[NotCranky]

They LOVE you for NOT trying anything!”)
Wisdom from the mouth of babes.
The thing many women are most afraid of is that a man is the “dog” kind or worse. They tend to get tired of that pretty fast…or at least they want to have a good sense of what is coming, especailly that they are not going to get roughed up in anyway…..so you must conceal that you are a dog(none of us are dangerous,I hope) with nonchalants, be you having good intentions or bad, at least long enough for the defenses to lay down and any potential spark in her comes alive.Life, and a set of slashed tires, taught rustico, that after the guise of, I am good but not needy has worked, be honest about the intentions part.

Disclaimer:This all no longer pertains to Rustico.

[NotCranky]

“Just to get serious for a minute, I think these neighborhoods are likely, through lurches and many ups-and-downs, to end up on the improved side of the scale.”

That is what I said in 91 when I bought my first house there. I previously rented “north of Adams” and in Talmage and bought “south of Adams”.I bought my second house a few blocks down the street. I got really excited when the 39th Street Park went in, then I had children and wanted to move, the irony. When we have long errand days we still take them the Kensington park or 39th St. Park for a break. Anyway it had gotten progressively better. That is actually a huge understatement. The location, geographically speaking, has always been incredible.
I think development of higher density bldgs. will be a continuing trend along the EL Cajon corridor. The area is zoned “commercial in transition” through the first block or two of houses of El Cajon. I have seen a master plan for the area between Adams elementary and the 15 along Madison. There are supposed to be many more eminent domain project and even residential redevelopment. I remember mostly “row homes” for the residences. Perhaps you would like to look into planning and see what might be coming around other streets. I was always hoping for a Trader Joe’s myself.

When ever we joke about it or when other posters are derisive about Normal Heights and North Park I can imagine people saying. Hey what about Kensington, N. Mountain View, Panorama, Redwood, South Park ect. To me those areas have always been just fine. With the exception of some spill over criminal element. Lack of schools many people would consider suitable for their kids is and issue. I notice you didn’t include growing families in you demographic description.

“Ironically, this process has been set on its ear by the horrid roll-up of prices, which priced out the natural buyers (first timers, married with baby, single urbanites, young childless couples, hipsters, gays…)”

I am not sure what you mean by set on its ear. The area is still basking in a renaissance glow from my perspective,even if gothic seems to be more the trend.
I think the demographics you mention make up the buyers actually participating in the run up along with flippers . There are some stuck flippers there but many of them sold to these very people you describe.

What you probably want to hope for is that the natural demographic is not rentals to the extent that it was before. It is inevitable that there will be more renters than there are currently.Maybe the renters will be better neighbors on average than they were 8-10 years ago. I tend to think you will be correct about the quality of the neighborhoods in the long run.

I like to think(hope) the negative impacts of the downturn will be mitigated by the improvements that have occurred in the last decade. I will believe that prices will get hit pretty hard until I see proof otherwise. I think in the frenzy the quality of the housing stock kind of got overlooked in some cases. I am not a housing snob,many of my friend live in those hosues and my first house was one, but it is true that many of those houses are basically shacks. I also am aware that the money is in the dirt but many lots are tiny and the appreciation was absurd regardless of what the value is applied to.

What caught me off guard was that houses there and even in 92113 and 92114 approximated the prices the prices of much newer(60’s&70’s), bigger and better houses in Poway.Part of this was because more educated and wealthier people moved in during the gentrifiaction wave.I think much of this is also because of who was targeted for and/or would take crazy loans and I will leave that at that.

[NotCranky]

“Just to get serious for a minute, I think these neighborhoods are likely, through lurches and many ups-and-downs, to end up on the improved side of the scale.”

That is what I said in 91 when I bought my first house there. I previously rented “north of Adams” and in Talmage and bought “south of Adams”.I bought my second house a few blocks down the street. I got really excited when the 39th Street Park went in, then I had children and wanted to move, the irony. When we have long errand days we still take them the Kensington park or 39th St. Park for a break. Anyway it had gotten progressively better. That is actually a huge understatement. The location, geographically speaking, has always been incredible.
I think development of higher density bldgs. will be a continuing trend along the EL Cajon corridor. The area is zoned “commercial in transition” through the first block or two of houses of El Cajon. I have seen a master plan for the area between Adams elementary and the 15 along Madison. There are supposed to be many more eminent domain project and even residential redevelopment. I remember mostly “row homes” for the residences. Perhaps you would like to look into planning and see what might be coming around other streets. I was always hoping for a Trader Joe’s myself.

