U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-22-2011, 02:36 PM
 
7 posts, read 9,339 times
Reputation: 16

Advertisements

Um I have been reading comments on here concerning monticello park and inspiration hills but if these neighborhoods are still great why did lose population between 2000 and 2010, according to the census tracts these neighborhoods are in there was a large population decline of every ethincity, for example one tract lost 600 people, how are these neighborhoods still good if they had a population decline in their areas?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-24-2011, 08:59 PM
 
Location: The "original 36" of SA
816 posts, read 1,479,659 times
Reputation: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by mone2 View Post
Um I have been reading comments on here concerning monticello park and inspiration hills but if these neighborhoods are still great why did lose population between 2000 and 2010, according to the census tracts these neighborhoods are in there was a large population decline of every ethincity, for example one tract lost 600 people, how are these neighborhoods still good if they had a population decline in their areas?

By your logic, a decline in population = a decline in desirability. Hmm... I guess all those people that say Olmos Park is nice are wrong. After all, it lost over 100 people from 2000 - almost 5 percent.

Yes, Monticello Park had a decrease in population over the last decade. Why, I'm not sure. The census data is still incomplete for 2010, so I can only guess based on what is currently available to study. Even so, I don't think it will ever have the necessary data for a true analysis. Please note that the subject census tract, 1801, contains more than just the Monticello neighborhood.

A few theories:
1. The vacancy rate increased. Just as in Olmos Park (and please, I'm in no way saying MP is as desirable as Olmos Park), the vacancy rate increased to 10%. Possible reasons include the economy, extended renovations, or elderly neighbors passing on and family members not immediately wanting to sell the property. I know of examples of each that have occurred in my neighborhood. One home very close to mine just this month had the estate settled after being vacant 2 years! It sold within days. The current data does not break down the number of vacancies into rentals vs. owner occupied, so I will have to revisit this thread at a later date.

2. For some reason, 21 homes were removed from the survey. This could be due to the flood of 2002 when many homes just north of Woodlawn were flooded. I know a few were demolished. There also could be the return of multifamily homes to single family residential or the change of a garage apartment into use as an office. Again, I know of an example of each.

3. The average household size may have decreased. This is another data field currently incomplete in the 2010 Census and will need to be revisited. If the size did decrease, it could be due to teens graduating and leaving the house, a family being replaced by a young couple, etc. None of these indicate a less desirable neighborhood.

I don't know why the population decreased. For me, however, it doesn't change the facts. I look at the $ per sq. ft. that people get for a house now vs. 10 years ago and then I compare that % increase to other existing (northern) areas and I see that my neighborhood is outpacing them. I look and see that within 2 blocks of my house, 10 homes have undergone significant renovations since 2000. Not just slapping up paint, but tens of thousands of dollars of work. I see people move in and spend $20,000+ on foundation repair or a new tile roof - and this is just the start of their work. To me that indicates a neighborhood that, while not nearly as desirable as other historic districts, is far from a neighborhood in decline.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2011, 02:33 PM
 
486 posts, read 872,136 times
Reputation: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montirob View Post
By your logic, a decline in population = a decline in desirability. Hmm... I guess all those people that say Olmos Park is nice are wrong. After all, it lost over 100 people from 2000 - almost 5 percent.
Not trying to pick a fight here, but I think population decline MAY translate into less desirability, particularly if it means more vacancy (abandoned houses) and less incentive for people to invest (less restaurants, entertainment options, stores, etc) just look at the situation in Detroit, which is an extreme example of this. This could then translate into lower re-sale value, which may turn potential new buyers away.
Obviously everything is relative, so even if Olmos Park is 5% "less desirable" than in 2000, it would still be very desirable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2011, 03:35 PM
 
Location: The "original 36" of SA
816 posts, read 1,479,659 times
Reputation: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by amexicano View Post
Not trying to pick a fight here, but I think population decline MAY translate into less desirability, particularly if it means more vacancy (abandoned houses) and less incentive for people to invest (less restaurants, entertainment options, stores, etc) just look at the situation in Detroit, which is an extreme example of this. This could then translate into lower re-sale value, which may turn potential new buyers away.
Obviously everything is relative, so even if Olmos Park is 5% "less desirable" than in 2000, it would still be very desirable.
I agree. My point is that (as you state) it MAY translate to decreased desirability. The OP seemed to argue that it was THE determinate factor.

