Discussion Has Focused on Details Rather Than Core Philosophical Issues: The Davis Enterprise‘s editorial this morning argues that there has been enough talk and debate and that it is time to build on Cannery and “turn an old eyesore into a new neighborhood.”
“The Hunt-Wesson tomato plant shut down in October 1999. That’s right, Davis has been dealing with this crumbling, derelict eyesore on the northern end of town for more than 14 years,” the Enterprise writes, and they note all of the changes that have occurred since 1999.
“But the landowner, ConAgra, kept pushing its Cannery project, knowing that Davis needs more housing and that it held the largest remaining parcel inside city limits,” the paper writes. They add, “To be sure, the city has driven a hard bargain. Our leaders insisted on unprecedented sustainability, diverse housing and accessibility.”
The editorial goes down the list of the debates and the compromises that have emerged. They write: “Senior groups wanted somewhere to age in place. Bicycle enthusiasts sought integration with the existing two-wheeled infrastructure. And, to its credit, ConAgra and its contractor, The New Home Company, stepped up. The project will include detached homes, lofts, bungalows and flats. Under an agreement with the group Choices for Healthy Aging, single-story detached homes will be an option in three of the project’s neighborhoods.”
They note about the “most contentious issue,” which they call “transportation” as opposed to “connectivity,” “the builders are pledging $11 million in improvements along Covell Boulevard. The Covell-J Street intersection, the main entry point to the area, will get a facelift, and two grade-separated crossings will allow bicycle access across Covell.”
But something sticks out here in this discussion – is connectivity really the most contentious issue?
“The truth is that Davis needs this project,” the paper continues. “Its 547 units would go a long way toward satisfying Davis’ fair-share housing requirements (we need to build 1,000 units by 2021). Our growth-challenged school district could definitely use the extra kids who will be growing up there, and those folks who work in Davis but find it too expensive to live here will have more options.”
That is where it strikes the observant reader – is the Enterprise’s contention really the truth? We have had discussions in the last few months on peripheral issues and details, but not the core issue – do we need 547 units of housing?
“The truth” here is merely the opinion of the Davis Enterprise. Some may agree, some may disagree. No one holds the providence over the truth here. It is not black and white, but merely the shades of gray that we will argue over.
Are those units really going to give people, for whom Davis has become too expensive, a chance to buy a home? How many students is the development going to add and will that really help or just be a temporary bump in student population?
And the most interesting question was never even addressed by the Enterprise – assuming the project gets three votes, which after all of the compromises looks almost assured, will citizens or competing developers be looking to put this on the ballot?
For most of this week people have been asking that question and I have been wondering exactly what an election would attempt to entail that has not been captured by the council discussion.
There is a sizable city population that does not believe we need any more homes. They do not believe that we have a housing requirement; they believe that such requirements are, at most, paper tigers and we might be able to utilize housing from West Village, from the expansion of ADUs and perhaps some future infill projects to meet housing needs (2021, after all, is a long time from now).
Maybe those people who hold those views are wrong, but writing their viewpoints off has proven disastrous for developers in recent years.
I hear a lot of talk about representative democracy, but little talk about how much the council actually represents the viewpoints of the public. After all, in 2005, there was a 4-1 vote to put Covell Village to a Measure J vote. That project lost 60-40. In other words, 80% of the councilmembers supported something that only 40 percent of the population supported.
In 2009, 3 councilmembers voted to put Wildhorse Ranch on the ballot and it lost 75-25. That means that 75 percent of the councilmembers supported something that only 25 percent of the population supported.
As we noted yesterday, one of the most intriguing questions is what role the Covell Village developers plan to play in all of this.
So, for all of the talk that there has been enough talk and debate, it seems that at least in the last several months, most of the discussion has not been on the core issues, but the side issues.
If we want the core issues in Davis discussed, the matter will have to go on the ballot.
The council shows absolutely no inclination to do so. So if we want this debate, someone else is going to have to put it on the ballot.
The Davis Enterprise concludes their editorial with, “On Tuesday, the City Council is expected to vote on the zoning change that will allow the project to go forward, as well as the final development agreement that provides all the benefits listed above. For the good of the community, the council must end the 14 long years of debate and start Davis toward a greener, brighter future.”
The problem is that not everyone agrees on what the greener, brighter future should look like and, despite declarations to the contrary, that debate has not even really begun.
