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

[newhomebuyer281]

The last new homes in the city (Imperial) and the city's ETJ (Avalon at Riverstone) are about a year or so from completion. Once these last areas are built there will be no other place to build a new home in Sugar Land. Will this result in home values going up?

[mikeyyc]

Theoretically, yes, but there are more than 12 months supply available.

[LocalPlanner]

It depends on how relatively desirable it is to be in the City of Sugar Land city limits vs. outside. Suburban home prices are mostly tied to school zoning, which isn't congruent with city boundaries.

[Failed Engineer]

I think you'll see a small trickle upwards but nothing significant. We are still suburbia and the 10 year outlook is probably very strong. I'd bet we will out pace every other suburb in Houston but we won't come close to desirable close in Houston neighborhoods.

[timtemtym]

People have always paid a premium on the SW side to be in the city of Sugar Land vs the large unincorporated area known as Richmond. I remember when Greatwood was going in and people I worked with who built there took extra pain to remind us that it was someday Sugar Land and NOT richmond.

I think Texas will eventually release some of the big city powers over ETJs and a lot of the unincorporated areas around Houston that are held hostage by Houston will incorporate. But cities in Texas have no real reason to annex neighborhoods since residents suck up services. They go after annexing commercial areas which pay into the tax base. You'll eventually have cities that are just shopping centers with no residents.

Sugar Land could jump the Brazos and help open that area up. It is so ripe for development. They need to put the grand parkway through and extend the fort bend tollway over the Brazos. That would make that area boom.

[SugLandDAd]

A lot will depend on the quality of schools........The prices are driven by desirability, and desirability is largely driven by the quality of schools. FBISD, which encompasses most of Sugar Land, is in a great state of flux.....and areas may improve relative to each other. There is a great deal of homebuilding along what will be the path of the Grand Parkway, south and west of Sugar Land.....this is Lamar ISD, which has improved over the years, and that will hold prices down.......if the school district manages growth and the schools continue to improve.

[NTexas2010]

Originally Posted by timtemtym

I remember when Greatwood was going in and people I worked with who built there took extra pain to remind us that it was someday Sugar Land and NOT richmond.

These were the same people who:

1.) Were convinced that with enough rabble-rousing, they could get Greatwood moved out of LCISD into FBISD (spoiler alert - no.)


2.) Would send their kids to Dickinson (and later Campbell) but would pull out of LCISD and/or move to New Territory when their child hit 6th grade.


3.) Came out of the woodwork to enroll their children back into LCISD when they got Greatwood HS - excuse me, George Ranch.


They weren't entirely wrong though - GW eventually did become part of Sugar Land proper.

[AliefNorth]

I’m beginning to like Sugar Land it feels much more superior than Katy and has its own “city” feel instead of a generic suburb.

New Territory definetly feels more upscale than Cinco Ranch and way more amenities too.

[ftbend06]

I think Sugar Land will do well long term relative to the surrounding area. I think it’s due to low supply-high demand (built out) and the other factor no one mentions is zoning. You can’t just build whatever you want like the surrounding area. That is likely to preserve/enhance values.

[jfre81]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

It depends on how relatively desirable it is to be in the City of Sugar Land city limits vs. outside. Suburban home prices are mostly tied to school zoning, which isn't congruent with city boundaries.

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.