[bearishgurl]

[quote=flyer]BG, I admire the fact that you are doing everything you can in your area to at least try to “curb” the growth–much as the citizens of CV did with One Paseo.

With so little buildable land left, builders are definitely desperate these days, and are willing to exploit any scrap of dirt they can find–especially in San Diego.

Places like Playa Vista are great developments, and have a lot to offer. Yet, although friends who are long-time residents of Marina Del Rey, Manhattan Beach, etc., like having the amenities they offer nearby, they are not looking forward to the added congestion they will bring to the area–especially the beaches–which are already a zoo. I’ll take our beautiful and peaceful Del Mar and Torrey Pines beaches any day compared to that.

Like you, we don’t live near any of these concrete jungles, so, continue your valiant efforts, but also try to enjoy the fact that these developments bring added resources–just far enough away–so that we too can enjoy what they have to offer without sacrificing our way of life.[/quote]flyer, I suspect the real problem with SD North City communities is that their City Council clowns/reps in the past proposed a “City of Villages” theme 10-15 years ago among communities along City’s proposed “transportation corridors.” At this time, a “general plan” was drafted by City and adopted by the City Council and the affected residents really didn’t understand the long-term ramifications of what was being proposed for their communities at that time. Hence, there was a lack of citizen involvement whilst the Council clowns just bulldozed their “General Plan” through the paces.

For example, it was tough for One Paseo opponents (10-15 years after the fact) to recently “fight city hall” on a “general plan” for their area which was adopted in an era when CV had 1/3 to 1/2 the housing (and congestion) they now have. I imagine that a lot of recent opponents to One Paseo either were too young to know about the City’s proposed “General Plan” for their community or were asleep at the switch at the time it was proposed and adopted.

I’m glad to hear that a CV community group was able to get the One Paseo project significantly reduced in size but the fact that it will be built anyway with inadequate parking for its size is still going to create a lot more traffic in an area which is already one of SD’s most notoriously congested communities. The adoption of the One Paseo project speaks volumes as to the non-effectiveness of CV’s lame-duck Councilperson and its community group’s subsequent lack of power in opposing City and Big D. The whole debacle was akin to trying mightily to close a heavy barn door long after the horses ran off, IMO.

[bearishgurl]

H@ll, I’m still waiting with baited breath to see if that awesome “master-planned community” in armpit Corona (which Pigg shoveler has recently touted here “THE place to be” new-construction project in So-Cal) will actually be completed as the developers have promised their buyers who are already moved in.

Weren’t there two holdout dairy farms “in the way” which these developers “built around,” hoping for the best at a later date??

LOLOL ….

[bearishgurl]

svelte seems to be using an article comparing the SF housing market to the rest of the housing market in CA for his argument that old bldgs with 2-4 flats in them can be torn down to build high-rise “affordable” condos or apts in their place (or create more “competition” for housing, ostensibly making the City more “affordable” to live in). This comparison is flawed because SF is apples to oranges to the rest of the housing market in CA. SF is an animal unto itself.

First of all, a developer who had visions of building condos/apts in SF would need to successfully acquire 2-4 adjacent lots to have enough room to build a higher rise condo or apt complex and would have both the City and County of SF to deal with in doing so. A good portion of these buildings are rent-controlled and have been for ~35 years. Regardless of the actual condition of these buildings today, a builder today wouldn’t likely be able to acquire a building in any condition for less than $1M per 5-7K sf parcel. Therefore, they would likely already have an outlay of $3M+ in just the land purchase (sans any demo and permit fees) before even beginning to start the eviction process on the building’s tenants. This is also entirely assuming the developer is successful in purchasing enough adjacent lots for their proposed project AND that longtime residents in that district (residing within 300 feet of the proposed project) don’t successfully fight their evictions and keep the developer’s permits in suspense for years and are successful themselves in getting the developer’s project scrapped, which is a distinct possibility. Longtime homeowners and LL’s in SF aren’t going anywhere. Many SF LL’s live in their own buildings, next door to their (rent-controlled) buildings or down the street in another building they own. Their property assessments are ultra low, due to this group heavily benefiting from Props 13, 58 and 193. As such, they can well-afford to minimally maintain their propertie(s) for habitability and keep them rent-controlled into oblivion. Many (most?) SF tenants have been occupying the same rent-controlled unit for decades.

If a luxury or even mid-grade high or low-rise apt bldg in SF IS successfully completed, it does absolutely nothing for the city’s “affordability crisis.” In fact, it likely displaced dozens of longtime tenants from their rent-controlled units and created “luxury” condos or very high-rent apts for the “nouveau-riche” newbies to move into SF and scoop up.