So yes, Tuesday will be an important vote, but the more important question will not be answered on Tuesday night, but rather in the days and weeks following the vote. Opponents will not have much time and, with Thanksgiving coming up, their efforts will be difficult – if they even attempt to make them.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Paper’s “Believe?”
the editorial board of a newspaper believes and represents the opinion of the newspaper, so yes. do you ever make a most that is not completely obnoxious and pointless?
I think The Enterprise has a hidden agenda. Throw them in with the cyclists and seniors. They want more porches for papers.
[quote]After all, in 2005, there was a 4-1 vote to put Covell Village to a Measure J vote. That project lost 60-40. In other words, 80% of the councilmembers supported something that only 40 percent of the population supported.[/quote]
[quote]In 2009, 3 councilmembers voted to put Wildhorse Ranch on the ballot and it lost 75-25. That means that 75 percent of the councilmembers supported something that only 25 percent of the population supported.[/quote]
Does putting it on the ballot automatically mean council supports something, or does it mean council supports the opportunity for people to vote on something.
[quote]Are those units really going to give people, for whom Davis has become too expensive, a chance to buy a home? [/quote]
I wonder about this too, how many of those homes are going to be affordable to young families, and how long will they stay that way. I don’t see this development significantly addressing this need, especially in the long run.
[quote]I think The Enterprise has a hidden agenda. Throw them in with the cyclists and seniors. They want more porches for papers.[/quote]
I think they see the oaks tree as raw material to print their papers on.
B. Nice
[i]”Does putting it on the ballot automatically mean council supports something, or does it mean council supports the opportunity for people to vote on something.”[/i]
Going, going, gone!!! B. Nice just knocked one out of the park into McCovey Cove.
[quote]I think The Enterprise has a hidden agenda. Throw them in with the cyclists and seniors. They want more porches for papers. [/quote]
It makes you wonder doesn’t it? I have to ask this question again, should council members who stand to benefit from more people coming to Davis for new housing because they or their family own a business be allowed to vote or should it be considered a conflict of interest?
The Enterprise making a plea for closure of discussion seems a very curious position for a newspaper to take.
If the Enterprise is in favor of the project, why not just say so instead of calling for “an end to discussion”.
Let’s look at what discussion and community input have resulted in so far:
1) Improvements favored by seniors
2) Improvements favored by the bicycling community
3) Improvements favored by those concerned with environmental concerns
4) The potential for improvements in preservation of at least some of the mature trees
5) Opportunities for small local builders
6) Near universal agreement at the last CC meeting from even those who such as myself who have not favored the project that the developer has been willing to listen to those with varying concerns and make honest efforts to mitigate where possible.
Does anyone believe that any of this would have occurred without vigorous discussion ?
So why would the Enterprise call for an arbitrary limit to conversation instead of simply stating
their preference ?
[quote] I have to ask this question again, should council members who stand to benefit from more people coming to Davis for new housing because they or their family own a business be allowed to vote or should it be considered a conflict of interest?[/quote]
Should council members who ride bikes and would stand to benefit from new biking infrastructure be allowed to vote or should that be considered a conflict of interest too?
[quote]Should council members who ride bikes and would stand to benefit from new biking infrastructure be allowed to vote or should that be considered a conflict of interest too? [/quote]
Comeon B. Nice, two totally different issues. I know you’re smarter than that.
not totally different issues. the benefit in the scenario you describe is an indirect benefit to a business. such benefits do not fall into the realm of recusal for a conflict of interest. the question you seem to be asking is whether a councilmember should be able to vote on anything that remotely benefits themselves personally. within the scope of that is the question that b.nice asked. in short, not totally different at all.
Not the same at all. A council member doesn’t personally benefit monetarily from bike paths or new roads unless of course their family owns a construction company. But if a council member owns a business, say like a restaurant or a bar, then bringing in new residents will most certainly add customers to their business.
you’re getting into the realm of silly here. what do you think the expected marginal increase in business for a councilmember based on a 557 unit project with a build out over the next five years? i bet it’s almost zero, certainly not enough to influence their decision.
[quote]i bet it’s almost zero, certainly not enough to influence their decision. [/quote]
What are we talking about here, 1500 new residents? If they visit an establishment let’s say three times a year you’re looking at 4500 new transactions/year. Not exactly chicken feed. Learn up.
sure that’s potential. but what’s the actual percentage of people who go to a given establishment? how many times have you gone to either one this year?
