Will Sugar Land home values increase with little to no new construction supply? (Houston: rent, condos)

[AliefNorth]

Originally Posted by jfre81

The whole concept of houses appreciating in the burbs is unicorn-chasing, that's thankfully dead for the most part. I've been saying it for a long time. Now it seems the rest of the forum has caught on. In this case, if the schools in Sugar Land would change for the worse (real or perceived), it's game over.

On its own, the land is next to worthless because it can never be anything the HOA doesn't approve of and it's one of a bajillion identical quarter-acre lots with a bajillion identical houses sitting on each one. The building sitting on that lot depreciates because it ages and develops problems - whether it was properly built or not - while something brand-new is always being built somewhere else. The only thing that can make it even keep up with inflation is the schools not declining. Otherwise, it might as well become 1960/Kuykendahl or Sharpstown.

That's the real reason why they don't want "affordable" housing (read: non-overpriced non-"luxury" apartments) anywhere near. It jeopardizes the only factor that holds up their resale values. People are paying to not send their kids to the same public school as those kids. If that's you, more power to you I suppose, just don't count on selling your house in 10 years for double what you paid for it.

Before this sounds too much like suburb-bashing, there's a similar rude awakening for all these people inside the loop overpaying for these stucco monstrosities, which look like the boxes MPC builders would use to ship their mass-production houses, that continue to pop up everywhere.. At least with them, their land has a reason to appreciate and, God willing, 15-20 years from now those abominations will meet the fate of the bungalows, duplexes and such that were torn down to make room for them. Then maybe something that will actually be useful for the rest of this century will get built in their place.

Prices are appreciating in suburbs like Sugar Land and Katy, if you compare house values to the earlier part of this decade you will understand. The land might seem worthless because it’s not close to anything but when people hear about the reputation of the school districts they become blind and this is what brings up prices

[jfre81]

Originally Posted by AliefNorth

Prices are appreciating in suburbs like Sugar Land and Katy, if you compare house values to the earlier part of this decade you will understand. The land might seem worthless because it’s not close to anything but when people hear about the reputation of the school districts they become blind and this is what brings up prices

But that's exactly my point, the schools are the only thing holding it up.

Nobody actually gives a good damn that it's Sugar Land or Katy for the sake of it being Sugar Land or Katy. It's all about the schools. As if they don't teach to the same standardized test that the kids in Texas City take.

[AliefNorth]

Originally Posted by jfre81

But that's exactly my point, the schools are the only thing holding it up.

Nobody actually gives a good damn that it's Sugar Land or Katy for the sake of it being Sugar Land or Katy. It's all about the schools. As if they don't teach to the same standardized test that the kids in Texas City take.

Can’t agree more.

Thank you.

[gwarnecke]

Originally Posted by jfre81

The whole concept of houses appreciating in the burbs is unicorn-chasing, that's thankfully dead for the most part. I've been saying it for a long time. Now it seems the rest of the forum has caught on. In this case, if the schools in Sugar Land would change for the worse (real or perceived), it's game over.

On its own, the land is next to worthless because it can never be anything the HOA doesn't approve of and it's one of a bajillion identical quarter-acre lots with a bajillion identical houses sitting on each one. The building sitting on that lot depreciates because it ages and develops problems - whether it was properly built or not - while something brand-new is always being built somewhere else. The only thing that can make it even keep up with inflation is the schools not declining. Otherwise, it might as well become 1960/Kuykendahl or Sharpstown.

That's the real reason why they don't want "affordable" housing (read: non-overpriced non-"luxury" apartments) anywhere near. It jeopardizes the only factor that holds up their resale values. People are paying to not send their kids to the same public school as those kids. If that's you, more power to you I suppose, just don't count on selling your house in 10 years for double what you paid for it.

Before this sounds too much like suburb-bashing, there's a similar rude awakening for all these people inside the loop overpaying for these stucco monstrosities, which look like the boxes MPC builders would use to ship their mass-production houses, that continue to pop up everywhere.. At least with them, their land has a reason to appreciate and, God willing, 15-20 years from now those abominations will meet the fate of the bungalows, duplexes and such that were torn down to make room for them. Then maybe something that will actually be useful for the rest of this century will get built in their place.