When ever we joke about it or when other posters are derisive about Normal Heights and North Park I can imagine people saying. Hey what about Kensington, N. Mountain View, Panorama, Redwood, South Park ect. To me those areas have always been just fine. With the exception of some spill over criminal element. Lack of schools many people would consider suitable for their kids is and issue. I notice you didn’t include growing families in you demographic description.

“Ironically, this process has been set on its ear by the horrid roll-up of prices, which priced out the natural buyers (first timers, married with baby, single urbanites, young childless couples, hipsters, gays…)”

I am not sure what you mean by set on its ear. The area is still basking in a renaissance glow from my perspective,even if gothic seems to be more the trend.
I think the demographics you mention make up the buyers actually participating in the run up along with flippers . There are some stuck flippers there but many of them sold to these very people you describe.

What you probably want to hope for is that the natural demographic is not rentals to the extent that it was before. It is inevitable that there will be more renters than there are currently.Maybe the renters will be better neighbors on average than they were 8-10 years ago. I tend to think you will be correct about the quality of the neighborhoods in the long run.

I like to think(hope) the negative impacts of the downturn will be mitigated by the improvements that have occurred in the last decade. I will believe that prices will get hit pretty hard until I see proof otherwise. I think in the frenzy the quality of the housing stock kind of got overlooked in some cases. I am not a housing snob,many of my friend live in those hosues and my first house was one, but it is true that many of those houses are basically shacks. I also am aware that the money is in the dirt but many lots are tiny and the appreciation was absurd regardless of what the value is applied to.

What caught me off guard was that houses there and even in 92113 and 92114 approximated the prices the prices of much newer(60’s&70’s), bigger and better houses in Poway.Part of this was because more educated and wealthier people moved in during the gentrifiaction wave.I think much of this is also because of who was targeted for and/or would take crazy loans and I will leave that at that.

[NotCranky]

“Just to get serious for a minute, I think these neighborhoods are likely, through lurches and many ups-and-downs, to end up on the improved side of the scale.”

That is what I said in 91 when I bought my first house there. I previously rented “north of Adams” and in Talmage and bought “south of Adams”.I bought my second house a few blocks down the street. I got really excited when the 39th Street Park went in, then I had children and wanted to move, the irony. When we have long errand days we still take them the Kensington park or 39th St. Park for a break. Anyway it had gotten progressively better. That is actually a huge understatement. The location, geographically speaking, has always been incredible.
I think development of higher density bldgs. will be a continuing trend along the EL Cajon corridor. The area is zoned “commercial in transition” through the first block or two of houses of El Cajon. I have seen a master plan for the area between Adams elementary and the 15 along Madison. There are supposed to be many more eminent domain project and even residential redevelopment. I remember mostly “row homes” for the residences. Perhaps you would like to look into planning and see what might be coming around other streets. I was always hoping for a Trader Joe’s myself.

When ever we joke about it or when other posters are derisive about Normal Heights and North Park I can imagine people saying. Hey what about Kensington, N. Mountain View, Panorama, Redwood, South Park ect. To me those areas have always been just fine. With the exception of some spill over criminal element. Lack of schools many people would consider suitable for their kids is and issue. I notice you didn’t include growing families in you demographic description.

“Ironically, this process has been set on its ear by the horrid roll-up of prices, which priced out the natural buyers (first timers, married with baby, single urbanites, young childless couples, hipsters, gays…)”

I am not sure what you mean by set on its ear. The area is still basking in a renaissance glow from my perspective,even if gothic seems to be more the trend.
I think the demographics you mention make up the buyers actually participating in the run up along with flippers . There are some stuck flippers there but many of them sold to these very people you describe.

What you probably want to hope for is that the natural demographic is not rentals to the extent that it was before. It is inevitable that there will be more renters than there are currently.Maybe the renters will be better neighbors on average than they were 8-10 years ago. I tend to think you will be correct about the quality of the neighborhoods in the long run.

I like to think(hope) the negative impacts of the downturn will be mitigated by the improvements that have occurred in the last decade. I will believe that prices will get hit pretty hard until I see proof otherwise. I think in the frenzy the quality of the housing stock kind of got overlooked in some cases. I am not a housing snob,many of my friend live in those hosues and my first house was one, but it is true that many of those houses are basically shacks. I also am aware that the money is in the dirt but many lots are tiny and the appreciation was absurd regardless of what the value is applied to.