Many more than three times. I thought three times was a very conservative estimate.
me zero. i wonder if anyone has a formula.
B.Nice
[quote]I wonder about this too, how many of those homes are going to be affordable to young families, and how long will they stay that way. I don’t see this development significantly addressing this need, especially in the long run.[/quote]
A couple of threads ago, I had expressed the opinion that this development was unlikely to meet the needs of one of the demographics it is purported to be helping. Another poster said that it was very likely it would meet that need. So with the following information in mind, I will gain ask how many young teachers, or others with similarly compensated work are going to be able to afford these homes in the $ 500,000 range unless of course one makes the assumption that they are otherwise completely financially unencumbered with no student loans, no credit card debt, no automobile payments to make.
[quote]Average Teacher Salary in Davis Joint Unified School District (2013)
The average teacher salary in Davis Joint Unified School District is $50,974.
Grade LevelAverage10th percentile25th percentileMedian75th percentile90th percentile
Pre-school$27,227$19,240$21,851$25,866$30,773$35,080
Kindergarten$54,613$34,500$42,347$54,142$66,643$77,988
Elementary$56,783$35,741$41,254$55,742$69,985$82,523
Middle school$56,716$36,551$43,649$55,771$70,393$80,313
High school$59,531$39,376$45,612$57,241$72,551$85,698
[/quote]
Again, I simply do not believe that this project will not help those who actually need it. What it will do is allow more seniors to move out of the homes in which they have equity and will be able to sell at a handsome profit. It will help young professionals who have significantly larger incomes, such as doctors, dentists, perhaps engineers by providing a larger number of options. These may be worthy goals and may merit a positive vote on the project. However, just as with the issue of “innovation”, as one gentleman expressing his opinion at the last CC meeting said in paraphrase,
nice features are not the same as innovation. By adopting this project in its current form, we are passing up an opportunity for real innovation which could be a model across the United States.
I simply believe we could serve the needs and goals of our community better.
G.I. your stretching. It would make more sense for a council member who’s family owns a business to have recused themselves on the plastic bag ordinance, which has a direct effect on a business. Your logic, would leave few things for family members of business owners on council to vote on.
Oops, very sorry. Perhaps one of you more technologically savvy could post the above information in the graph form the I found it be googling teachers salaries in Davis, Ca.
Thanks.
[quote]G.I. your stretching. It would make more sense for a council member who’s family owns a business to have recused themselves on the plastic bag ordinance, which has a direct effect on a business.[/quote]
Did the plastic bag ban cost any council member money? If I remember right you claimed it wouldn’t cost business owners at all. But bringing in many new residents certainly will help any council member who is tied to a Davis business prosper.
[quote]But bringing in many new residents certainly will help any council member who is tied to a Davis business prosper.[/quote]
Not directly enough to warrant recusal.
you’re failing to distinguish between direct and indirect effects here. the law on recussal only focuses on direct impacts.
Will it provide opportunity for people with moderate incomes? I think about the guy who has kids and both he and his wife teach in the Davis schools. Perhaps it does provide opportunity for his family and some others of modest means since there will be a mixture of options in housing styles.
Sadly, the demands for all the bells and whistles cause prices to increase and lack of new supply does the same.
As they say the cure for high prices is high prices.
I also think all the voices that represent demand for different demographics demonstrates not only the demand for more housing of many types it also shows we need more housing not just at Cannery but throughout the community. More options for seniors, students, workers and families young and old. The Enterprise is right for once, after 15 years of doing nothing, it is time to move forward. The Cannery, a project that has been fully vetted, is as good a place to start as any.
[quote]Perhaps it does provide opportunity for his family and some others of modest means since there will be a mixture of options in housing styles. [/quote]
Maybe a few at first, but I don’t think, without price fixing, these houses will stay affordable for long.
[quote]Sadly, the demands for all the bells and whistles cause prices to increase and lack of new supply does the same[/quote]
I don’t think it would be possible to build enough houses in Davis to meet the demand to live here.
This doesn’t mean I don’t think the project should move forward, but I do think the promise of long term affordable housing is misleading.
