Skyranch in Santee

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Russell]AN gets it. We are talking about substitution not the overall community.[/quote]

Russell, I personally don’t think home buyers substitute their preferred area to shop in unless they are ONLY looking at new-construction developments. Did you read SRO’s long rants? (S)he repeated over and over all the new developments (s)he shopped in before purchasing in SR but ALL THOSE AREAS (s)he mentioned were BRAND NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS! SRO DIDN’T EVER CONSIDER BUYING AN EXISTING HOME! (Or at least if (s)he did, (s)he didn’t mention it here.)

The buyers I have worked with had a particular neighborhood in mind to buy in, usually due to relatives in the vicinity. None of them wanted to look at property out of that neighborhood or general area. If a property wasn’t available to suit them, they waited week(s) or month(s) until one was.

[quote=Russell]Bearish girl, you defended Clairmont which has many below average houses, is stuck between Linda Vista an actual landfill dump,light industrial/ industrial supply, a million commuters, an airport,borderline ghetto apartments, inner city like high schools, dingy strip malls,sleaze bars, car lots and a heck of a lot of density including transient and semi-transient people. It’s the same argument.[/quote]

Russell, could it be that some of the negatives you’re referring to here are actually in Kearny Mesa, Bay Park or Loma Portal or “upper Clairemont” (92123, 92110, or 92117). I don’t think the 92111 zip (I was trying to sell Scarlett on in another thread) has all of these negatives within it and the “commuters” are actually on the 5 and 163, NOT traveling the surface streets.

[quote=Russell]BTW,I wasn’t aware that there was a large quantity of un-zoned properties in Santee. Do you have a list or something like that?[/quote]

I don’t have a “list” per se, but I have worked with land-use attorneys for years. Certain parts of SD County are “mixed use” due to lack of earlier zoning or were zoned that way originally. I can see why Santee’s mayors have been advocating better zoning since its incorporation. This is an uphill battle because once an area’s land-uses are entrenched, either by zoning or default, the uses within it become “grandfathered.” For instance, an “egg ranch” or “dog kennel” that has been allowed to operate for the last 50 years cannot suddenly be run out of the area because a nearby new development’s residents don’t like the smell or barking. Santee, Lakeside, San Marcos and Spring Valley are four areas that I am familiar with that suffer from “grandfathered” mixed land use. As older business owners die or sell their land, it will mostly likely be re-zoned to comport with newer uses. It’s a long, slow process, though.

[quote-Russell]Those shoddy looking industrial places in Santee and Lakeside provide invaluable service to the region and yours truly BTW. I love them.[/quote]

Yes, they do, Russell. I completely agree. I visit Allied Gardens on occasion to get repairs on certain things that cannot be repaired anywhere else 🙂

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]It was a joke for longtimers referring to someone getting overzealous on a point and not willing to consider other points of views because one knows it all. Not necessarily an insult but not a compliement either. It is what is…[/quote]

sdr, “Schahrzad’s” bio makes her sound like a guru and pretty intelligent – LOL! Havent’t had a chance to peruse her website yet to determine if she’s “overzealous.” This is now on my low-priority “to-do” list 🙂

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]It was a joke for longtimers referring to someone getting overzealous on a point and not willing to consider other points of views because one knows it all. Not necessarily an insult but not a compliement either. It is what is…[/quote]

sdr, “Schahrzad’s” bio makes her sound like a guru and pretty intelligent – LOL! Havent’t had a chance to peruse her website yet to determine if she’s “overzealous.” This is now on my low-priority “to-do” list 🙂

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]It was a joke for longtimers referring to someone getting overzealous on a point and not willing to consider other points of views because one knows it all. Not necessarily an insult but not a compliement either. It is what is…[/quote]

sdr, “Schahrzad’s” bio makes her sound like a guru and pretty intelligent – LOL! Havent’t had a chance to peruse her website yet to determine if she’s “overzealous.” This is now on my low-priority “to-do” list 🙂

