Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian
In the Bay Area, people live in the city because they enjoy the city--even in tiny or shared spaces--but it's usually kids that drive them out. The city schools are problematic at best and the cost of private, even Catholic, schools is too much for many parents on top of the high cost of everything else.
Most of the people found moving to Texas or somewhere will tell you it's because living in SF they could NEVER save enough for a single family home in a good school district. I'm not sure that many people living in SF even try because they see it as impossible. If they have the ability, many plan on moving to a different part of the country when the kids come. But they do NOT want to live in an apartment the rest of their lives (until the nest is empty again).
|
Very few people aspire to rent for their entire lives, but the Bay Area receives a massive influx of the prime renting demographic. That being young, high-income, childless professionals. That's why it seems odd to me to say that developers could build a bunch of units that might sit empty due to local preferences. Somewhere like Sacramento I could see that being more pertinent, but as mentioned, in a city with $3,000 shoebox rentals I think preferences be damned in the short-run.