Mr. Toad
[quote]The Cannery, a project that has been fully vetted, is as good a place to start as any.[/quote]
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that you were personally promoting this project long before it had been “fully vetted”. And to be fair Just as I had been proposing changes long before full consideration had taken place.
“I don’t think it would be possible to build enough houses in Davis to meet the demand to live here. “
Of course you could. You could build a million homes and prices would crash. So the question isn’t if its possible its how many do we need? Of course the reality is that many people who already own homes don’t want to add supply and actually make Davis affordable. I always find it interesting that many of the most vocal anti-growth voices own multiple homes. This raises the issue of doing well by doing good or perhaps in Davis CYA means covering your assets.
[quote] The Cannery, a project that has been fully vetted, is as good a place to start as any.[/quote]
“Fully vetted” isn’t the same as “desirable.” I agree with those who believe that the affordable housing component at The Cannery is likely to be a drop in the bucket compared with the demand, and that most of the middle-income folks wanting to buy in Davis will be disappointed. That makes the project mostly a pitch to higher-income folks, which seems less likely to meet internal needs and thus inconsistent with the slow-growth policy.
To me, the most compelling argument for approval is taking a chunk off the regional housing requirement number, and I don’t find it all that compelling given the time frame for compliance. The commercial component is modestly interesting, but not enough of a draw to offset the traffic and other impacts. And I’d still like to see the Council require some sort of mitigation for the projected long-term budget drain; the most recent project documents indicate that it starts around Year 10.
[quote]Of course you could. You could build a million homes and prices would crash.[/quote]
Where would you build a million homes? I’m saying there is not enough space in Davis to build enough homes to meet demand, thus prices will always be higher here. Davis has seem a huge housing boom in the last 20 years and it has not made housing more affordable. Thus, I don’t see the additional housing provided by the Cannery threatening anyones housing prices, nor do I see it providing affordable housing for a significant number of people, especially in the long term.
“Davis has seem a huge housing boom in the last 20 years …”
I beg to differ with that conclusion. Woodland has built thousands of homes in the last 20 years. Davis not so many. Where could we build them? Pick a direction and then add up. Covell Village alone could take nearly 1000. There is plenty of room for houses, you could build out to the causeway, west out towards Plainfield, South towards the Delta. There is plenty of room there just isn’t the desire.
[quote]There is plenty of room for houses, you could build out to the causeway, west out towards Plainfield, South towards the Delta. There is plenty of room there just isn’t the desire.[/quote]
Your right the desire is not there. Or at least it is trumped by our desire to limit sprawl and preserve open space. Which incidentally make Davis a nice place to live and as a consequences drives up housing prices. But that’s not the issue I’m debating here.
The Cannery has a lot of great things going for it, but providing affordable housing isn’t one of them.
If the Enterprise wants to end the discussion, perhaps it should offer someone $2 million to distract people from thinking about other possible uses of the Cannery. That seems to have been a reasonably effective strategy.
“our desire”
You and who else. Did you see the hearing? There were a lot of people who wanted more housing for one reason or another. Very few spoke against more housing. I came away thinking that perhaps the tide was turning on no growth. Time will tell.
“There were a lot of people who wanted more housing for one reason or another. Very few spoke against more housing.”
the people who spoke, were they people who normally oppose housing? a lot of people i know, decided not to come and will wait for the ballot measure.
[quote]”our desire, You and who else.” [/quote]
Everyone who voted for Measure R.
Medwoman wrote:
> A couple of threads ago, I had expressed the opinion
> that this development was unlikely to meet the needs
> of one of the demographics it is purported to be helping.
> Another poster said that it was very likely it would
> meet that need.
That was me, almost every college educated full time working couple can afford to buy a home for $500K.
> So with the following information in mind, I will gain
> ask how many young teachers, or others with similarly
> compensated work are going to be able to afford these
> homes in the $ 500,000 range
Keep in mind that teachers don’t work full time (they get off at ~3:00pm and have summers off plus winter and spring break).
> Average Teacher Salary in Davis Joint Unified School District
> (2013) The average teacher salary in Davis Joint Unified School
> District is $50,974.
Let’s go with one teacher and one nurse a quick Google search said average $90K in CA and $116K in San Jose, or a Davis firefighter at an average take home of $75K (and no student loans since it costs almost nothing to get a JC fire science degree)>
A $450K loan today is about $2,300 a month and if you want to say that two teachers making $102K can’t afford to pay $27K to buy a house maybe I’m wrong and most people working full time ~50 hrs a week with 2 wks vacation make a lot more than a teacher.