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]It was a joke for longtimers referring to someone getting overzealous on a point and not willing to consider other points of views because one knows it all. Not necessarily an insult but not a compliement either. It is what is…[/quote]

sdr, “Schahrzad’s” bio makes her sound like a guru and pretty intelligent – LOL! Havent’t had a chance to peruse her website yet to determine if she’s “overzealous.” This is now on my low-priority “to-do” list 🙂

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]It was a joke for longtimers referring to someone getting overzealous on a point and not willing to consider other points of views because one knows it all. Not necessarily an insult but not a compliement either. It is what is…[/quote]

sdr, “Schahrzad’s” bio makes her sound like a guru and pretty intelligent – LOL! Havent’t had a chance to peruse her website yet to determine if she’s “overzealous.” This is now on my low-priority “to-do” list 🙂

[NotCranky]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=Russell]AN gets it. We are talking about substitution not the overall community.[/quote]

Russell, I personally don’t think home buyers substitute their preferred area to shop in unless they are ONLY looking at new-construction developments. Did you read SRO’s long rants? (S)he repeated over and over all the new developments (s)he shopped in before purchasing in SR but ALL THOSE AREAS (s)he mentioned were BRAND NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS! SRO DIDN’T EVER CONSIDER BUYING AN EXISTING HOME! (Or at least if (s)he did, (s)he didn’t mention it here.)

The buyers I have worked with had a particular neighborhood in mind to buy in, usually due to relatives in the vicinity. None of them wanted to look at property out of that neighborhood or general area. If a property wasn’t available to suit them, they waited week(s) or month(s) until one was.

[quote=Russell]Bearish girl, you defended Clairmont which has many below average houses, is stuck between Linda Vista an actual landfill dump,light industrial/ industrial supply, a million commuters, an airport,borderline ghetto apartments, inner city like high schools, dingy strip malls,sleaze bars, car lots and a heck of a lot of density including transient and semi-transient people. It’s the same argument.[/quote]

Russell, could it be that some of the negatives you’re referring to here are actually in Kearny Mesa, Bay Park or Loma Portal or “upper Clairemont” (92123, 92110, or 92117). I don’t think the 92111 zip (I was trying to sell Scarlett on in another thread) has all of these negatives within it and the “commuters” are actually on the 5 and 163, NOT traveling the surface streets.

[quote=Russell]BTW,I wasn’t aware that there was a large quantity of un-zoned properties in Santee. Do you have a list or something like that?[/quote]

I don’t have a “list” per se, but I have worked with land-use attorneys for years. Certain parts of SD County are “mixed use” due to lack of earlier zoning or were zoned that way originally. I can see why Santee’s mayors have been advocating better zoning since its incorporation. This is an uphill battle because once an area’s land-uses are entrenched, either by zoning or default, the uses within it become “grandfathered.” For instance, an “egg ranch” or “dog kennel” that has been allowed to operate for the last 50 years cannot suddenly be run out of the area because a nearby new development’s residents don’t like the smell or barking. Santee, Lakeside, San Marcos and Spring Valley are four areas that I am familiar with that suffer from “grandfathered” mixed land use. As older business owners die or sell their land, it will mostly likely be re-zoned to comport with newer uses. It’s a long, slow process, though.

[quote-Russell]Those shoddy looking industrial places in Santee and Lakeside provide invaluable service to the region and yours truly BTW. I love them.[/quote]

Yes, they do, Russell. I completely agree. I visit Allied Gardens on occasion to get repairs on certain things that cannot be repaired anywhere else :)[/quote]

Bearishgirl, I am not substituting communities I am accomodating value judgements and judgements of value on properties in our part of southern California.

I said Clairmont was surrounded by these negatives not that they are all in each zip,(many are).