I agree with most of these points except for the following:

-Suburban communities can appreciate significantly if they find themselves adjacent to major business districts, especially if they also offer great schools. Probably the best examples of this in Houston are Frostwood and the Fonn Villas - people pay 600-700k+ for nondescript 2300 sq ft 1960s ranches, because the schools are great and Memorial City, CityCenter, the Energy Corridor, and Uptown are all a short drive away. Going back further - Bellaire and West U were the Katy/Sugar Land of their day.

-I have yet to come across a single example of the demolition of one or all units of a detached-wall infill development in Houston. The oldest of these started to pop up in the 1970s and 1980s around the Museum District and Rice Military. These are not exactly cheap-dirt neighborhoods - if redevelopment of 40+ year old buildings doesn't make sense here, it probably won't work anywhere else in Houston for the foreseeable future. It's logistically difficult to demo and rebuild a single unit with neighbors ~2 feet away on either side and shared driveways, and not easy to convince 4-6 owners of the units in a single development to sell out.

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by gwarnecke

I agree with most of these points except for the following:

-Suburban communities can appreciate significantly if they find themselves adjacent to major business districts, especially if they also offer great schools. Probably the best examples of this in Houston are Frostwood and the Fonn Villas - people pay 600-700k+ for nondescript 2300 sq ft 1960s ranches, because the schools are great and Memorial City, CityCenter, the Energy Corridor, and Uptown are all a short drive away. Going back further - Bellaire and West U were the Katy/Sugar Land of their day.

-I have yet to come across a single example of the demolition of one or all units of a detached-wall infill development in Houston. The oldest of these started to pop up in the 1970s and 1980s around the Museum District and Rice Military. These are not exactly cheap-dirt neighborhoods - if redevelopment of 40+ year old buildings doesn't make sense here, it probably won't work anywhere else in Houston for the foreseeable future. It's logistically difficult to demo and rebuild a single unit with neighbors ~2 feet away on either side and shared driveways, and not easy to convince 4-6 owners of the units in a single development to sell out.

I actually saw the the demolition and reconstruction of a couple separate 1970s-era rowhouse units fronting Briar Forest over in Lakeside. Not sure if they had been fire-damaged or what.

[ftbend06]

Originally Posted by jfre81

The whole concept of houses appreciating in the burbs is unicorn-chasing, that's thankfully dead for the most part. I've been saying it for a long time. Now it seems the rest of the forum has caught on. In this case, if the schools in Sugar Land would change for the worse (real or perceived), it's game over.

There's some truth here, but one could also claim how is it any different from Bellaire, etc.

[ftbend06]

Originally Posted by jfre81

That's the real reason why they don't want "affordable" housing (read: non-overpriced non-"luxury" apartments) anywhere near. It jeopardizes the only factor that holds up their resale values. People are paying to not send their kids to the same public school as those kids. If that's you, more power to you I suppose, just don't count on selling your house in 10 years for double what you paid for it.

There is truth to this but, again, not really different from anywhere else. The truth is, lots of places considered urban now were once suburban. Sugar Land is not as much of a bedroom community as it once was. Lots more has come out there which drives values, but you're correct, zoning keeps away multi-family.

[hbcu]

I like the ETJ lol

You have more unique businesses and investment in those areas due lax oversight

look at the highway 6 portion between sugar land and Houston. All types of businesses we don’t get elsewhere

[jfre81]

Originally Posted by ftbend06

The truth is, lots of places considered urban now were once suburban.

"Urban" is such a subjective term in Houston.

There's maybe 50 square miles of "urban" in Houston as the people on this train I'm on right now would reckon it.

[okcthunder1945]

I think Sugar Land is well set for the future; it has a good employment base, it's got expanding higher education in UH, it's got good public schools, and it has good access to Houston's largest employment centers (downtown, galleria, TMC, and greenway).