[quote]A $450K loan today is about $2,300 a month and if you want to say that two teachers making $102K can’t afford to pay $27K to buy a house maybe I’m wrong and most people working full time ~50 hrs a week with 2 wks vacation make a lot more than a teacher.[/quote]
Our loan is for $350,000 and we refinanced at a good time, we have good credit, so our interest rate is good. Between the mortgage, taxes, and insurance our payment every month is $2520.89. My parents lent us money to get us to 20% down otherwise our payments would be higher.
“My parents lent us money to get us to 20% down otherwise our payments would be higher.”
Yes, this is an under reported part of the story. Unless you can borrow from family or inherit some money its a lot harder to buy into the Davis market. Of course the real estate market here is one of the residents own making.
Plus there are closing cost, which can run about $20K
“A $450K loan today is about $2,300 a month and if you want to say that two teachers making $102K can’t afford to pay $27K to buy a house maybe I’m wrong and most people working full time ~50 hrs a week with 2 wks vacation make a lot more than a teacher.”
Sometimes single people want a nice home, too. Or single parents. Not everyone is lucky enough to find that special person who is compatible enough to be a spouse. Single parents need nice homes. Single child-less people need nice homes, too. Davis needs singles, too. Not just couples.
[quote]Sometimes single people want a nice home, too. Or single parents.[/quote]
Or one income families.
B, Nice wrote:
> Our loan is for $350,000 and we refinanced at a
> good time, we have good credit, so our interest
> rate is good. Between the mortgage, taxes, and
> insurance our payment every month is $2520.89.
B. Nice either has a 15 year loan, a bad rate, high insurance or a $600K+ home (with higher than average property taxes)…
Don’t forget that most couples with jobs filing a joint return typically save in “income” taxes what they pay in “property” taxes (due to the mortgage interest deduction).
Then JimmysDaughter wrote:
> Sometimes single people want a nice home, too.
Nice homes and cars are expensive. Most college students I know want a Porsche or Ferrari. The ones that really want one will work hard and buy one (they don’t expect the government to start a “affordable sports car program” like so many people do with homes and apartments)…
[quote]B. Nice either has a 15 year loan, a bad rate, high insurance or a $600K+ home (with higher than average property taxes)… [/quote]
None of the above, 30 Year Fixed, at 5.125%., insurance is $90/month, and house worth is not $600+.
[quote](they don’t expect the government to start a “affordable sports car program” like so many people do with homes and apartments)…[/quote]
It’s not an “affordable mansion program” so your analogy falls short. Providing affordable housing so people have a decent and maybe even nice place to live is hardly equivalent to the government assisting people in purchasing luxury items.
[quote]Nice homes and cars are expensive. Most college students I know want a Porsche or Ferrari. The ones that really want one will work hard and buy one [/quote]
Plenty of hard working people cannot afford to buy a house in Davis.
I wrote:
> B. Nice either has a 15 year loan, a bad rate,
> high insurance or a $600K+ home (with higher than
> average property taxes)…
Then B, Nice wrote:
> None of the above, 30 Year Fixed, at 5.125%
Last month you could have locked a 30 year fixed rate in at 100bps lower (and last year you could have locked a 3.50% 30 year rate) so 5.125% is not a great rate (It might still make sense for you to re-fi at current rates).
> Providing affordable housing so people have a
> decent and maybe even nice place to live is hardly
> equivalent to the government assisting people in
> purchasing luxury items.
Davis has more expensive home than 90% of America, so living here is something special (kind of like having a fancy car). My first house was not a nice house, it was a dump that needed a lot of work. After years of saving and selling a couple homes at a profit I was able to buy a dump in East Davis that needed a lot of work…
Just like a first time car buyer should buy an inexpensive older car that needs some love a first time home buyer should buy an inexpensive older home that needs some love (not a fancy brand new home in Davis)…
[quote]Last month you could have locked a 30 year fixed rate in at 100bps lower (and last year you could have locked a 3.50% 30 year rate) so 5.125% is not a great rate (It might still make sense for you to re-fi at current rates). [/quote]
From my experience these lower rates often come with significantly higher upfront closing costs, which restricted our ability to take advantage of them.