Mixed use types,commercial in transition, these are tools to allow/direct use. It may not be what you consider desirable zoning/use controls.I know they want some adjustment to development types. As you know, it can be a litigious and drawn out process to “plan” change. I think that since it is on the table is creates a greater likely hood that Santee will evolve in a direction more in keeping with desirable suburban areas rather than less. Not sure, of course.

Thanks for the discussion.Have a good day.

[NotCranky]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=Russell]AN gets it. We are talking about substitution not the overall community.[/quote]

Russell, I personally don’t think home buyers substitute their preferred area to shop in unless they are ONLY looking at new-construction developments. Did you read SRO’s long rants? (S)he repeated over and over all the new developments (s)he shopped in before purchasing in SR but ALL THOSE AREAS (s)he mentioned were BRAND NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS! SRO DIDN’T EVER CONSIDER BUYING AN EXISTING HOME! (Or at least if (s)he did, (s)he didn’t mention it here.)

The buyers I have worked with had a particular neighborhood in mind to buy in, usually due to relatives in the vicinity. None of them wanted to look at property out of that neighborhood or general area. If a property wasn’t available to suit them, they waited week(s) or month(s) until one was.

[quote=Russell]Bearish girl, you defended Clairmont which has many below average houses, is stuck between Linda Vista an actual landfill dump,light industrial/ industrial supply, a million commuters, an airport,borderline ghetto apartments, inner city like high schools, dingy strip malls,sleaze bars, car lots and a heck of a lot of density including transient and semi-transient people. It’s the same argument.[/quote]

Russell, could it be that some of the negatives you’re referring to here are actually in Kearny Mesa, Bay Park or Loma Portal or “upper Clairemont” (92123, 92110, or 92117). I don’t think the 92111 zip (I was trying to sell Scarlett on in another thread) has all of these negatives within it and the “commuters” are actually on the 5 and 163, NOT traveling the surface streets.

[quote=Russell]BTW,I wasn’t aware that there was a large quantity of un-zoned properties in Santee. Do you have a list or something like that?[/quote]

I don’t have a “list” per se, but I have worked with land-use attorneys for years. Certain parts of SD County are “mixed use” due to lack of earlier zoning or were zoned that way originally. I can see why Santee’s mayors have been advocating better zoning since its incorporation. This is an uphill battle because once an area’s land-uses are entrenched, either by zoning or default, the uses within it become “grandfathered.” For instance, an “egg ranch” or “dog kennel” that has been allowed to operate for the last 50 years cannot suddenly be run out of the area because a nearby new development’s residents don’t like the smell or barking. Santee, Lakeside, San Marcos and Spring Valley are four areas that I am familiar with that suffer from “grandfathered” mixed land use. As older business owners die or sell their land, it will mostly likely be re-zoned to comport with newer uses. It’s a long, slow process, though.

[quote-Russell]Those shoddy looking industrial places in Santee and Lakeside provide invaluable service to the region and yours truly BTW. I love them.[/quote]

Yes, they do, Russell. I completely agree. I visit Allied Gardens on occasion to get repairs on certain things that cannot be repaired anywhere else :)[/quote]

Bearishgirl, I am not substituting communities I am accomodating value judgements and judgements of value on properties in our part of southern California.

I said Clairmont was surrounded by these negatives not that they are all in each zip,(many are).

Mixed use types,commercial in transition, these are tools to allow/direct use. It may not be what you consider desirable zoning/use controls.I know they want some adjustment to development types. As you know, it can be a litigious and drawn out process to “plan” change. I think that since it is on the table is creates a greater likely hood that Santee will evolve in a direction more in keeping with desirable suburban areas rather than less. Not sure, of course.

Thanks for the discussion.Have a good day.

[NotCranky]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=Russell]AN gets it. We are talking about substitution not the overall community.[/quote]

Russell, I personally don’t think home buyers substitute their preferred area to shop in unless they are ONLY looking at new-construction developments. Did you read SRO’s long rants? (S)he repeated over and over all the new developments (s)he shopped in before purchasing in SR but ALL THOSE AREAS (s)he mentioned were BRAND NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS! SRO DIDN’T EVER CONSIDER BUYING AN EXISTING HOME! (Or at least if (s)he did, (s)he didn’t mention it here.)

