Random Thoughts

Starbucks – Rusky style

There was quite a kerfuffle last week over the NBC admission that they were violating Olympic rules by allowing their own personal Starbucks loose on the unsuspecting Russians and tourists wandering the venue grounds. Buckaholics became unhinged when they saw these special NBCrs carrying their own Starbucks cups outside their compound and had no way of participating. New Olympic rules forbid this illicit coffee from Russian and Olympic territory – only McDonalds, who had paid handsomely for the right to sell American coffee, was permitted (and maybe a few others). For the Olympics it is "pay-to-play." I can think of many towns in the USofA that would be thrilled for a Starbucks. You wonder how much NBC paid for the creation of the first Russian pop-up Starbucks. GO HERE

Electric News

Tesla's stock is soaring after a bit of a dip toward the end of last year. At Thanksgiving last year it was trading at 120, now it's at 253, a 200% climb. While the bottom feeders are trying to steel everything Fisker Automotive (not to be confused with the scissor maker – an honest mistake - one vowel e for an a) has in its government supported plant, the other government supported electric car maker (Tesla) is going gang busters with huge growth projections hampered only by a reliable battery supplier. The other government supported battery makers lost the ability to recharge their company with money and went upside down. As you well know I am not a fan of government handouts (no matter what the experts say about past successes); it is always quality management and business skill that outweighs any federal handout or sexy brochure, and Elon Musk seems to be that guy at Tesla. The Fisker Karma was cool. Maybe somebody with business sense will make it work, but then again, maybe not.

And it is no surprise that Tesla is looking outside the state of California to build its $5 billion battery plant. Seems that all the nasty stuff needed to make the necessary things that make environmentally friendly cars go is not tolerated in uber-green California. Do as I say – but just not here. GO HERE

Solar Power

While it is grist for the subsidy mill (see above), the solar industry keeps plugging along. I was very pleased to see that Shea Homes is now applying their zero-net-zero homes to their new Trilogy Active Adult communities. Their goal is that the house has zero energy cost to the buyer over the short and long term. Called SheaXero, it is a state of the art solar energy package that, for a limited time, is at no extra cost to the buyer. There is absolutely no reason that these systems don't become mandatory, like modern heating and cooling systems built into homes today. These "modern utilities" are built into the cost of the house and are, for the most part, invisible except for normal maintenance. If we build a million equipped homes every year, think of the environmental and energy savings if each is solar. MORE HERE

Internal Migration

Recent analysis of census data and other population counters such as home building reinforce the fact that people are moving to the suburbs. While some cities have shown some numbers improvement, others have not. New Yorkers (Manhatten) are moving to the Bronx and Queens (yes, these are considered suburbs) and east out of Los Angeles to San Bernardino and Riverside counties. Whether housing costs or safety are the concern are regional issues. But, I can assure you, this is not the last of the discussions or cultural trashing of this post WWII choice of home and hearth (that is where you can burn wood in your fireplace). HERE

And the Density Is What?

Whoever thought that the Shed Shop would become a homebuilder? They are building 99-foot square houses is in Madison, Wisconsin for the homeless and environmentally concerned. Developed by former organizers of the Occupy Movement, this shelter has a bed, a table, and a compostable toilet. The density by my calculation, since most of these people can't afford a car, may be as high as 150 detached single-family units per acre. I'm reminded that after WWII the government put out helpful pamphlets on how to convert a chicken coop into a home. This is, I'm sure, an idea that most cities will politely say no too. MORE HERE

Stay Tuned . . . . . . . . .

Out Migration and California, The Naysayers May Bite Their Tongue

Due to a book event at the Oakland Convention Center today, where I will be shamelessly shilling my books at the Windsor Hill Publishing booth, I will defer the next Noodlings blog to next Friday. There is much to noodle.

So today a short post and a reprise of one of my past blogs.

California bashing is always in vogue and with the current high profile antics of the mayor of Oakland and her dithering with the Occupy crowd (my convention today is two blocks away), the silliness with the Dodgers and the ongoing divorce (from the fans as well), and Governor Browns attempts at changing the pension system for state employees – no wonder we Californians are scratching our collective heads this week.

But due to the economic realities of the day less California citizens are packing up and fleeing. Even the usual bash source, the New York Times, has to admit that out migration has slowed to a trickle (HERE). In the article California is shown to have reduced its outward migration 201,000 in 2005 to 71,000 in 2009. My guess it’s even lower today. But remember that the state has averaged a net growth per year since 2000 of 400,000 people, even with the outflow. We are not getting smaller.

My first blog this year posted a broader picture of the current state of the state. It’s reposted for your enjoyment, such as it is.

January 7, 2011

A Tale of Two States Separated at Birth

The population of California in 2010 reached 37,254,000 souls. This is a 10% increase over its population in 2000 or about 4 million people. We are ranked 13th in national density with 239 citizens per square mile (it’s a big state and there's lots space between us – except of course where you live). The state is projected to have 42.2 million people in 2020 and 46.4 million in 2030 (government projections - take them as you will). If these new 9 million people were to form their own state it would rank as the tenth most populous in the nation.

Today the majority of Californians, in fact the far majority, live within 50 miles of the Pacific Ocean and in fact, more like 30 miles. This coastal population is almost 25.7 million people with the split at 8.1 million north and 17.6 million south, a two to one split. The state has 163.7 thousand square miles. The 30 mile band of coastal paradise may not total 11,000 square miles, less than 2% of the state’s area. California will grow over the next twenty years by almost ten million people and is projected to grow to fifty million by 2050, this growth equals the current population of Los Angeles and Orange Counties combined.

This missive isn’t about the differences between the north and the south, culturally they are so similar (outside of some snooty northern Californian’s opinions about LA), that the discussions about their potential separation are moot and in fact, humorous. The real and most tragic difference is the cultural, economic, and educational extremes between the coast and the rest of the state. Sure there are pockets of charm and financial strength in the rest of the state, but these are extremely small and survive on the largess of the coast. It’s now a story of east and west, the haves and have-nots, the self-appointed elites and the desperate, the disconnected illegal and the prosperous patrician.

This coastal band of counties and cities have built bulwarks around their communities and pulled legal shrouds over their collective heads and, as a result, forced development needed to supply the basics for this incoming generation of residents into the rest of the state. This has been the natural course of American growth in the latter part of the twentieth century, like it or not. Remember cities, with few exceptions, only plan for the future, they do not build. Their exposure is to paper and maps, not to wood and steel and the marketplace.

As I have noted before in other blogs, the coastal communities must, in fact, welcome more people into their communities – period. This must be through changes in underlying zoning and density, increased height limits (the maximum four story structure must be put to rest), expansion of roads and infrastructure while at the same time increasing efficiency and standardization. The marketplace and the strength of the economy will determine whether residential development is rental or ownership, this buy/rent relationship will always be in a state of flux. The real issue is the unit itself and where it is built.

I came across Victor Davis Hanson’s blog called Two Californias the other day that brought this home in a new and frightening way. I have planned and designed communities throughout California for the last thirty years and Mr. Hanson’s observations about the Central Valley and the coast strike close to the heart. I have worked in these Central Valley communities, planned their neighborhoods, and listened to many city councils - all desperate to improve their small bit of California. But now within the state the strength in the soul seems to be slipping, an acquiescence to fate, a palpable bitchiness, and an almost tribal fear resulting in paralysis is growing. Gangs are now moving into suburban areas, meth labs are found throughout the countryside, and a real dumbing down of the population during a time of a manic need for education. There is a need to grab on and hold tight – the Golden State needs a new sunrise.