Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Has anyone else noticed the steep rise in gentrification taking place in suburban areas for the last decade or so? What do you think is an effective and plausible solution to this epidemic of rising affluence and real estate prices?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Memorial/Gessner said:

Has anyone else noticed the steep rise in gentrification taking place in suburban areas for the last decade or so? What do you think is an effective and plausible solution to this epidemic of rising affluence and real estate prices?

 

Do you mean urban? I don't think the suburbs have experienced any significant increase in gentrification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2016 at 10:54 AM, Memorial/Gessner said:

Has anyone else noticed the steep rise in gentrification taking place in suburban areas for the last decade or so? What do you think is an effective and plausible solution to this epidemic of rising affluence and real estate prices?

 

Elect Sheila Jackson Lee as President?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, august948 said:

 

Elect Sheila Jackson Lee Garnet Coleman as President?

 

Only he can prevent dog walkers...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, HNathoo said:

 

Do you mean urban? I don't think the suburbs have experienced any significant increase in gentrification.

yes, I'm not referring to large planned housing projects like those seen in Katy or Missouri City. However, what have before been considered suburban neighborhoods are now home to lots with prices not lower and often much higher than $1,000,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you're against property values rising not gentrification.   The land there probably has minimum lot sizes and other deed restrictions so values will probably continue to rise.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BeerNut said:

So you're against property values rising not gentrification.   The land there probably has minimum lot sizes and other deed restrictions so values will probably continue to rise.

 

Both, I suppose I should've worded my question better. I choose to focus on gentrification though, as it is a much more pressing issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Memorial/Gessner said:

yes, I'm not referring to large planned housing projects like those seen in Katy or Missouri City. However, what have before been considered suburban neighborhoods are now home to lots with prices not lower and often much higher than $1,000,000.

 

Most of what were originally suburban neighborhoods, like the area around Memorial and Gessner, never went through a down phase like the older neighborhoods inside the loop so gentrification isn't really a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, august948 said:

 

Most of what were originally suburban neighborhoods, like the area around Memorial and Gessner, never went through a down phase like the older neighborhoods inside the loop so gentrification isn't really a problem.

right, gentrification doesn't apply there. However, the rising prices are kicking out middle class families, only leaving room for the super-rich. Its a separate yet related issue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2016 at 10:54 AM, Memorial/Gessner said:

What do you think is an effective and plausible solution to this epidemic of rising affluence and real estate prices?

 

First, you have to establish a perimeter...

 

58852252.jpg

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2016 at 10:54 AM, Memorial/Gessner said:

Has anyone else noticed the steep rise in gentrification taking place in suburban areas for the last decade or so? What do you think is an effective and plausible solution to this epidemic of rising affluence and real estate prices?

I am not sure that I have ever heard "rising affluence" related to an "epidemic."

 

may I ask you if the folks who, in 1980, purchased the homes in the area you mention consider this an "epidemic"?  They don't like the wealth that they have created for themselves?  After all, an epidemic is bad for everyone, no?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like gentrification is usually bad problem in areas where most residents rent their homes, while in areas where they own them it is a good problem.  In renter areas, the residents are getting squeezed out with no real compensation to them, while in owner areas they may be getting squeezed out but they also sold their bungalow for $400,000 so they should be able to land on their feet

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/2/2016 at 6:37 PM, UtterlyUrban said:

I am not sure that I have ever heard "rising affluence" related to an "epidemic."

 

may I ask you if the folks who, in 1980, purchased the homes in the area you mention consider this an "epidemic"?  They don't like the wealth that they have created for themselves?  After all, an epidemic is bad for everyone, no?

 

 

It depends on your vantage point. The people you speak of don't see a problem. The people Memorial are referring to......do.

 

Other cities should have this issue......where people seem to be getting richer. Or at the very least, their property values are going up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2016 at 8:54 AM, Memorial/Gessner said:

Has anyone else noticed the steep rise in gentrification taking place in suburban areas for the last decade or so? What do you think is an effective and plausible solution to this epidemic of rising affluence and real estate prices?