The buyers I have worked with had a particular neighborhood in mind to buy in, usually due to relatives in the vicinity. None of them wanted to look at property out of that neighborhood or general area. If a property wasn’t available to suit them, they waited week(s) or month(s) until one was.

[quote=Russell]Bearish girl, you defended Clairmont which has many below average houses, is stuck between Linda Vista an actual landfill dump,light industrial/ industrial supply, a million commuters, an airport,borderline ghetto apartments, inner city like high schools, dingy strip malls,sleaze bars, car lots and a heck of a lot of density including transient and semi-transient people. It’s the same argument.[/quote]

Russell, could it be that some of the negatives you’re referring to here are actually in Kearny Mesa, Bay Park or Loma Portal or “upper Clairemont” (92123, 92110, or 92117). I don’t think the 92111 zip (I was trying to sell Scarlett on in another thread) has all of these negatives within it and the “commuters” are actually on the 5 and 163, NOT traveling the surface streets.

[quote=Russell]BTW,I wasn’t aware that there was a large quantity of un-zoned properties in Santee. Do you have a list or something like that?[/quote]

I don’t have a “list” per se, but I have worked with land-use attorneys for years. Certain parts of SD County are “mixed use” due to lack of earlier zoning or were zoned that way originally. I can see why Santee’s mayors have been advocating better zoning since its incorporation. This is an uphill battle because once an area’s land-uses are entrenched, either by zoning or default, the uses within it become “grandfathered.” For instance, an “egg ranch” or “dog kennel” that has been allowed to operate for the last 50 years cannot suddenly be run out of the area because a nearby new development’s residents don’t like the smell or barking. Santee, Lakeside, San Marcos and Spring Valley are four areas that I am familiar with that suffer from “grandfathered” mixed land use. As older business owners die or sell their land, it will mostly likely be re-zoned to comport with newer uses. It’s a long, slow process, though.

[quote-Russell]Those shoddy looking industrial places in Santee and Lakeside provide invaluable service to the region and yours truly BTW. I love them.[/quote]

Yes, they do, Russell. I completely agree. I visit Allied Gardens on occasion to get repairs on certain things that cannot be repaired anywhere else :)[/quote]

Bearishgirl, I am not substituting communities I am accomodating value judgements and judgements of value on properties in our part of southern California.

I said Clairmont was surrounded by these negatives not that they are all in each zip,(many are).

Mixed use types,commercial in transition, these are tools to allow/direct use. It may not be what you consider desirable zoning/use controls.I know they want some adjustment to development types. As you know, it can be a litigious and drawn out process to “plan” change. I think that since it is on the table is creates a greater likely hood that Santee will evolve in a direction more in keeping with desirable suburban areas rather than less. Not sure, of course.

Thanks for the discussion.Have a good day.

[NotCranky]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=Russell]AN gets it. We are talking about substitution not the overall community.[/quote]

Russell, I personally don’t think home buyers substitute their preferred area to shop in unless they are ONLY looking at new-construction developments. Did you read SRO’s long rants? (S)he repeated over and over all the new developments (s)he shopped in before purchasing in SR but ALL THOSE AREAS (s)he mentioned were BRAND NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS! SRO DIDN’T EVER CONSIDER BUYING AN EXISTING HOME! (Or at least if (s)he did, (s)he didn’t mention it here.)

The buyers I have worked with had a particular neighborhood in mind to buy in, usually due to relatives in the vicinity. None of them wanted to look at property out of that neighborhood or general area. If a property wasn’t available to suit them, they waited week(s) or month(s) until one was.

