August 16, 2006 at 9:26 AM #7211powaysellerParticipant
This Dataquick chart over at TheMessthatgreenspanmade shows median prices for so CA counties. San Diego is in the middle.
Why is the median price so much higher, $650K in Ventura and Orange Counties, vs. $500K in SD County?
Are their wages so much higher over there?August 16, 2006 at 9:34 AM #32022VCJIMParticipant
We have had a ton of new construction in Ventura County. I suspect that is the main reason our median is so high. I also suspect we have a much stronger employment environment; there are many high-tech companies here. Beyond that, a lot of people commute from V.C. to the San Fernando Valley, West LA and downtown. In my area, it is very difficult to buy ANY house for less than $500K, but that situation is improving daily.August 16, 2006 at 9:38 AM #32023bob007Participant
Orange County especially Southern parts are nice. They are close to major job centers in Irvine, Anaheim and downtown LA.August 16, 2006 at 9:51 AM #32024smfjParticipant
Per US Census Bureau Quick Facts, 2003 Median Household Income: San Diego $48,634, Orange $55,861, Ventura $57,864, meaning OC and VC are 14.9% and 19.0% above SD, respectively.
Interestingly, the Census’ American Community Survey shows an increase in inflation-adjusted median household income between 2003 and 2004 for SD and OC of .1% (from $50,611 to $51,012) and 5% (from $61,329 to $64,416), respectively (Ventura not given).August 16, 2006 at 10:06 AM #32025VCJIMParticipant
smfj, that is interesting! I would not have expected the difference to be that large. I’ve always thought of VC as kin to SD; both relatively close to LA but distant enough to not BE LA.August 16, 2006 at 10:20 AM #32026nlaParticipant
San Diego has a lot of distressed neigborhoods: National City, San Ysidro, Encanto and most of SE San Diego, Old/West Chula Vista, La Presa, etc.August 16, 2006 at 10:49 AM #32027DanielParticipant
I agree. The median in North San Diego County is probably substantially higher than 500K. The overall median is pulled lower by the distressed southern neighborhoods.August 16, 2006 at 11:09 AM #32028unbiasedobserverParticipant
Yes, a large percentage of SD is pretty undesirable (areawise). When I moved there my company set me up with a relocation specialist. She showed me a big map on the wall and told me to avoid everywhere below the 8 and Oceanside near CP. One time I drove to a southern part of downtown to buy a mattress and I was scared for my life.August 16, 2006 at 11:23 AM #32030bmarumParticipant
Yeah, Mission Hills and Hillcrest, both south of interstate 8, are real dumps.August 16, 2006 at 11:47 AM #32033ChrispyParticipant
Kensington is just plain awful, and don’t get me started on Mount Helix.
For the record, a friend just sold a house on Mt. Helix for $800K – $100K below market. I think she was lucky to get out when she did.August 16, 2006 at 12:13 PM #32035lindismithParticipant
ok, I have to jump in here. Mt. Helix and Kensington are dumps? South of downtown scarred someone for life? And the South Bay isn’t good enough to be part of SD????
What on earth? Are you people all in North County? Do you all carry that anti-bacterial gel in your pockets in case you have to drive south of the 8?
For the record, amongst native San Diegans:
– Not everyone wants to live in a McMansion in North County, that looks exactly the same as your neighbor.
– Mission Hills is considered very prestigious, as is Mt. Helix (at the top) and Kensington
– Part of Chula Vista are very beautiful, and there are many very wealthy people living here in South Bay.
– We all know old money is south of the 8, and new money and transplants live in N. county. Unless you’re coastal – then you could be old money, and you could be very cool.
Sometimes the attitudes of people about what makes a good neighborhood just make me laugh. I’d take a one-of-a-kind canyon home in Hillcrest and walk to some of San Diego’s best restaurants over living in the tract development of Carmel Valley where the best you can get is a mini-van drive to the Vons parking lot for overpriced chain food any day!August 16, 2006 at 12:26 PM #32038bmarumParticipant
Can’t speak for the other poster, but mine was dripping with sarcasm. Too bad that doesn’t come through so well sometimes on the internet. 🙂August 16, 2006 at 12:26 PM #32036sdrealtorParticipant
You seem to have missed out on what were obviously very sarcastic f/u comments made to a comment by an uninformed recetn transplant. We all know Kensington and Mission Hills are spectacular as are many other areas south of 8!August 16, 2006 at 12:33 PM #32039lindismithParticipant
oh, ok. sorry.August 16, 2006 at 1:00 PM #32040DanielParticipant
OK, to check that we’re all on the same page, let’s state this: although blanket statements like “south of 8”, “north of 8”, etc are obviously incorrect, I would say that it is true that San Diego has a fair share of distressed neighborhoods (wherever they may be located).
I think that San Diego’s median is lower than that of VC and OC precisely because of that. Although I’m sure OC and VC have their own bad neighborhoods, I would argue that San Diego probably has a higher share of them. Those who know more about SoCal demographics, please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.