SF is the worst possible example svelte could have used to bolster an argument here that infill in the choicest CA urban areas could be razed and rebuilt to create more units and thus more “affordability” (if that is actually what he was trying to convey here), IMO. Because of the exorbitant land cost in SF, the “numbers” don’t pencil out to create “affordable units” today, although I did read somewhere that an “affordable housing commission” of some sort purchased up adjacent parcels many years ago in the Mission District and was looking for a developer to create “affordable” units on them. However, this situation is a Big Outlier in SF.

Again, CA owes newcomers nothing. Especially brand new housing in a coastal county. Newcomers can live in what is on offer in CA or go elsewhere. CA doesn’t need any more people. Nearly all CA counties (except the most rural) have had a larger population than they could properly service for at least the past 25 years.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi]. . . I’ve gotten to a point where it’s hard to think without a smart device.[/quote]That’s not a good sign, FIH. Why don’t you start going to the gym 3x per week to take spinning, lift weights and swim laps with other humans. You don’t need your smartphone for that and will leave 2.5 hrs later feeling like a new, refreshed person.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi]. . . When are you moving to your small town retirement home? I wish people like you would move away so we can have more bright lights, big city. . . [/quote]

FIH, you don’t have to worry about me exercising any of my NIMBY muscles around here anytime soon. I can go on living my life, never having to lift a finger in that direction because I/we have a very vocal senior-citizen cohort of neighbors who have a lot of time on their hands to work their local political contacts higher up the food chain and line up to testify at city council meetings, etc. Several years ago, this group was able to successfully get the city to veto Big D‘s plans for an 8-12 story mixed use bldg in dtn Chula Vista with a basement pkg garage, offices on the ground floor and condos on the other floors.

IIRC, at first, this group got the proposed bldg knocked down from 12 stories to 8 stories and then were eventually successful in convincing the city to run the developer out of town on their ears.

This 4+ AC lot is still sitting empty today, surrounded by chain link.

Sorry to hear the fine citizens residing in the SD North City area aren’t as effective and politically savvy as us “southerners.” The truth is, no one can erase a longtime residents’ average of 50 years residency in the city NOR can they erase WHO these longtime residents have met (and courted) along the way. It is what it is :=0

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi]. . . These are some pictures of Playa Vista, in LA. We can use more of that in San Diego. UTC/Mira Mesa are ideal for that.
https://www.google.com/search?q=naples+florida&biw=1344&bih=686&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwi8-qK5tqDLAhVCSSYKHQ3gAbgQ_AUIBygC#tbm=isch&q=playa+vista+los+angeles
[/quote]

FIH, some of those pics remind me of Fashion Valley SD, which was built on a “Type A” floodplain up against protected wetlands further west and also out east towards Qualcomm Stadium. High grade and luxury condo complexes followed soon after on the north side of Friars Rd.

I’m certain these developers fought LA County and environmental lawsuits for YEARS, even DECADES before any ground broke on this massive project. I noticed quite a bit of the wetlands have been preserved and most of the mid-rise shops and condos are situated not too far above ground level. I wonder what materials were used in a “glass breakwater” project in attempt to protect the buildings from flooding in a big rain. Big rock? Well, that didn’t do much to protect the Fashion Valley area, especially between the mall and I-8 service road. I don’t know how old this project is but time will tell if portions of it are intermittently underwater after several days of rain.

It appears that most of the land Playa Vista sits on (and surrounds) was never developed until recently for good reason.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi] . . . At this point, it doesn’t matter what Trump says. He just needs to sound badass and not wimpy and his supporters will turn out. . . . [/quote]Well, I noticed how red and puffy his eyes were over the weekend and then last night I read reports (not sure how accurate they were) that Trump had been getting only 1.5 to 3 hrs of sleep per night while on the campaign trail. That’s hard to understand for me cuz he has a luxurious bdrm on his plane and can just take off his jacket and rest between gigs.

I suspect he’s been having too many long up-to-the-minute powows with his peeps (even regularly at 2 am) regarding what the airwaves have been saying about his campaign in the last 24 hours. He would do well to just ignore all this crap and plow on and let his peeps stategize over that sh!t. That’s what they earn the “big bucks” for so let them do their jobs.

