Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
an
Participant[quote=spdrun]
Who said SD? I said CA.
Coastal CA is generally NIMBY-laden. Good luck without any gov’t support.[/quote]Who said anything about without any gov’t support? If the government can get behind the high speed train, why can’t they get behind something that every Californian will use? If the NIMBY-ism gets too much, just flex the eminent domain muscle and I’m sure they’ll STFU.
Participant[quote=joec]Maybe they could have subsidies for desalination or something…Major downsides I see are lots of save the oceans/whales/dolphins/sea lions/environmentalists blocking any major expansion. I’d assume energy use is also high for desalination plants and those 2 reasons are probably why we don’t do it already.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desalination
”
Due to relatively high energy consumption, the costs of desalinating sea water are generally higher than the alternatives (fresh water from rivers or groundwater, water recycling and water conservation), but alternatives are not always available.
“[/quote]
Nuclear, solar, wind, natural gas, etc. We have energy. We just don’t have fresh water.Participant[quote=spdrun]Good luck getting any infrastructure built in a densely-populated area like SD without gov’t involvement.[/quote]
Who said SD? I said CA.ParticipantIt always baffles my mind that there’s a drought in CA, when we’re right next to the largest water source on this earth. The Carlsbad desalination plant cost about $1B and it can serve 300k homes. I don’t know why we can’t build 100 of them, which would serve about 30M homes. That’s about the cost of the bullet train they’re proposing, but this new water source will be used by everyone instead of just a few wrt the train. I would have no problem paying additional property tax to have these built so I can stop hearing about drought in CA.
July 17, 2014 at 10:44 PM in reply to: What do you think about the price of this house in Mira Mesa? #776806ParticipantIt’s priced about right.
Participant[quote=dumbrenter]401k? really? I must be living under a rock because the only time you withdraw from that is when you get to a state where you are hungry and have nothing to buy food with.[/quote]That’s what I’ve seen on those TV show with failing restaurants and the host comes in, remodel the place and revamp the menu. A few times, the owner said they already tapped their equity and their 401k.
ParticipantMost people don’t have a few hundred thousand in cash sitting around before they start their small biz. The other sources of cash to start a small biz is either home equity or cashing out their 401k/IRA. So, yeah, I bet it’s pretty common.
Participant[quote=Happs]The infill development in the city of Santa Clara is a good start to addressing the housing shortage, but it’s a drop in the bucket. Restrictive development regulations need to be eased, open space preserves need to be built on, growth boundaries eliminated etc to address the housing shortage. Silicon Valley will always be a desirable place to live due to jobs, weather and proximity to premier universities. There’s a plethora of open space in the Silicon Valley that could be built upon if politicians and voters didn’t have such a pro-environmental bent.[/quote]I agree with some of this. I agree that restrictive development regulations need to be eased, but I think open space preserves needs to stay. You can always build up. Silicon Valley have plenty of room left to build up. If they eliminate height restriction and start to zone for very dense condo high rises in certain area, that would greatly alleviate some of the problem. If cities with Silicon valley drastically renovate its downtown and build up. Maybe people would find less of an urge to live in SF and commute to Silicon Valley. If they have a vibrant downtown of their own that’s near their work.
Although Bay area might be more built out than SD, it’s far from the density that other major international cities experience, such as Hong Kong, Singapore, etc. If you don’t help alleviate cost of living, traffic will only gets worse and living standard will decline and smog will increase, since people will commute longer and further. Then, you would also get family who live in a condo a size of a bedroom because they can’t afford more. Whether one like it or not, the city will continue to grow if your economy grow.
Participant[quote=The-Shoveler]Others want schools for kids etc…
I believe AN
1) had a home
2) had a job.If you have none of the above you move to where you can find one, usually things work out.[/quote]I don’t think it matter that I have a home and a job (unless the only job I can find is in SV). I think it has a lot more to do with the fact I have kids and school quality is top priority with distance being #2. Those two factor is what make SV super duper expensive compare to SD IMHO. If I want a small 1400-1500 sq-ft home on 5k sq-ft lot, in Mira Mesa or RB (that’s where the tech jobs mostly are), you can find those for ~$450-600k today. Both areas have very good schools (not the best but very good). In SV, if you want any place that have schools like MM or RB, you’re look at least $900k-$1M easily. You can go with crappy schools areas, like some part of SJ and Sunnyvale, but even those will cost you $700-800k. Income there are no where near as high compare to San Diego as their RE price compare to San Diego.
Participant[quote=UCGal]FWIW – San Diego county has a bigger population now. Life marches on. A factor in my decision to retire is the fact that the north 805 construction, and the huge amount of traffic out of Sorrento Valley sometimes made my 6.5 mile commute take over an hour. That project won’t be done till 2017. I didn’t blame the workers, or the folks commuting. I just stopped commuting myself.
What do you propose to stop growth you don’t like? Build a wall and don’t let anyone else move in? Lets get real… that’s not going to happen.[/quote]Very well said. If you don’t build appropriate amount of housing for the population growth, what will simply happen is prices will sky rocket. The kids who grew up there won’t be able to buy near their parents anymore, unless they got a great career or their parents help them out. Or worse yet, they’ll continue to live in their parents house and you start to have 6-8 cars per house. you also start to have spraw to exurb areas, which will increase traffic and smog.
I’m actually rooting for the Carroll Canyon masterplan and Stone Creek masterplan to be built out. That will increase Mira Mesa’ population by 17%. But I’m glad they got it right in making the builder fully build out Carroll Canyon Road to stretch from 805 to 15 before they let them build any housing. This will prevent NIMBY-er to move in and mess it all up like they did in UC with Regents Road.
