Squeezing into the suburbs (Plymouth, Burnsville: fit in, real estate, apartments)
Minneapolis - St. PaulTwin Cities
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What does everyone think of this latest article by the Star Tribune on Sunday? Squeezing into the suburbs | StarTribune.com
Is there really that much demand in the inner suburbs for new contruction homes? How can this be....I thought everyone was supposed to embrace living in a high rise condo next to the light rail line?
On another note, what does this mean for the ex-urbs? The fact that people can actaully afford to build a new house in the inner suburbs now is great for some ( me included: building a new home in Woodbury that 4 years ago I would never be able to afford in Woodbury.)
I have to think the people in the exurbs are going to be stuck with 5,000 square foot mcmansions that are worth only a fraction of what they were purchased for. Those ex-urb cities are going to have a hard time recovering with all the forclosures and their brand new expensive schools that will be too large and unaffordable if their population moves back closer to the core cities.
...Is there really that much demand in the inner suburbs for new contruction homes? How can this be....I thought everyone was supposed to embrace living in a high rise condo next to the light rail line? ....The fact that people can actaully afford to build a new house in the inner suburbs now is great for some ( me included: building a new home in Woodbury that 4 years ago I would never be able to afford in Woodbury.)
I think it means that different people like different things. I am glad we live in a country where people can seek out the sorts of things that make them happy and not being criticized for their choices.
There are always going to be people who genuinely want to live in the exurbs for various reasons, and that's fine. But I think a lot of people in the past moved there out of necessity, or at least necessity in terms of being able to buy the home they wanted; the whole "drive 'til you can afford it" thing. Nowadays they don't have to drive as far to do that, hence what is happening in closer-in locations like Woodbury.
The inner-ring suburbs AND the core cities are in high demand right now, and that's not just MSP, but almost every major metro area. The inner-ring suburbs provide a fantastic compromise between urban living and suburban living. I always consider those suburbs as "urburbs", or urban suburbs. The Twin Cities doesn't have a ton of them, but nonetheless people like the compromise between suburban lifestyle and city location/amenities.
The article doesn't really say anything at all about inner-ring suburbs or the core cities. They give some examples of new housing being built in suburbs, but Maple Grove, Blaine, Woodbury, and Plymouth hardly count as inner suburbs. And they give one example of an exburb (Buffalo, which to me, starts to get near the limits you can even call an exburb) that has less new housing, but that's just one community. What about Elk River, Lakeville, Farmington, etc?
And, to boot, the whole thing is talking about new housing, which is a pretty small subset of overall housing market. In the end, there is really nothing there to base any sort of overarching conclusions on where people want to live. The most significant fact, in a somewhat muddled article, is that developers can't get financing to make the big new sprawling developments, so they are doing smaller projects, which happen to fit in suburbs that are not quite as far-flung as Buffalo.
That being said, on the topic of inner-ring suburbs, I do think its interesting to drive around places like St. Louis Park and see the neighbors starting to be spotted with brand-new, larger homes, in among the smaller, 1950s area homes. It will certainly continue to happen as some of the older buildings get more run down and the value of the land they are sitting on outstrips the value of the structure.
I do agree with 1stpontiac that the suburbs cited in the article are not "inner ring" suburbs by definition. Most of the true inner ring suburbs don't have any space left that is slated for single family homes. I do think single family homes are very positive for the suburbs and they should attempt to push single family home developments as much as possible.
While every city desires to growth, some of these cities need to be careful what you wish for when you try to get to grow by buildling rental units or cheap condo/townhomes. Look at what happened to Burnsville, they built a glut of condos and townhomes and now they went from a desireable suburb to the Brooklyn Center of the south suburbs. I hope Woodbury, Blaine, Maple Grove, etc learn a lesson from Burnsville, and avoid the push from the liberals to build lots of "affordable housing" to increase the so-called beneift of "diversity."
Increased diversity, if done the wrong way, can mean simply taking the problems of the city and moving them into the suburbs. Take a look at the suburbs with the best schools and you will find that these suburbs have high cost of housing. To put it a different way, I am all for diversity in my community as long as you can afford to buy a single family home or an expensive condo. Woodbury for instance, thus far, has been able to retain high probably values, while still increasing diversity (even though the liberals don't count count Asians and people from India as being diverse in their mind).
I do agree with 1stpontiac that the suburbs cited in the article are not "inner ring" suburbs by definition. Most of the true inner ring suburbs don't have any space left that is slated for single family homes. I do think single family homes are very positive for the suburbs and they should attempt to push single family home developments as much as possible.
While every city desires to growth, some of these cities need to be careful what you wish for when you try to get to grow by buildling rental units or cheap condo/townhomes. Look at what happened to Burnsville, they built a glut of condos and townhomes and now they went from a desireable suburb to the Brooklyn Center of the south suburbs. I hope Woodbury, Blaine, Maple Grove, etc learn a lesson from Burnsville, and avoid the push from the liberals to build lots of "affordable housing" to increase the so-called beneift of "diversity."
Increased diversity, if done the wrong way, can mean simply taking the problems of the city and moving them into the suburbs. Take a look at the suburbs with the best schools and you will find that these suburbs have high cost of housing. To put it a different way, I am all for diversity in my community as long as you can afford to buy a single family home or an expensive condo. Woodbury for instance, thus far, has been able to retain high probably values, while still increasing diversity (even though the liberals don't count count Asians and people from India as being diverse in their mind).
Burnsville is a great example of what you are saying. Not long ago Burnsville was one of the top high schools in the state, today, not so much...
I do agree with 1stpontiac that the suburbs cited in the article are not "inner ring" suburbs by definition. Most of the true inner ring suburbs don't have any space left that is slated for single family homes. I do think single family homes are very positive for the suburbs and they should attempt to push single family home developments as much as possible.
While every city desires to growth, some of these cities need to be careful what you wish for when you try to get to grow by buildling rental units or cheap condo/townhomes. Look at what happened to Burnsville, they built a glut of condos and townhomes and now they went from a desireable suburb to the Brooklyn Center of the south suburbs. I hope Woodbury, Blaine, Maple Grove, etc learn a lesson from Burnsville, and avoid the push from the liberals to build lots of "affordable housing" to increase the so-called beneift of "diversity."
Increased diversity, if done the wrong way, can mean simply taking the problems of the city and moving them into the suburbs. Take a look at the suburbs with the best schools and you will find that these suburbs have high cost of housing. To put it a different way, I am all for diversity in my community as long as you can afford to buy a single family home or an expensive condo. Woodbury for instance, thus far, has been able to retain high probably values, while still increasing diversity (even though the liberals don't count count Asians and people from India as being diverse in their mind).
I didn't realize that real estate developers were liberal. Pretty sure that most are conservative with finance backgrounds. They build these complexes because they think they can make a profit.
So now people who live in apartments or townhomes are the root of all evil?
I don't want to buy anything. Not an expensive condo, and not a single family home (if we do buy at some point, I'd lean towards a duplex or triplex). But I make an excellent neighbor. And I won't sneer at you or other neighbors if your household income is lower than ours or if you choose to live within or below your means.
Regardless of whether this particular article is about inner-ring suburbs, they do continue to be extremely popular and are part of this new wave of urbanism you hear so much about (whether you believe it or not). St. Louis Park alone easily has 1,000-1,500 apartments being constructed right now. There are plans in Edina around Southdale and the Galleria for hundreds/thousands more, especially at the "conceptual phase". That's nothing to sneeze at!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