[quote]a first time home buyer should buy an inexpensive older home that needs some love (not a fancy brand new home in Davis)…[/quote]
Except that those are all student rentals.
Growth Izzue said . . .
[i]”Did the plastic bag ban cost any council member money? If I remember right you claimed it wouldn’t cost business owners at all. But bringing in many new residents certainly will help any council member who is tied to a Davis business prosper.”[/i]
GI, what Council members are in that position. As of the most recent count, the number is (to the best of my knowledge) zero. It used to be one, but that has been recently reduced to zero.
[quote]a first time home buyer should buy an inexpensive older home that needs some love (not a fancy brand new home in Davis)…[/quote]
You were the one making the claim that teachers could afford to buy in Davis.
I don’t think fancy is requirement for most people, just livable and affordable. I don’t think the Cannery will provide a significant amount of housing that teachers or those with similar salaries can afford.
Davis Progressive said . . .
[i]”The people who spoke, were they people who normally oppose housing? a lot of people i know, decided not to come and will wait for the ballot measure.”[/i]
My sense was that the answer to your first question is “no.”
If they are waiting for a ballot measure, my sense is that they will be waiting until Lucifer needs an overcoat.
I want to know why we are willing to accept a project that starts costing the city at year 10? Do we approve another project in five years that has a ten year revenue stream and so on forever?
B. Nice wrote:
> You were the one making the claim that teachers could
> afford to buy in Davis. I don’t think fancy is requirement
> for most people, just livable and affordable.
If you don’t need fancy, the single family home at 115 Guaymas Place in Davis is on the market for $275K.
If a single teacher saves up $8,250 (3%) they can get a FHA loan for less than $1,400 a month (and get the actual payment under $1,000 a month if they rent a room to a student)…
Sorry, i didn’t make the comment about single school teachers being unable to afford a house at the new project. My comment was about how the taxpayers will be paying for infastructure from year 10 on for however long the houses are there. Why should we increase our operating costs? Seems like a good way to raise taxes (not easy to do) or increase our shortfall. New houses that increase our revenue for a decade and last for 100 years seems pound foolish and penny wise.
“If you don’t need fancy, the single family home at 115 Guaymas Place in Davis is on the market for $275K. “
Great for a single person I agree, but hard to raise a family in 900 sq ft, 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom home.
What do you got in a 3/2 or even a 3/1?
TRAFFIC – On another note, it seems there will be lots more traffic on many city streets that are already quite busy and crowded. Streets are currently in bad shape, and there’s a need for more signals at intersections. Several hundred Cannery residents commuting back and forth to and from out of town employment will impact many streets and intersections at certain times of day.
B. Nice
[quote]None of the above, 30 Year Fixed, at 5.125%., insurance is $90/month, and house worth is not $600+. [/quote]
SOD
[quote]Last month you could have locked a 30 year fixed rate in at 100bps lower (and last year you could have locked a 3.50% 30 year rate) so 5.125% is not a great rate (It might still make sense for you to re-fi at current rates). [/quote]
B. Nice
[quote]From my experience these lower rates often come with significantly higher upfront closing costs, which restricted our ability to take advantage of them.
[/quote]
B. Nice, SOD is right. My son just secured a 30 year loan with 0 points at 4.25% with very low upfront costs. Bankrate.com shows the current avg. 30 year int. rate at 4.30. In today’s market 5.25 is very high, in my opinion you should find another loan consultant.
[quote]Or one income families. [/quote]
Zero income families want a nice house too.
“”If you don’t need fancy, the single family home at 115 Guaymas Place in Davis is on the market for $275K. ”
Great for a single person I agree, but hard to raise a family in 900 sq ft, 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom home. “
Here I think is the crux of the issue. Over time, our societal view has changed dramatically regarding what we consider “nice”. Within my lifetime, a two bedroom, one bath house was considered “nice enough,” for a family of four. Our perception has changed to the point where “nice” seems to mean that evyone gets their own room, there is a “family room” in addition to the “living room” and probably a study or office as well. There is frequently a formal dining room as well as a kitchen nook. There is often a den, a study or office, maybe a game room. The washing machine and dryer get there own room as do our two to three cars.