What caught me off guard was that houses there and even in 92113 and 92114 approximated the prices the prices of much newer(60’s&70’s), bigger and better houses in Poway.Part of this was because more educated and wealthier people moved in during the gentrifiaction wave.I think much of this is also because of who was targeted for and/or would take crazy loans and I will leave that at that.

[NotCranky]

“Just to get serious for a minute, I think these neighborhoods are likely, through lurches and many ups-and-downs, to end up on the improved side of the scale.”

That is what I said in 91 when I bought my first house there. I previously rented “north of Adams” and in Talmage and bought “south of Adams”.I bought my second house a few blocks down the street. I got really excited when the 39th Street Park went in, then I had children and wanted to move, the irony. When we have long errand days we still take them the Kensington park or 39th St. Park for a break. Anyway it had gotten progressively better. That is actually a huge understatement. The location, geographically speaking, has always been incredible.
I think development of higher density bldgs. will be a continuing trend along the EL Cajon corridor. The area is zoned “commercial in transition” through the first block or two of houses of El Cajon. I have seen a master plan for the area between Adams elementary and the 15 along Madison. There are supposed to be many more eminent domain project and even residential redevelopment. I remember mostly “row homes” for the residences. Perhaps you would like to look into planning and see what might be coming around other streets. I was always hoping for a Trader Joe’s myself.

When ever we joke about it or when other posters are derisive about Normal Heights and North Park I can imagine people saying. Hey what about Kensington, N. Mountain View, Panorama, Redwood, South Park ect. To me those areas have always been just fine. With the exception of some spill over criminal element. Lack of schools many people would consider suitable for their kids is and issue. I notice you didn’t include growing families in you demographic description.

“Ironically, this process has been set on its ear by the horrid roll-up of prices, which priced out the natural buyers (first timers, married with baby, single urbanites, young childless couples, hipsters, gays…)”

I am not sure what you mean by set on its ear. The area is still basking in a renaissance glow from my perspective,even if gothic seems to be more the trend.
I think the demographics you mention make up the buyers actually participating in the run up along with flippers . There are some stuck flippers there but many of them sold to these very people you describe.

What you probably want to hope for is that the natural demographic is not rentals to the extent that it was before. It is inevitable that there will be more renters than there are currently.Maybe the renters will be better neighbors on average than they were 8-10 years ago. I tend to think you will be correct about the quality of the neighborhoods in the long run.

I like to think(hope) the negative impacts of the downturn will be mitigated by the improvements that have occurred in the last decade. I will believe that prices will get hit pretty hard until I see proof otherwise. I think in the frenzy the quality of the housing stock kind of got overlooked in some cases. I am not a housing snob,many of my friend live in those hosues and my first house was one, but it is true that many of those houses are basically shacks. I also am aware that the money is in the dirt but many lots are tiny and the appreciation was absurd regardless of what the value is applied to.

What caught me off guard was that houses there and even in 92113 and 92114 approximated the prices the prices of much newer(60’s&70’s), bigger and better houses in Poway.Part of this was because more educated and wealthier people moved in during the gentrifiaction wave.I think much of this is also because of who was targeted for and/or would take crazy loans and I will leave that at that.

[NotCranky]

“Just to get serious for a minute, I think these neighborhoods are likely, through lurches and many ups-and-downs, to end up on the improved side of the scale.”

That is what I said in 91 when I bought my first house there. I previously rented “north of Adams” and in Talmage and bought “south of Adams”.I bought my second house a few blocks down the street. I got really excited when the 39th Street Park went in, then I had children and wanted to move, the irony. When we have long errand days we still take them the Kensington park or 39th St. Park for a break. Anyway it had gotten progressively better. That is actually a huge understatement. The location, geographically speaking, has always been incredible.
I think development of higher density bldgs. will be a continuing trend along the EL Cajon corridor. The area is zoned “commercial in transition” through the first block or two of houses of El Cajon. I have seen a master plan for the area between Adams elementary and the 15 along Madison. There are supposed to be many more eminent domain project and even residential redevelopment. I remember mostly “row homes” for the residences. Perhaps you would like to look into planning and see what might be coming around other streets. I was always hoping for a Trader Joe’s myself.

When ever we joke about it or when other posters are derisive about Normal Heights and North Park I can imagine people saying. Hey what about Kensington, N. Mountain View, Panorama, Redwood, South Park ect. To me those areas have always been just fine. With the exception of some spill over criminal element. Lack of schools many people would consider suitable for their kids is and issue. I notice you didn’t include growing families in you demographic description.

