Is Linda Vista headed in any direction at the moment? (San Diego: low income, apartments)

[marbymarbs]

I'm looking to buy a house and Linda Vista's homes are on average $50k+ cheaper than Clairemont looking at comps.

I'm aware of Linda Vista's past and present reputation. People seem to have been saying it's next for gentrification for the past decade but for some reason it just hasn't happened despite it's great location central to the city and access to 4 major freeways.

Do any of you live there now or frequent the neighborhood? Do you see it beginning to turn towards a better direction? Is it stagnating? I feel like surely, it must start to turn the corner because of the prices but people have been saying that for years now and it hasn't whereas all the neighborhoods south of the 8, La Mesa, Escondido, San Marcos, etc have done well.

The area I'm looking at specifically is south Linda Vista, 1 mile from USD.

[NYSD1995]

My theory on gentrification - a place only improves if the housing stock supports it. Otherwise the area might improve for it's residents but wont attract any wealthy new ones. For example, North and South Park is full of historic homes but. City Heights is not. City Heights has improved somewhat but not gentrified. Normal Heights, North Park, and even Clairemont has a lot of marginal areas with no real location or built environment advantage to make them attractive to a would-be gentrifier. Linda Vista, has no attractive housing stock. It is a low income area with entry level housing and a lot of poorly constructed high density apartments. 10% price discount isn't enough to attract anyone who can afford it. I can see it improving for the locals that live there, but it would basically need to be torn down and rebuilt in order for anyone with money to really consider it. In the early 2000's Logan Heights seemed poised to improve but it's actually much worse today than it was back then. See also greater Golden Hill, Sherman Heights, City Heights, Mira Mesa as similar examples. On paper they should be improving , but reality is, they are pretty much stuck where they were 10 years ago.

[cainsurance]

Linda Vista is super central location... close to Fashion Valley / Mission Valley and all of the freeways.

Close to the beach too and some beautiful canyons.

Lots of nice restaurants nearby too and not overpriced. I think there is a lot of potential.

[stablegenius]

Originally Posted by NYSD1995

My theory on gentrification - a place only improves if the housing stock supports it. Otherwise the area might improve for it's residents but wont attract any wealthy new ones. For example, North and South Park is full of historic homes but. City Heights is not. City Heights has improved somewhat but not gentrified. Normal Heights, North Park, and even Clairemont has a lot of marginal areas with no real location or built environment advantage to make them attractive to a would-be gentrifier. Linda Vista, has no attractive housing stock. It is a low income area with entry level housing and a lot of poorly constructed high density apartments. 10% price discount isn't enough to attract anyone who can afford it. I can see it improving for the locals that live there, but it would basically need to be torn down and rebuilt in order for anyone with money to really consider it. In the early 2000's Logan Heights seemed poised to improve but it's actually much worse today than it was back then. See also greater Golden Hill, Sherman Heights, City Heights, Mira Mesa as similar examples. On paper they should be improving , but reality is, they are pretty much stuck where they were 10 years ago.

My take on gentrification in San Diego... When things gentrify, they get more expensive, but almost never get "nicer". Your take above is pretty spot on.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Linda Vista. Stay away from the area near the main shopping center if you are house hunting. Look to the West on the canyon rims or down as close to Friars as possible. There are plenty of million dollar homes close to USD that have a Linda Vista zip. It's light years from what it used to be when it was gang bang central.

[sdurbanite]

Originally Posted by NYSD1995

In the early 2000's Logan Heights seemed poised to improve but it's actually much worse today than it was back then. See also greater Golden Hill, Sherman Heights, City Heights, Mira Mesa as similar examples. On paper they should be improving , but reality is, they are pretty much stuck where they were 10 years ago.

You don't think Barrio Logan has gotten better over the years? On Logan Ave, there's Salud and a few other places worth checking out. I'm still confused as to why Golden Hill and Sherman Heights haven't taken off after all of these years..... good housing stock, views, great location, etc. I do know the planes fly overhead, so maybe that's it.

They're starting to spruce up the western side of National City, and I wonder if hipsters will ever make their way south one day.

[NYSD1995]

Originally Posted by sdurbanite

You don't think Barrio Logan has gotten better over the years? On Logan Ave, there's Salud and a few other places worth checking out. I'm still confused as to why Golden Hill and Sherman Heights haven't taken off after all of these years..... good housing stock, views, great location, etc. I do know the planes fly overhead, so maybe that's it.

They're starting to spruce up the western side of National City, and I wonder if hipsters will ever make their way south one day.

I don't think that restaurants a good indicator that an area is improving. Barrio Logan is one of those places developers think they can bulldoze and start over with. I don't see any of that as healthy or valuable to the city or the neighborhood.

Sherman Heights and Golden Hill have a couple of pesky near-permanent problems that I think are going to hold them back for a really long time:
1- homeless
2- halfway houses
3- a lot of marginal housing, especially high density low income apartments.

[stablegenius]

Originally Posted by NYSD1995

I don't think that restaurants a good indicator that an area is improving. Barrio Logan is one of those places developers think they can bulldoze and start over with. I don't see any of that as healthy or valuable to the city or the neighborhood.

Sherman Heights and Golden Hill have a couple of pesky near-permanent problems that I think are going to hold them back for a really long time:
1- homeless
2- halfway houses
3- a lot of marginal housing, especially high density low income apartments.

What do you think is holding Clairemont back?

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by stablegenius

What do you think is holding Clairemont back?

My block has an average home price of 1 million now so I don't think Clairemont is being held back at all. Even E Clairemont is pushing 700K for a sfh.

[NYSD1995]

Originally Posted by stablegenius

What do you think is holding Clairemont back?

Nothing, the areas that have gentrified already have, whats left is just overpriced and no one is rushing in to buy those.