Trump should devote no more than 10-15 minutes to powows (one before starting the day and one after ending the day) getting just the “bullet points” which took place over the airwaves in the last day (which he may be called upon by the MSM to respond to) and hear his peeps’ stategy on how they feel he should respond, even though he may have his own opinion and is typically pretty quick on the draw.

It’s way too soon in the election cycle for Trump to be suddenly hospitalized for “exhaustion” … or worse. The party is just getting started and this is one of the most interesting general election seasons most of us old boomers have witnessed in our lifetimes :=0

[bearishgurl]

Starting tomorrow, the Donald needs to take 24-48 hours off and sleep. He’s been bleary-eyed for several days and lack of sleep is affecting his short and long-term memory and ability to answer questions without getting cranky. He’s hasn’t been near as sharp as he should have been in the last few days.

I wouldn’t want to have to show up in 3-6 cities in one day, pressed and coiffed, whether I was on a “campaign trail” or not. Private jet or no, Trump’s grueling life on the campaign trail is starting to get the better of him about now.

Hillary seems to be doing much better (health-wise) than Trump is right now so she is probably using her “downtime” to sleep instead of paying too much attention what the MSM is currently spouting off about her.

When political candidates have their own team of “social media experts” and “spokespeople” while on the campaign trail (espcially a few days before major primaries take place), they’re not supposed to be doing anything but sleeping, bathing, grooming and showing up in each locale bushy-tailed and bright-eyed enough to be able to walk it and talk it all day. Trump’s usually sharp self has been falling down on the job a bit lately, imho.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN][quote=bearishgurl]AN, you’re our “resident expert” on MM. Do you know of any Historic homes there, view homes on canyons bluffs and/or cliffs, homes designed by local architects, custom homes, yards with 80+ year-old trees, homes with acreages, etc. I mean …. besides being on ’70’s thru ’90’s tracts, are there really any other “redeeming qualities” (besides proximity to job centers) to the single family homes there?

Be honest.[/quote]I hate those old ass homes. If those are my only choice, I’d buy it and tear it down.

Yes, there are canyon view homes with some on 1/3-1/2 acre lots. There is even a few $1.8M+ custom homes designed by some architect. I hate those homes and think they ugly as hell.

As for other redeeming qualities, how about being 2-8 miles from the coast, being a few miles from UCSD, being 15-20 minutes from almost anywhere worth going to in SD county, have good schools, etc.

But I’m sure you don’t really care about getting real answers.[/quote]AN, agree with everything you’re saying and if you’re referring to the ugly box homes on Lopez Canyon as “architect-designed” homes, I know about those albatrosses but didn’t realize they were actually in MM. Can you post a link here of one of MM’s canyon-view homes with a 1/3 to 1/2 AC lot? It doesn’t have to be for sale. I was unaware that that kind of tract existed in MM.

If you think about it, other “working class” areas I mentioned in SD County such as Lemon Grove, Nat’l City and Chula Vista have ALL of those types of homes I mentioned above and all three cities are 5-20 mins from almost everywhere in SD metro, south and east county. However, Chula Vista is the only city out of three which has just as good or better public schools as MM. NC and CV are situated on SD Bay and Lemon Grove is about 8 miles inland. I agree that proximity of UCSD is a huge benefit for MM residents.

I just like more “room” in my environment (street not filled up with parked cars, etc) and I like to be able to get out and do errands locally without fighting a lot of traffic. I prefer the charm of “vintage” homes with large yards, good setback, space between homes and big trees over miles of matching tract homes but of course, that is a personal preference. I’m happy for longtime residents of MM that they are now seeing property appreciation like they’ve never seen before but realize that it is a very well-established community (SFR tracts) and not very transient and so longtime owners there aren’t very likely to list their homes. As such, all this recent appreciation in MM is just a “paper profit” for the vast majority of longtime residents. Hence, we consistently see poor levels of inventory there. And I think the flippers are pretty much done in MM as well as it doesn’t make sense to buy a “fixer” at today’s prices and then try to flip it. Even though when MM was first developed, it was an outlier, it is now very centrally located and its SFR tracts are stable. I agree that MM has a lot going for it.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN]Not only that, but I think this is definitely one of her best gem in awhile:

[quote=bearishgurl]Again, MM is nothing special but it just so happened to be already situated in the “right place” when high tech and biotech employers decided to set up shop in SD.[/quote][/quote]

AN, you’re our “resident expert” on MM. Do you know of any Historic homes there, view homes built on canyon bluffs and/or cliffs, homes designed by local architects, custom homes, yards with 80+ year-old trees, homes with acreages, etc. I mean …. besides being on ’70’s thru ’90’s tracts, are there really any other “redeeming qualities” (besides proximity to job centers) to the single family homes there?