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]Everybody’s got an opinion about all of us horrible NIMBYs until their OWN quality of life is affected by unbridled growth. Has anyone here who lived on a quiet street gotten a letter from their city and Caltrans stating that the street in front of their house is going to be extended by 8-10 miles to accommodate 100K living units of additional traffic? If so, did your letter state that a freeway entrance would be built five houses down from you and that your sidewalk and part of your easement would be taken for an additional lane and your sidewalk moved further up on the easement (bordering your front yard)? Did it state that a double yellow line would be drawn down your (future 4-lane) street? This happened to hundreds of homeowners in Chula Vista, many who had purchased their home new between 1961 and 1964. Do any of you have deep enough pockets to fight City Hall and Caltrans? Come on, let’s hear it, folks. What if you went to 2.5 years worth of public hearings and were ultimately told to pack sand? If you listed your property for sale, you would then have to disclose to a prospective buyer (or their agent would) the upcoming plans for the street. How would that make you feel? Trapped, possibly??[/quote]I’m glad the city told them to go pound sand. Yay for increase density. I wouldn’t be buying in a place that this can happen. I like to be in a place that have higher density and more amenities.
[quote=bearishgurl]As I previously stated, Poster child Chula Vista is but a microcosm of the far-reaching effects of the presence of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act on CA’s books. I’m sure Stockton’s old-timers aren’t too thrilled about their post office waits increasing from 4 minutes to 45 minutes. Without the Act in place, the Golden State would still be golden. Alas, those days are long gone, never to return.[/quote]Got proof on that?
[quote=bearishgurl]The City of SD did a fine job of separating 92122 (condo vs. SFR area) decades ago with a strip of dedicated open space and the RR tracks which were already there. They didn’t mix the two. The condo complexes constructed in the 70’s and early 80’s are tasteful and well-built with plenty of alley clearance, larger-than-std 2-car garages and mostly spacious units (avg 1650 sf), most with their own courtyards. I haven’t looked at any of the *newer* complexes there (north of Nobel and also east of Genessee, north of the tracks) so don’t know what the clearances are like on them. [/quote]What does separating housing type has anything to do with anything? The density still increased.
[quote=bearishgurl]You people all need to come down and take a tour of craptastic 91915 and see for yourself what I’m talking about. WTH, spend all day there and drive down every street (you might have to wait your turn, though). ’nuff said.[/quote]I did go there a few years back. Looks perfectly fine to me. Lots of new houses. I would personally make either Telegraph Canyon or Olympic into a freeway.
Participant[quote=flu]I learned a new acronym today…
NIMBYism
I never knew…
What about if you’re a poor person like me and don’t really have a backyard?[/quote]Maybe, it’s NIMCYism? Not In My Court Yard ism? 🙂
Participant[quote=UCGal]Back on the topic of silicon valley prices… Friends moved up there last year when he left Qcom for Goog. They sold their paid off Carmel Valley 4Ksf home for well over $1M. They are renting a 1600sf beater house in Palo Alto for almost $4k/month. They are having no luck finding a house for $2.5M or less in Palo Alto.
The increased google salary was not enough to compensate for the HUGE increase in housing costs.[/quote]This is why I’m still in SD and completely rule out the bay area as a possible relocation spot, unless something change (either income there has to go up EVEN MORE, say 50% more, or housing has to decrease). A year ago, as I was pondering moving up there, I ran the numbers and look at housing cost for comparable areas (for me, it’s distance to work and school). For anything that have the distance to work and school like Mira Mesa, you’re look at 2x the price. The salary was higher @ ~25-35%, but with that higher W-2 income, you’ll be paying more taxes, and potentially losing out on some government perks for making less $, so to me, the income increase turn out to be only ~10-15%. There’s no way the number work out.
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]Palo Alto is one of the most expensive cities in SV. Why is it that your friends need to live there? There are many other cities in SV which are in the same league as the Carmel Valley (SD) that they left. Palo Alto is not. It’s several notches above Carmel Valley, so IMO, based upon your post, your friends’ housing sights are set too high for their resources and budget.[/quote]LOL, I don’t know how else to respond to this.
[quote=bearishgurl]Let me ask you something, UCGal. Does your beloved hometown of UC (SD) now have over 5x the population it did in 1986? Has SD increased the density there 500% (multifamily units) since 1986? [/quote]Don’t you see all of those condos/apartments popping in UTC?
[quote=bearishgurl]I’m aware that the UTC area (adjacent to UC but different zip code) is nearly all multifamily units but a large portion of those units were built prior to 1986. Several large complexes there have oversized garages and alleys easy to turn and park in one’s garage. In addition, those older complexes are built exponentially better than the typical crap shack built in Otay Ranch in recent years and the streets in UTC are wide and easily navigable. [/quote]WTF? They’re both 92122. What are you talking about?
[quote=bearishgurl]And btw, NIMBYism is legal, whether “on steroids” . . . or not. I believe CA coastal counties should be preserved at all costs … at least the 1st and 2nd tier coastal zones of them (1st 8-20 miles from the coast, depending on topography). As you know, they’re among the finest parts of the country to live in. A low or moderate income family should not be guaranteed a “cushy life” in one of them or any life at all for that matter. They should be reserved for those who have paid their dues or have the resources to live comfortably in them.[/quote]LOL, NIMBYism at its finest. Guess what, as population grows, city needs to grow and get more dense. Deal with it or move.
-
AuthorPosts
