Real Estate in Secular Uptrend

Not a financial decision. For extended family. Does not make sense. But there are plenty of $10m homes in Woodside. For $2m you can only get a modest home a few miles away in Redwood City. BTW Woodside is trying to get around SB9 by declaring it a mountain lion sanctuary.

Hadn’t heard. That’s hilarious. Them cougars are snarfing pets from off the leash and attacking children.

1 Like

Family makes sense, but for $2m? Must have plenty of loose change in the sofa to work with!
Depending how close they are to this listing: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Woodside/3600-Partition-Rd-94062/home/23468371 They could buy it for 1/4 the cost and put up a few Yurts instead.

Want to get around SB9?

  1. Buy homes next door to legislators.
  2. Submit “demolish and rebuild” plans for a 3 story 7 plex with zero parking to replace the home now on the lot. Doesn’t mean you have to build, just that you intend to. Also, be sure to CC the legislator and every neighbor within a 1,000 ft radius of your plans.
  3. Watch how fast NIMBY resistance builds and SB9 gets rolled back.

I’m sure folks in Woodside and pretty much any city under pressure from SB9 could pony up $500k to buy properties next to these kind folks trying to force everyone else to build when they don’t want to - or can’t, in the case of Huntington Beach here in SoCal. Because there is zero available surplus land in and around HB and we’re at peak density to begin with, the City is going full hand to hand combat against the State on SB9 issues. Hopefully they will prevail.

There are cougars and then there are ‘cougars.’ Which one is Woodside a sanctuary for?!

3 Likes

The real issue is the cost of construction. ADUs can cost from $300-1200 per sf. Not affordable. The State has a hard time building affordable housing for $750/sf. Affordable housing is cruel joke

1 Like

How do builders pull off new construction at ~$300/sqft an hour away from the Bay Area? I would love to take a shot at a major expansion or even a remodel but it doesn’t make financial sense at ≄ $750/sqft.

1 Like

$300/sf means a lot of sweat equity

1 Like
  1. They don’t have the insane permit fees.
  2. People don’t expect commercial appliances in 1,400 sq ft starter homes.
  3. People don’t expect super high-end finishes in normal homes.
2 Likes

CRE :-1: :-1:
Multi-family :-1:
Luxury SFHs :-1:
Move-up SFHs - My target segment :grinning:
Entry level SFHs :+1:

2 Likes

The commercial problems are starting. This will create more stress for regional banks who own the debt.

Since stock market is in high price level (peak), I see lot of redfin hot homes in bay area!

This is SFH came into market with 24 hours, see the home homes!!

5.5%

That’s not surprising. I wonder if someone else will try to buy the land to develop it. 80 acres is a ton of land that’s close to downtown and Diridon station.

However, last 5 years, real estate near by areas went up way high with google complex news. It is suppose to be 14 Billion project.

Now, real estate around that area will impact heavily.


Expect 30-40% fall in multi family units. Time to get the dry powder ready.

2 Likes

Back in 2000 AAPL agreed to buy acres of land in south San Jose, project shelved after downturn, then permanently shelved.

Same way, year 2008 Cisco agreed to buy multi acres land same place, project shelved after 2009 downturn.

Now, if Google shelves the project, with WFH policy expansion will likely be shelved permanently.

In such case, even if 40% discount, no use of buying as SJC downtown area is high crime location. IMO, It is not attractive anymore or less attractive.

2 Likes

Construction costs fees and regulations keep making new construction much higher going forward. Supply is permanently restricted and demand keeps increasing. I have had no problem raising rents in Tahoe. Downtowns in the BA have encouraged homelessness and crime through liberal politics and appeasement. Other areas will benefit from this.

1 Like

Year 2008 started like this !

2 Likes

Just sharing what they published
Real_estate_in_the_us_systemic_risks