 

Tell people to quit getting richer?  Relocate criminals to the suburbs?

 

If rising real estate prices in one area are not the sole reason for lowered real estate prices in others, I'm not seeing a problem here.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/2/2016 at 4:40 PM, mkultra25 said:

 

First, you have to establish a perimeter...

 

58852252.jpg

 

:lol: Then you have to make it known that enforcement is not an option, but a requirement. The rich people MUST integrate and acclimate with the poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ricardo said:

It depends on your vantage point. The people you speak of don't see a problem. The people Memorial are referring to......do.

 

Other cities should have this issue......where people seem to be getting richer. Or at the very least, their property values are going up.

Who are the people Memorial is referring to?  He is discussing "suburban gentrification".   Suburban areas are dominated by single family home owners (not renters).  I assume from the user ID that "Memorial" is speaking of the area generally referred to as "Memorial".   So, 40 years ago, somebody purchased a house for, what? $70k? and its worth $1.5m today.  Since the long-term average housing prices inflates at slightly above CPI,  I have a hard time understanding why anyone is upset.  Can't afford the taxes?  Sell the darn thing, PAY ZERO CAPITAL GAINS, and move to another place 4 miles away that isn't as hot but costs 50% less.  You'll have monetized $750k.

 

anything else is simply whining, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the impression that Memorial was upset that some people got lucky. The people who bought homes in areas where the property values increased over the years and not decreased.

 

The post seemed more like a rant against rich people than anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting piece from the Texas Observer on the potential for gentrification accelerating in Houston as a byproduct of the Trump tax cuts, which contain a $1.5 billion tax break for real estate investors in economically-disadvantaged areas defined as "opportunity zones": 

 

https://www.texasobserver.org/trumped-up-incentives-houston-gentrification/

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, mkultra25 said:

Interesting piece from the Texas Observer on the potential for gentrification accelerating in Houston as a byproduct of the Trump tax cuts, which contain a $1.5 billion tax break for real estate investors in economically-disadvantaged areas defined as "opportunity zones": 

 

https://www.texasobserver.org/trumped-up-incentives-houston-gentrification/

I'm leery of the term "economically-disadvantaged areas", which seems to imply that these areas are slums, and a form of urban blight that must be eliminated.
The areas where the "economically-disadvantaged" live include neighborhoods that were developed before WW II, a time when one (or no) car households were common. They were designed with the understanding that sidewalks and public transportation were necessities.
Contrast this with the areas into which the poor are now being scattered, which were designed specifically for the automobile. Too often these neighborhoods and the people who occupy them are cut off from access to grocery stores, parks, clinics, libraries, etc. because car ownership is out of reach. 
Of course, it comes down to economics. Many people are wary about investing in poorer areas. Development can (and should) involve an element of risk. The movement of people into inner city neighborhoods is a well-established trend that needs no outside encouragement. The resulting uprooting and relocation of thousands of families is certain to create more problems than it solves.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, dbigtex56 said:

I'm leery of the term "economically-disadvantaged areas", which seems to imply that these areas are slums, and a form of urban blight that must be eliminated.

 

Indeed. And the more cynical among us might also be inclined to speculate as to exactly what the "opportunity" in "opportunity zones" refers to. 

Edited by mkultra25
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An article below, from the Economist last year about gentrification myths.

I remember Montrose when you couldn't walk around at night for fear of being robbed, when burglaries and car thefts and gunfire were common. And folks thought nothing of parking vehicles on their front lawn.


The link seems to work. I don't have an online subscription.

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2018/06/21/in-praise-of-gentrification

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The discussions about gentrification have recently increased on NextDoor and Third Ward FB groups.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From "The Economist":
The most careful empirical analyses conducted by urban economists have failed to detect a rise in displacement within gentrifying neighbourhoods. 
We have to take the author's word for this remarkable statement, as he doesn't cite sources within the article. It certainly doesn't jibe with the realities I've empirically observed. 

Too many long-time residents of the Heights and Montrose have been displaced by higher rents and taxes for me to give his contention any credibility. 
 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...