[quote=Russell]Bearish girl, you defended Clairmont which has many below average houses, is stuck between Linda Vista an actual landfill dump,light industrial/ industrial supply, a million commuters, an airport,borderline ghetto apartments, inner city like high schools, dingy strip malls,sleaze bars, car lots and a heck of a lot of density including transient and semi-transient people. It’s the same argument.[/quote]

Russell, could it be that some of the negatives you’re referring to here are actually in Kearny Mesa, Bay Park or Loma Portal or “upper Clairemont” (92123, 92110, or 92117). I don’t think the 92111 zip (I was trying to sell Scarlett on in another thread) has all of these negatives within it and the “commuters” are actually on the 5 and 163, NOT traveling the surface streets.

[quote=Russell]BTW,I wasn’t aware that there was a large quantity of un-zoned properties in Santee. Do you have a list or something like that?[/quote]

I don’t have a “list” per se, but I have worked with land-use attorneys for years. Certain parts of SD County are “mixed use” due to lack of earlier zoning or were zoned that way originally. I can see why Santee’s mayors have been advocating better zoning since its incorporation. This is an uphill battle because once an area’s land-uses are entrenched, either by zoning or default, the uses within it become “grandfathered.” For instance, an “egg ranch” or “dog kennel” that has been allowed to operate for the last 50 years cannot suddenly be run out of the area because a nearby new development’s residents don’t like the smell or barking. Santee, Lakeside, San Marcos and Spring Valley are four areas that I am familiar with that suffer from “grandfathered” mixed land use. As older business owners die or sell their land, it will mostly likely be re-zoned to comport with newer uses. It’s a long, slow process, though.

[quote-Russell]Those shoddy looking industrial places in Santee and Lakeside provide invaluable service to the region and yours truly BTW. I love them.[/quote]

Yes, they do, Russell. I completely agree. I visit Allied Gardens on occasion to get repairs on certain things that cannot be repaired anywhere else :)[/quote]

Bearishgirl, I am not substituting communities I am accomodating value judgements and judgements of value on properties in our part of southern California.

I said Clairmont was surrounded by these negatives not that they are all in each zip,(many are).

Mixed use types,commercial in transition, these are tools to allow/direct use. It may not be what you consider desirable zoning/use controls.I know they want some adjustment to development types. As you know, it can be a litigious and drawn out process to “plan” change. I think that since it is on the table is creates a greater likely hood that Santee will evolve in a direction more in keeping with desirable suburban areas rather than less. Not sure, of course.

Thanks for the discussion.Have a good day.

[NotCranky]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=Russell]AN gets it. We are talking about substitution not the overall community.[/quote]

Russell, I personally don’t think home buyers substitute their preferred area to shop in unless they are ONLY looking at new-construction developments. Did you read SRO’s long rants? (S)he repeated over and over all the new developments (s)he shopped in before purchasing in SR but ALL THOSE AREAS (s)he mentioned were BRAND NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS! SRO DIDN’T EVER CONSIDER BUYING AN EXISTING HOME! (Or at least if (s)he did, (s)he didn’t mention it here.)

The buyers I have worked with had a particular neighborhood in mind to buy in, usually due to relatives in the vicinity. None of them wanted to look at property out of that neighborhood or general area. If a property wasn’t available to suit them, they waited week(s) or month(s) until one was.

[quote=Russell]Bearish girl, you defended Clairmont which has many below average houses, is stuck between Linda Vista an actual landfill dump,light industrial/ industrial supply, a million commuters, an airport,borderline ghetto apartments, inner city like high schools, dingy strip malls,sleaze bars, car lots and a heck of a lot of density including transient and semi-transient people. It’s the same argument.[/quote]

Russell, could it be that some of the negatives you’re referring to here are actually in Kearny Mesa, Bay Park or Loma Portal or “upper Clairemont” (92123, 92110, or 92117). I don’t think the 92111 zip (I was trying to sell Scarlett on in another thread) has all of these negatives within it and the “commuters” are actually on the 5 and 163, NOT traveling the surface streets.

