same bureaucrats much more hospitable then they were with your “friend” (who sounds here as if his project may have been subject to CC&R’s).

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]brian, I don’t think you know the what would have to happen for your “dream utopia” to be built in SoCal (which seems to be turning it in a massive Asian city). It appears you want to (1) repeal longtime state legislation; (2) change (relax) city/county ordinances; and (3) “upzone” wholesale entire swaths of desirable land in CA coastal counties.

Ain’t gonna happen.
[/quote]

That’s why America is falling behind. We are not taking on big projects to modernize the country.

I mean look at those shacks in old areas of San Diego — rinky-dink heaters on the wall, no air-conditioning, creaky floors, bad plumbing and bad insulation. And you want Americans to pay a lot to live in those hell-holes, in the 21st century?….[/quote]

brian, after a landlord of an older SFR spends $4K+ on central air, another $2-3K to install A/C (if needed), all new copper piping ($4K), insulates top to bottom and side-to-side ($2K+) and perhaps even installs new vinyl windows ($5K) and an upgraded elec panel box ($1K+) on, say, a 55 yo 1400 sf rental house, how much do you think he/she will raise the rent??

Where will poor and moderate income tenants live if all the older rental stock of SFR’s in SoCal was upgraded in this way? Many can’t live in more modern apts due to pets, having more than 2 vehicles (more than 2 working adults) and needing ramps (have a disabled individual in the household).

I could understand how a free-and-clear owner might be able to do this and not raise the rent so much. But for an investor with a mtg, they will have to recoup most or all of the money they spent on rehab thru the rent for a period of time.

What you (and Hollywood?) are proposing here is to drive lower-income tenants out of town. If your gardener/hotel housekeeper/waiter etc has to drive 45+ miles to work one way, how much do you think the prices of the services they provide will go up for everyone?

[briansd1]

BG, I don’t that my “dream” will never happen.

I’m proposing relaxing zoning restrictions so that builders can “instantly” meet housing demand.

If you can tear down 2 houses and put in a 30 unit condo building, then rental prices will come down, or stay the same for the same location. Builders make money, the economy improves, people have modern living spaces, and there’s less urban sprawl. Want to save open space? That’s the way to do it.

As people live closer together, you can have restaurants, bakeries, hardware stores, etc… all within walking distance.

[an]

[quote=bearishgurl]It seems that members of your spouse’s family sold or left their longtime “city” houses and moved out into the sprawl when newer development became available. Therefore, they must have gotten caught up in millenium-boom buying (since that’s when the majority of these tracts were built) and are underwater now.

You’re right, AN. If you can’t beat them, join them. I guess being able to buy cheap rental houses now lessens the sting of an unwise purchase on one’s residence years ago :=]

For your spouse’s relatives’ sake, I hope all the “shadow inventory” around Fresno is able to be absorbed in the coming years (gets transferred to stronger hands).[/quote]
What “city” houses are you talking about? I did say they’ve lived there for well over 20 years. I don’t know about all of them, but the one that I do know, the answer is no, they’re not underwater, even when they bought in the bubble years (not at the peak).

What do you mean if you can’t beat them? Beat what? Who are them? What sting are you referring to?

FYI, I think some of them would be ecstatic if the “shadow inventory” drive prices down even further. Lower prices = more and better cash flow rental for them.

[Author]

Posts