I believe that this trend over the pasy 50 years to consider anything less that a “mini mansion” as “not nice” has been instrumental in the unsustainability of our current situation, both in Davis, the country, and the world. More is not always better and often brings with it a whole host of worries that we would not have if we were willing to reconsider what we mean by “nice” and align that expectation more closely with what will be sustainable for future generations.
[quote]Great for a single person I agree, but hard to raise a family in 900 sq ft, 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom home. ”
[/quote]
My wife and I started with an 850 sq. ft. 2/1 house with 3 children. It got our foot in the door and was the best purchase of our lives. Bought for $60,000 and sold for $540,000. Today people feel so much more entitled. You buy what and where you can afford it.
B Nice wrote:
> Great for a single person I agree, but hard to raise a
> family in 900 sq ft, 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom home. ”
When I was a single person I lived in a little apartment with a roommate (saving money so I could buy a house some day)…
Then medwoman wrote:
> Here I think is the crux of the issue. Over time, our
> societal view has changed dramatically regarding what we
> consider “nice”.
My grandfather bought a 2 bedroom one bath home in SF for $3,000 (less than the cost per MONTH for some apartments in Davis today) in the 1930’s and raised my Mom, her sister and her two brothers in the house. My parents bought the house from my Aunt and Uncles when my Grandmother died and Zillow says the place is worth over $1 million today.
> Within my lifetime, a two bedroom, one bath house was
> considered “nice enough,” for a family of four.
And “way back when I was a kid” in the 70’s most families (including ours) had just one car, everyone did fine without their own cell phones (with internet access), 200 channels on TV and camping vacations (vs. international travel)…
“My wife and I started with an 850 sq. ft. 2/1 house with 3 children. It got our foot in the door and was the best purchase of our lives. Bought for $60,000 and sold for $540,000. Today people feel so much more entitled. You buy what and where you can afford it.”
People feel entitled because they want to pay less the $540,000 for a 850 sq. ft 2/1 house? I would say the are looking for the same opportunity you had which was to pay a much more reasonable price.
“And “way back when I was a kid” in the 70’s most families (including ours) had just one car, everyone did fine without their own cell phones (with internet access), 200 channels on TV and camping vacations (vs. international travel).”
How is this relevant to the fact Medwoman was making that housing prices are a lot more expensive today?
[quote]People feel entitled because they want to pay less the $540,000 for a 850 sq. ft 2/1 house? I would say the are looking for the same opportunity you had which was to pay a much more reasonable price. [/quote]
First of all we added on to the house before we sold it so that added into the sales price. Secondly when I bought the house $60,000 was a great amount of money at that time and really stretched our budget.
[quote]First of all we added on to the house before we sold it so that added into the sales price. Secondly when I bought the house $60,000 was a great amount of money at that time and really stretched our budget.[/quote]
If 60,000 was a stretch then I guess $540,000 was out of the question, or even $275 which is what a run down 2/1 cost today (which is significantly higher even with inflation taken into a account). You happened to be “entitled” enough to buy at a time when stretching got you a house for $60,000 not $275,000. So cut people some slack, they just want the same opportunity you had.
[quote]B. Nice, SOD is right. My son just secured a 30 year loan with 0 points at 4.25% with very low upfront costs. Bankrate.com shows the current avg. 30 year int. rate at 4.30. In today’s market 5.25 is very high, in my opinion you should find another loan consultant.[/quote]
Since my loan was not “just” secured you should probably cut my loan consultant some slack too.
The other relevant question is how much GI was earning at the time he bought his house for $60,000.
Comparing 60,000 to 275,000 is meaningless without knowing the relative value of the dollar at the time.
But maybe I should give her a call….
[quote]$60,000 not $275,000[/quote]
I guess B. Nice has never heard of inflation.
[quote]I guess B. Nice has never heard of inflation.[/quote]
I guess you didn’t read my post very carefully:
[quote]60,000 was a stretch then I guess $540,000 was out of the question, or even $275 which is what a run down 2/1 cost today [u](which is significantly higher even with inflation taken into a account)[/u].[/quote]
[quote]Comparing 60,000 to 275,000 is meaningless without knowing the relative value of the dollar at the time. [/quote]
I remember Medwoman, I was working for $7.77/hour and at that time it was considered a fairly good wage. My wife was working too. Everything enters into the equation and at that time I would venture to say that $60,000 would be like today’s $275,000.