We need to study the entire range of trends before deciding. IF Monticello Park continues to lose population and the vacancy rate skyrockets, then, yes, we can safely assume that desirablility has decreased. However, if the population decreases but we see that we replaced renters with homeowners (say with more disposable income), then maybe we can assume the reverse. For an admittedly extreme example: The Lavaca area recently lost a ton of population due to the closing of the Victoria Courts housing project. I would bet that no one thinks that the area is less desirable now than 10 years ago.

Please also don't interpret MY posts as fighting - I just find the subject interesting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2011, 10:54 PM
 
155 posts, read 330,011 times
Reputation: 121
Lower income households were replaced by higher income households. Higher income households tend to have fewer kids and are less likely to have "extended families" living in the home.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2011, 08:06 AM
 
4,268 posts, read 8,382,804 times
Reputation: 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montirob View Post
For an admittedly extreme example: The Lavaca area recently lost a ton of population due to the closing of the Victoria Courts housing project. I would bet that no one thinks that the area is less desirable now than 10 years ago.
Good point. I haven't seen the numbers yet, but I'd say the population has rebounded substantially in recent years, filling in a lot of those vacant houses and now that the Commons are there. Viva Lavaca!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2011, 09:43 AM
 
7 posts, read 9,339 times
Reputation: 16
Because I thought when a schools demographics change its because of the neighborhood, thats what sociology say, so what is the Jefferson Neighborhood today?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2011, 10:47 AM
 
Location: The "original 36" of SA
816 posts, read 1,479,659 times
Reputation: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by mone2 View Post
Because I thought when a schools demographics change its because of the neighborhood, thats what sociology say, so what is the Jefferson Neighborhood today?
Not necessarily. Hispanics are the majority of school age kids these days throughout Texas, but that doesn't mean that the neighborhood has the same percentage.

For the area around Jefferson, it is currently around 18% "White" ("not Hispanic or Latino" as the Census calls it). For Monticello Park proper, Census Tract 1801.02 (new tract added for 2010), it is just over 25% "White". Now if you break it down into children vs. adults, the percentage (as is common everywhere else in Tx) of "Whites" decreases to 7% and 11% respectively. In other words, the school reflects the child makeup, but not the neighborhood ethnic makeup.

Please note that the designated area for a school is much, much larger than a single neighborhood or Census Tract.

The big question is, does it really matter? My preference would be that the school have more diversity, because I believe it is good for kids to know people from multiple cultures, political and religious beliefs, economic levels, etc. I believe that the Monticello Park neighborhood itself meets that desire for diversity (including sexual orientation), as do many others such as Lavaca, Tobin Hill, and Mahncke Park. Right now, Jefferson HS itself does not meet my ideal. Please don't interpret this as saying I want it to be like my HS "back in the day" which was 70% White. No! I just want to see more Asians, more Blacks, more Muslims, and yes, probably more Republicans (I'm a Moderate in-between who doesn't do straight party votes). Ironically, my old HS now almost meets my definition... except that is located in suburbia outside of 410.

Hey... are we all writing a paper for you? If so, I'd like to see the finished product. Really.

Last edited by Montirob; 05-26-2011 at 10:49 AM.. Reason: Wow... it looks like some posts were removed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2011, 12:17 PM
 
4,268 posts, read 8,382,804 times
Reputation: 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montirob View Post
Not necessarily. Hispanics are the majority of school age kids these days throughout Texas, but that doesn't mean that the neighborhood has the same percentage.

For the area around Jefferson, it is currently around 18% "White" ("not Hispanic or Latino" as the Census calls it). For Monticello Park proper, Census Tract 1801.02 (new tract added for 2010), it is just over 25% "White". Now if you break it down into children vs. adults, the percentage (as is common everywhere else in Tx) of "Whites" decreases to 7% and 11% respectively. In other words, the school reflects the child makeup, but not the neighborhood ethnic makeup.
.
Good point. I don't know the stats for Bonham elementary, but I'm willing to bet it doesn't completely reflect the makeup of the neighboring community and I'm sure Brack HS does not. There is a significant non-hispanic population here, and though many newcomers are indeed sending their kids to public school, many send their kids to private school, which would skew the school's stats as reflecting the 'hood. I suspect the same is true for other inner city neighborhoods like Tobin Hill, Alta Vista, Mahcnke Park, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2011, 12:18 PM
 
Location: SA
74 posts, read 148,574 times
Reputation: 44
simply reason, kids grow up and move out, I know I did and my parents still live there. Plus I've noticed more couples without kids have been buying the houses. Less kids around the neighborhoods.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top