[quote=Russell]BTW,I wasn’t aware that there was a large quantity of un-zoned properties in Santee. Do you have a list or something like that?[/quote]

I don’t have a “list” per se, but I have worked with land-use attorneys for years. Certain parts of SD County are “mixed use” due to lack of earlier zoning or were zoned that way originally. I can see why Santee’s mayors have been advocating better zoning since its incorporation. This is an uphill battle because once an area’s land-uses are entrenched, either by zoning or default, the uses within it become “grandfathered.” For instance, an “egg ranch” or “dog kennel” that has been allowed to operate for the last 50 years cannot suddenly be run out of the area because a nearby new development’s residents don’t like the smell or barking. Santee, Lakeside, San Marcos and Spring Valley are four areas that I am familiar with that suffer from “grandfathered” mixed land use. As older business owners die or sell their land, it will mostly likely be re-zoned to comport with newer uses. It’s a long, slow process, though.

[quote-Russell]Those shoddy looking industrial places in Santee and Lakeside provide invaluable service to the region and yours truly BTW. I love them.[/quote]

Yes, they do, Russell. I completely agree. I visit Allied Gardens on occasion to get repairs on certain things that cannot be repaired anywhere else :)[/quote]

Bearishgirl, I am not substituting communities I am accomodating value judgements and judgements of value on properties in our part of southern California.

I said Clairmont was surrounded by these negatives not that they are all in each zip,(many are).

Mixed use types,commercial in transition, these are tools to allow/direct use. It may not be what you consider desirable zoning/use controls.I know they want some adjustment to development types. As you know, it can be a litigious and drawn out process to “plan” change. I think that since it is on the table is creates a greater likely hood that Santee will evolve in a direction more in keeping with desirable suburban areas rather than less. Not sure, of course.

Thanks for the discussion.Have a good day.

[sdrealtor]

bg
She is intelligent, no question about that but that wasnt what I was referring to. She was a longtime poster on this site before being banned.

To clarify, my point was because I dont like the kind of blanket statements you are making about certain communities (just as you did not like the ones about Chula Vista). I’m sure there are some wonderful properties in Santee that would be far preferable to others in Del Cerro. Its simple not accurate to say DC > Santee in every case. Even though neighborhood factors are very important every house stands on its own merits. Most importantly every home is castle to someone. Its all perspective.

[sdrealtor]

bg
She is intelligent, no question about that but that wasnt what I was referring to. She was a longtime poster on this site before being banned.

To clarify, my point was because I dont like the kind of blanket statements you are making about certain communities (just as you did not like the ones about Chula Vista). I’m sure there are some wonderful properties in Santee that would be far preferable to others in Del Cerro. Its simple not accurate to say DC > Santee in every case. Even though neighborhood factors are very important every house stands on its own merits. Most importantly every home is castle to someone. Its all perspective.

[sdrealtor]

bg
She is intelligent, no question about that but that wasnt what I was referring to. She was a longtime poster on this site before being banned.

To clarify, my point was because I dont like the kind of blanket statements you are making about certain communities (just as you did not like the ones about Chula Vista). I’m sure there are some wonderful properties in Santee that would be far preferable to others in Del Cerro. Its simple not accurate to say DC > Santee in every case. Even though neighborhood factors are very important every house stands on its own merits. Most importantly every home is castle to someone. Its all perspective.

[sdrealtor]

bg
She is intelligent, no question about that but that wasnt what I was referring to. She was a longtime poster on this site before being banned.

To clarify, my point was because I dont like the kind of blanket statements you are making about certain communities (just as you did not like the ones about Chula Vista). I’m sure there are some wonderful properties in Santee that would be far preferable to others in Del Cerro. Its simple not accurate to say DC > Santee in every case. Even though neighborhood factors are very important every house stands on its own merits. Most importantly every home is castle to someone. Its all perspective.

[Author]

Posts