Bottom line, I think it’s unfair to label hard working people “entitled” because they would like to live in the town they work in. I also don’t think they are “entitled” for not wanting to squeeze their family into 900 sq ft. 2/1. I don’t see these people asking for a handout just an opportunity.
GI
[quote]My wife was working too.[/quote]
I agree that this is a key factor. For families with small children, someone has to take on the responsibility of caring for them. I know that some folks have spoken glowingly about the opportunities in The Cannery for young families, and yet I suspect that many truly “young” as opposed to “mid income” families will be priced out of this community in short order when the entirety of their income to expense ration is considered rather than just the price of the house.
This also leads to my philosophy of the inappropriate nature of our system of compensation. I would argue that the individual choosing to stay at home to raise their children in a responsible fashion deserves the same compensation for their time as does the individual who chooses to do their contribution to society in the form of work outside the home. I know this is a terribly unpopular point of view, but if we value the service as a community as we say we do, why should we not compensate for it just as we do other valued services ?
[quote]I know this is a terribly unpopular point of view, but if we value the service as a community as we say we do, why should we not compensate for it just as we do other valued services ? [/quote]
And who’s going to pay for that?
[quote]And who’s going to pay for that? [/quote]
Republicans who support “family values”?
[quote]Republicans who support “family values”? [/quote]
Republicans do support family values. Republicans also support people standing on their own two feet and not expecting entitlements and others to pay for them.
[quote]Republicans do support family values. Republicans also support people standing on their own two feet and not expecting entitlements and others to pay for them.[/quote]
These two beliefs often work against each other.
Are better way to evaluate what has happened to the price of housing in Davis is to look at the premium for living in Davis as compared to nearby communities. If you go far enough back there was no difference in prices. In fact if you go way back real estate in Woodland was probably more expensive relative to Davis. Its been a while since I looked at this but as Davis has restricted growth the premium has expanded. As I recall, in the depths of the housing bust the premium was close to 100% more. Some of that was that we under built and other communities over built. Today its still over 50% more to buy the same house in Davis as in Woodland. When i first moved here in the early 90’s it was only 20% more. I think since the relative performance of the schools hasn’t changed that much we can assign the increasing difference to construction rates.
When I read about somebody who had to borrow 20% from their parents to afford a home and still pays around $2500 a month for a modest home in Davis it makes me sad. Expanding the housing supply would have made it easier for that family to live here or allowed them to move here without tapping their parents. It would also have made it easier for people who don’t have parents to borrow from to live here and send their children to our fine schools. Of course with a larger housing supply maybe more of the 2/3 of Davis residents who make up the portion of the population that rents could afford to buy here too.
The people who have benefitted most from restricted housing supplies are people who owned when the premium created by lack of supply was lower than it is today. Yet it hurts me when those that struggle to live here lack empathy for others who can’t afford to move here but would like to live in Davis. Perhaps there is some resentment over how hard it is to make it here. Perhaps it is worry that the value of their own home will go down. I don’t know. What I do know is that having made sacrifices to live in Davis i wish that we would make it easier for those who would like like to join us here to fulfill their dreams instead of throwing obstacles in their way at every turn.
A better way …
You can take my parents off your worry list, (at least in a finical sense, they are doing just fine). For the record the money wasn’t a gift, it was a loan, so tack on an ADDITIONAL $400 to that mortgage payment.
If I had my wish, all 500+ houses in the Cannery would be modest homes, no higher end luxury models, just nicely designed, functional homes that people earning teachers salaries could afford.
Mr. Toad
My partner would prefer that we were able to live in San Francisco, but sadly , we cannot afford the kind of house that we can afford here in Davis. Is it your position that the residents of San Francisco should somehow lower their perceived standard of living to allow us the ability to live there simply because my partner likes and wants to live in SF ? If not, how is the different from what you advocate for Davis ?
And why, if it is important enough to us as a couple to live in San Francisco, should we not accept a lesser quality of home than we can afford here if location is that much of a priority for us ?
B. Nice
[quote]If I had my wish, all 500+ houses in the Cannery would be modest homes, no higher end luxury models, just nicely designed, functional homes that people earning teachers salaries could afford.
[/quote]
I could not agree more.
Wow! I want to unsubscribe from this thread! I understand the website isn’t working well but I don’t see how to do it. Clues anyone?
it’s simple. go to the top right where it says “my account” – then my comments – then comment subscriptions.