Condos and houses built right next to each other going up all over.

There is a ton on new development going on in the North San Diego city I live. In horrible, undesirable (to me anyway) locations. They are being built up against a busy freeway, or at the corners of major intersections. Old restaurants and strip malls being torn down and are being replaced with this housing.

There are homes that are being built right up next to each other. No front yards and teeny tiny back yards. Some of the condo developments are 3 and 4 story.

I was having a discussion with someone today that mentioned the zoning had been changed recently to allow for more units per square footage, or something like that. Supposedly that is the reason for the recent boon in construction starts.

I was just wondering, with the slow down in the real estate market and the supposed bubble burst that is coming to San Diego, what is going to happen to all of these developments? I doubt that they are going to be able to sell them without a huge price reduction, if at all. What is going to happen to all those large bank loans made to construction and developement companies?

most of the money (and the property) will end up in the hands of king george's family, "base" and business partners.

I live in one in Silicon Valley-

mixed high rises, town houses, walk to light rail and rapid transit.

Our "strip mall" has a nice pizza shop, a barber shop, a cleaner/laundry/dry cleaner, a Starbucks, a Middle Eastern restaurant, a dentist, a doctor, a bank, a VietNamese restaurant, a Chinese restaurant, a Mexican restaurant, a California cuisine restaurant, two light rail stops, about 100 high rise units, about 1500 town house units.

Across the office park is a similar community.

I like it.

Get used to it -- with "Peak Oil" -- that's the way we will be living.

completed in the county that they can't sell now. Also, we have don't have light rail. We also have a large legal and illegal immigrant population. So it is different than what you are talking about.

I just wonder why now are developers building these properties? The timing isn't exactly perfect. How are they going to be able to pay back the bank?

If they have good freeway access to SD they may remain desirable even in a slow or down market because they're new construction. The zero lot line houses in particular will probably sell,but the new owners won't see much appreciation until the market turns around again. Condos, I don't know. Californians in general are adverse to condos outside of major cities but we have a lot of pent-up demand for new housing. Whether the builders will need to discount the prices in order to move them, again I don't know, but they probably would do OK even with a major reduction. They may take a loss but not default.

Especially with the condo units. Since they can now put more on their acreage, maybe that is the how and the why.

One thing that takes getting used to - you have "commons" (albeit with tennis courts, play grounds, kiddie pools, and lap pools) - no real "yards".

My wife and I are both I-95 Corridor "urban folk" - so we like it. I used to walk to elementary school, middle school, high school, both sets of grandparents, neighborhood shopping, transit to college and grad school. Even today - in California no less, we put a total of 8K miles on our mini-cars. (After 9/11 we sold the SUV's and bought mini-cars - now have a Prius and a Corolla). My office is a spare bedroom.

It's a life style thing.

Where I live on the I-680 corridor, two bedroom condos were dirt cheap 5 years ago --I'm talking 2 BR 2 B units for under 150K and they weren't scummy. They just did not move well at all in spite of single family house prices in the 300-400K range. Realtor friends confirmed that impression. I came here from Boston and just couldn't believe how these large condos languished. In fact, it was mostly the East Coast transplants who thought they were worth consideration. That has changed and they're now around 500K but it's only because the prices for single family houses are so absurd and the area is essentially built out without zoning changes.

in Santa Clara County.

I see from your early post that you live in a transit village. I would think that people should be clamoring for high-density development around rail stations but along the Pittsburg BART line there is still a lot of opposition every time such things are proposed. When I see a plan for 100 units next to BART my reaction is, why not 200? There is still a resistance to a car-free commute.

It's starting to change, but ever so slowly. One of the reasons we located in this area is that most of the towns have neighborhoods within walking distance of vibrant shopping and service areas and BART (I'm a city kid at heart.) It's not perfect but at least it's not endless house farms, and we're close enough for when the peak oil reality sets in.

Santa Clara County's VTA, and even the Peninsula CalTrain.

The prime location is the North First Street Corridor (from River Oaks and North Park to River Mark) and parallel to it on Lick Mill Rd, and there is talk of changing the zoning at North First and Charcot/Guadalupe (by eBay's HQ) to allow a transit village.

The very high density town house development in Milpitas (near Great Mall) is motivated by the proximity to the Light Rail-BART transfer station.

Land is just so expensive on the Peninsula, in Si Valley, and in South Alameda county that you have to go to high density.

Contra Costa County is ridiculously backward in housing policy and land use planning. The major I-680 cities, Concord and Walnut Creek, are only now recognizing that high density housing is a necessary component of the downtown area. Concord overall has done a better job I think. The city council in Walnut Creek resisted most apartment style condo development until a developer put up a high end one right on the edge of downtown and it sold out instantly. Now they have several major developments under way all within walking distance of BART and downtown.

The problem with land is that there isn't available space to build new suburbs -- that's a new idea around here. I think we have reached the outer limits on the paving of the central valley under the misguided notion that it's within reasonable commuting distance to San Jose or SF --- at least I hope we have. I'd love to see residential development over the parking lots of large malls and corporate parking lots. It would be a better land use.

By smaller operation trying to get in on the bubble. Its really going to be messy when it pops and the smaller operations fail. The big guys have already gotten in and out, and will do fine.

is there some new, exacted in the dark of night by the bushmilhousegang, housing subsidity or some kind of money arrangement for the newly arrived?