Be honest.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flu]I stopped getting weekly emails from redfin about Mira Mesa about two weeks ago. I thought there was something wrong with my email, so I checked out my redfin account.

Then I realized why.

I had my slumlord filter set to properties with asking prices less than $200k.

Well, there isn’t any anymore.

My, has times changed.

https://www.redfin.com/zipcode/92126
[/quote]Uh, well, back to the OP . . . flu, as a LL in Mira Mesa, were you referring to yourself as a “slumlord” or to everyone who already has or is looking for investment properties in MM)?

The OP makes the reader kinda wonder what flu really thinks of being a landlord there, lol ….

[bearishgurl]

[quote=spdrun]

Don’t be stuck in the 1970s (based on your housing preference). The world is moving on without you. The best things were not invented in the past.

As long as it’s a dry roof over your head in a convenient (for you) location, who gives a flying motherflip when it was built? Or whether it has gold plated fixtures or marble countertops.[/quote]Good point, spd. Personally, I don’t care about any of that stuff. If I’m not planning on listing the property soon, it can all be fixed (or replaced, if necessary) when I get around to it.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Less than 5k miles in CA. What do you see really? You’re missing out a lot.[/quote]No, 5K miles is for SoCal only. If I go to NorCal, that is considered an “open road” trip as Norcal is actually more than twice as far as SD to the AZ line. That is, if you can call the I-5 parking lot between Bakersfield and about Tracy the “open road,” lol ….

[quote=FlyerInHi] I go all over the place. My San Diego commute is 27 miles one way. I stop at Costco, Ikea all the time. I stop in riverside, San Bernardino to look at listings. I’m in LA every other week. etc…. Always on the move.

Just drive around Playa Vista next time in LA. You will see that people don’t live like in the 70s anymore and they don’t give a shit about avocado groves or 1/2 acre lots or anything like that.[/quote]OK, I’ll take a look at it. I don’t drive much down here because even if I have the freedom from work and my chores to go to LA for the day or to spend one night up there, I still have to get my pets taken care of while I’m gone which is a big deal if I can’t take my dog with me. And I also have landscaping and trash day responsibilities. I’m not as mobile as you and don’t have a “lock and go” lifestyle, like you do :=0

Don’t you have “big box” stores in LV to shop at, FIH?

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi]BG, based on the mileage you posted before, you hardly go anywhere. Me, on the other hand, I easily put on 30,000 miles (I don’t even pay attention anymore) per year all over So Cal to Vegas.

Don’t be stuck in the 1970s (based on your housing preference). The world is moving on without you. The best things were not invented in the past.[/quote]I put on about 13K miles per year but less than 5K of that is in SoCal. Approx 8K of it is on the open road.

Yeah, those frequent back and forth trips from LV to SD and vice versa really add up your annual mileage. And LV is a very large city to traverse now (if you leave your stomping grounds and get out around there). It’s a good thing for you that gas is so cheap right now.

I don’t think I’ve ever put more than 13K annual miles on my car, even when I was using it everyday for work. But for many years, the road trip vehicle we used was not the same vehicle as our work vehicles.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=bearishgurl] not everyone wants to live tightly packed like MM has become with all its *new* giant apt complexes. Again, MM is nothing special but it just so happened to be already situated in the “right place” when high tech and biotech employers decided to set up shop in SD. Good for them.[/quote]

You can say Silicon Valley was “nothing special” decades ago. One my friends bought a house in San Jose for $120,000 in the early 90s, same as San Diego back in the day, haha…[/quote]

I have “extended family” who bought an architect-designed 2600+ sf home situated on a little more than 1 AC with a wide staircase, floor to ceiling rock FP and curved-glass windows in the LR overlooking all of SJ for $66K in 1965 (a LOT of $$ back then). Of course, when we used to visit them 2x year on holidays, they were overlooking mostly avocado groves in the early years, NOT the huge urban sprawl which now comprises the floor of SJ.

My kids tell me that the owners have since moved into an over-55 complex and “sold” the property to their only child and her spouse. Of course, it now needs a lot of rehab which they are in the process of doing.

I remember when their daughter was born. As a borderline-millenial, she is very, very fortunate to be able to “purchase” this property from her parents as it is a one-of-a-kind jewel, regardless of its current condition. They will also get to take advantage of her parents’ tax assessment. Good for them!

[Author]

Posts