High Rents In Silicon Valley

[normando]

Our society is built on people moving where the jobs are. Tenants rent so they can live temporarily until they can settle down. Owner saves money to buy and takes risk in owning.
It's how our market works.

 

[Howard Klahr]

Since 2004, the allowable increase has not gone higher than 2.2%.

How much have operating expenses increased during that time frame?

In another words, properties in San Francisco could be higher without rent control.

That is just a bit obvious now isn't it?

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

One of the challenges of income disparity in locations such as Aspen CO is finding someplace for the "workers" to live. My brother lives in Aspen in a townhouse development that was built to accommodate the "worker bees." The units were constructed and a lottery determined who would get one. There are then limitations on selling them so as not to exacerbate the problem which caused them to be built.

 

[normando]

Back in the old days, Palo Alto was a high end market especially being near Stanford University. An area nearby was East Palo Alto which were inferior quality affordable housing for the working class. Urban planners did something right by having workers a place to live near employment. Now East Palo Alto is changing as high tech companies like Facebook are moving in. The trend now is workers now have to live further away for better and larger housing.

 

[Pat Butler]

We used to spend our vacations in Aspen and I still keep up on the local news there. Despite all the complaining, the lowly workers are willing to live far outside the city and drive to their low paid jobs each day. It'll never change.

 

[normando]

While driving today, I notice hills and ample open space. They're beautiful scenery but if government officials really interested in solving housing crisis, more housing should be built.
The Bay Area has limited land but there is more than enough open space to build. We have enough recreational areas. However, existing occupants do not want change. They don't want to lose their open space. They don't want low income living near them. So some cities build affordable housing but only for the elderly. If government was serious in increasing housing units, it can be done.

 

[Cigar]

This shows Federal ownership of land, in addition to that are state, city, and park districts that own land.

 

[normando]

Never knew government owned so much land especially in California. Fortunately, south of San Jose has ample land for future development. Silicon Valley can expand south but weather is hotter further down. North of San Francisco is Marin County with plenty of opens space and is a rich income area except for Marin City (city for the poor working class). I can not foresee any future development there. Too much regulations which contribute to high cost to build. Developers have to pay fees for school, parks, and have portion for low income. All these add up to the high cost of housing here.

 

[Tim The Enchanter]

All these add up to the high cost of housing here.

Too high cost pushes out the not rich.
But, the rich need people to do their chores. But won't pay enough for the gardener and maid to be more than poor.
They sure aren't going to clean their own house or mow their own lawn. What!?

No answers here. Just poking around with my sharp stick.
Cleaning my own house, and mowing my own lawn. Yes, in February.

 

[normando]

I just stop cutting my lawn. I found it more profitable per hour doing appraisals than cutting my lawn.