“Ironically, this process has been set on its ear by the horrid roll-up of prices, which priced out the natural buyers (first timers, married with baby, single urbanites, young childless couples, hipsters, gays…)”

I am not sure what you mean by set on its ear. The area is still basking in a renaissance glow from my perspective,even if gothic seems to be more the trend.
I think the demographics you mention make up the buyers actually participating in the run up along with flippers . There are some stuck flippers there but many of them sold to these very people you describe.

What you probably want to hope for is that the natural demographic is not rentals to the extent that it was before. It is inevitable that there will be more renters than there are currently.Maybe the renters will be better neighbors on average than they were 8-10 years ago. I tend to think you will be correct about the quality of the neighborhoods in the long run.

I like to think(hope) the negative impacts of the downturn will be mitigated by the improvements that have occurred in the last decade. I will believe that prices will get hit pretty hard until I see proof otherwise. I think in the frenzy the quality of the housing stock kind of got overlooked in some cases. I am not a housing snob,many of my friend live in those hosues and my first house was one, but it is true that many of those houses are basically shacks. I also am aware that the money is in the dirt but many lots are tiny and the appreciation was absurd regardless of what the value is applied to.

What caught me off guard was that houses there and even in 92113 and 92114 approximated the prices the prices of much newer(60’s&70’s), bigger and better houses in Poway.Part of this was because more educated and wealthier people moved in during the gentrifiaction wave.I think much of this is also because of who was targeted for and/or would take crazy loans and I will leave that at that.

[NotCranky]

I actually figure I could fork out the 25 bucks since I am neither “oriental” or a student.

Don’t worry drunkle when it comes to real estate, laziness is on your side.

[NotCranky]

I actually figure I could fork out the 25 bucks since I am neither “oriental” or a student.

Don’t worry drunkle when it comes to real estate, laziness is on your side.

[NotCranky]

I actually figure I could fork out the 25 bucks since I am neither “oriental” or a student.

Don’t worry drunkle when it comes to real estate, laziness is on your side.

[NotCranky]

I actually figure I could fork out the 25 bucks since I am neither “oriental” or a student.

Don’t worry drunkle when it comes to real estate, laziness is on your side.

[NotCranky]

I actually figure I could fork out the 25 bucks since I am neither “oriental” or a student.

Don’t worry drunkle when it comes to real estate, laziness is on your side.

[NotCranky]

I’m now wondering if chivalry is dead…;)

Yes that is a joke. However this thread begs the question. Was the cultural revolution known as feminism, not supposed to have some effect on masculinism? I agree with the evolutionists on this thread but not to the extent to say cultural mores don’t change or even need to be adapted for couples to thrive. Perhaps that should say individual takes on cultural mores might need to adapt,not superficially. Speaking of books, some suggested reading, Warren Farrell and Shere Hite just to look at different views on the same topic. I think it was Warren Farrell,that was a long time ago. I’ll go check and fix it if it is wrong.

[NotCranky]

I’m now wondering if chivalry is dead…;)

Yes that is a joke. However this thread begs the question. Was the cultural revolution known as feminism, not supposed to have some effect on masculinism? I agree with the evolutionists on this thread but not to the extent to say cultural mores don’t change or even need to be adapted for couples to thrive. Perhaps that should say individual takes on cultural mores might need to adapt,not superficially. Speaking of books, some suggested reading, Warren Farrell and Shere Hite just to look at different views on the same topic. I think it was Warren Farrell,that was a long time ago. I’ll go check and fix it if it is wrong.

[NotCranky]

I’m now wondering if chivalry is dead…;)

Yes that is a joke. However this thread begs the question. Was the cultural revolution known as feminism, not supposed to have some effect on masculinism? I agree with the evolutionists on this thread but not to the extent to say cultural mores don’t change or even need to be adapted for couples to thrive. Perhaps that should say individual takes on cultural mores might need to adapt,not superficially. Speaking of books, some suggested reading, Warren Farrell and Shere Hite just to look at different views on the same topic. I think it was Warren Farrell,that was a long time ago. I’ll go check and fix it if it is wrong.

[NotCranky]

I’m now wondering if chivalry is dead…;)

Yes that is a joke. However this thread begs the question. Was the cultural revolution known as feminism, not supposed to have some effect on masculinism? I agree with the evolutionists on this thread but not to the extent to say cultural mores don’t change or even need to be adapted for couples to thrive. Perhaps that should say individual takes on cultural mores might need to adapt,not superficially. Speaking of books, some suggested reading, Warren Farrell and Shere Hite just to look at different views on the same topic. I think it was Warren Farrell,that was a long time ago. I’ll go check and fix it if it is wrong.

[Author]

Posts