U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [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 02-28-2015, 02:39 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,094 posts, read 16,134,638 times
Reputation: 12696

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
When I was in China (ten years ago admittedly) the most unusual element to me was there didn't appear to be tremendous income stratification by neighborhood. You'd see a luxury apartment building next to a "middle-class" tower, with both close to shantytowns. Admittedly it might have merely been because the area was in severe flux, but it was very different from what I was used to.
Never been to mainland. HK is pretty stratified. Mostly I was referring to the fact that China routinely displaces entire towns and neighborhoods. It doesn't do it through gentrification but by forced relocation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-01-2015, 08:12 PM
 
26,594 posts, read 52,423,706 times
Reputation: 20444
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
Prop 13 was meant as a check on property taxes - which is great in intent - but the delivery hasn't really worked out that way. The 2% increases have been significantly outpaced by inflation which pushes revenue raising into more regressive forms of taxation. There's also a quite a strong case to be made that while it has protected homeowners who bought a house pre-1978 it's actually made housing more expensive for everyone else who came along after that.
I'm a case in point of the opposite...

I bought in 2003 and then in 2009 on my street a new family bought a short sale for much less than I paid and got a much better home... my 1958 1725 rancher and their 1969 2700 square foot rancher...

So the new family on the block has locked in Prop 13 much better than I did... all because Prop 13 is based on purchase price or more accurately, the value at the time of transfer...

This was not an isolated case... every city block has similar... so owning longer is not part of the equation... at the worst of the collapse... 20 years of appreciation was wiped out in some areas of Oakland CA...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 12:34 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,009,893 times
Reputation: 1349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attrill View Post
If that is true then why is some of the most expensive real estate in the world also in some of the densely populated areas? Are you saying NYC, Hong Kong, and Tokyo suffer from a lack of density?

I live in an area that is gentrifying right now. Currently there are plans to add about 500 units of housing within 100 yards of my house, and it will not do anything to make housing more affordable, in fact it will probably end up increasing property values.
NYC, Hong Kong, and Toyko, at least in the hyper-dense areas to which you seem to be referring, aren't usually the subject of gentrification talk. It tends to be about low- to moderately-low density areas with detached, semi-detached, and rowhouse SFHs wherein existing families get priced out of their own neighborhood. Now, I'm not familiar with the specifics of the situation in Hong Kong and Tokyo. AFIAK, NYC is facing a gentrification problem and that is, indeed, because there is far more demand by wealthy, predominantly white families for those SFHs than there is supply.

Now, that said, if we're simply talking about supply vs. demand in the simplest terms, yes those areas' prices suggest a shortage of housing, or at least, of a specific kind of housing (eg, luxury condos) in specific locations (eg, overlooking Central Park). But that is, obviously, not an accurate statement because it is so generalized but it is, in abstract, true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 12:43 PM
 
Location: Upstate NY
35,767 posts, read 10,599,337 times
Reputation: 33980
Spike [Lee], is that you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 03:07 PM
 
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,539 posts, read 2,472,496 times
Reputation: 1483
Gentrification is saving our cities and is adding to its tax bases.

Areas as this will continue to deteriorate? Unless gentrification reaches it in Chicago? Much around downtown did come. But did not yet for enough?

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8605...1jlS7OXY1A!2e0

City maintains streets. They are clean and worst of decay gets ripped down when abandoned beyond repair? But without gentrification? More lovely old housing will get lost.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8649...15qSmIrtEw!2e0

So many areas of housing lost.... Returning to prairie. Because gentrification did not come? But neglect and total disrespect did come to destroy them?

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8764...24OOWnCoMg!2e0

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8905...AJoEPHxLVA!2e0

So to me if this is the result of NO gentrification? I vote for more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 03:22 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 22,127,115 times
Reputation: 8970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delahanty View Post
Spike [Lee], is that you?

"One, two, three, look at Mr Lee,
Three, four, five, look at him jive"

- Diana Ross
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 03:25 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 22,127,115 times
Reputation: 8970
Quote:
Originally Posted by steeps View Post
Gentrification is saving our cities and is adding to its tax bases.

Areas as this will continue to deteriorate? Unless gentrification reaches it in Chicago? Much around downtown did come. But did not yet for enough?

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8605...1jlS7OXY1A!2e0

City maintains streets. They are clean and worst of decay gets ripped down when abandoned beyond repair? But without gentrification? More lovely old housing will get lost.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8649...15qSmIrtEw!2e0

So many areas of housing lost.... Returning to prairie. Because gentrification did not come? But neglect and total disrespect did come to destroy them?

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8764...24OOWnCoMg!2e0

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8905...AJoEPHxLVA!2e0

So to me if this is the result of NO gentrification? I vote for more.

Why would more lovely old housing get lost? There are plenty of people in the neighborhood who would fix it up if given the opportunity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 04:36 PM
 
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,539 posts, read 2,472,496 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
Why would more lovely old housing get lost? There are plenty of people in the neighborhood who would fix it up if given the opportunity.
Not all people? Given the money? Or even have the talent to fix them? Then the fortitude to persevere, to keep it that way.... Would?
I agree, in the perfect world yes? But many people are not raised with the teaching of everything from balancing a check book? To how to keep a home clean and do the work to maintain it all? Many giving the chance? Yes would.

Just in my small town. I have seen people trash apartments. No reason but their own lacking?

As we know? There is no perfect nation or society that all are with talent, education and ability to be with all the expectations to create this perfect society.

Realize these homes were once pristine and vibrant neighborhoods? Now hanging on and the worst of neglect and decay removed by the city. Leaving empty lots returning to prairie? Awaiting another generation or people, for restoration, or could be lost too? So the Gentrification if it can do this? Infill with new? Revives what these neighborhoods once were? More vibrant and higher end again?

Decay and neglect is no more a natural process then restoration in gentrification? It is people who changed? Not the housing? People still cause decay with neglect?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 05:41 PM
 
Location: Chicago - Logan Square
3,396 posts, read 6,193,619 times
Reputation: 3717
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
Now, that said, if we're simply talking about supply vs. demand in the simplest terms, yes those areas' prices suggest a shortage of housing, or at least, of a specific kind of housing (eg, luxury condos) in specific locations (eg, overlooking Central Park). But that is, obviously, not an accurate statement because it is so generalized but it is, in abstract, true.
I was responding to this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
That's where your incorrect. Gentrification is the income gap made manifest via a shortage of housing where it is desired. It is a "problem" only insofar as it is suggestive or representative of a supply shortage. Shortages of housing very much are the domain of urban planners. They can direct higher densities to specific locations but can also protect areas from wholesale razing by developers.
My point is that gentrification is not a classic supply and demand situation - the supply of housing in the examples I gave are as ample as any in the developed world, yet the prices remain among the highest in the world. Providing more housing does absolutely nothing to provide affordable housing in gentrifying areas, and frequently an increasing supply drives the later stages of gentrification. Do you have any examples of gentrification being stopped by an increased supply of housing units?

Gentrification usually begins due to an oversupply of housing, which results in declining rents. If that occurs in a part of a city that is generally safe and has good transportation options, then gentrification is likely to occur (in a robust economy). By the time new construction begins, gentrification is pretty much a fait accompli. Zoning, permitting, and increasing density can affect the form of the gentrification that occurs, but it won't have an impact on the gentrification itself.

Just to clarify - I'm not really opposed to gentrification, although I think cities do need to put more resources into providing affordable housing. My main point is that I don't think planning can do all that much to stop or encourage gentrification. Making sure there are good transportation options is one thing it can do to promote gentrification, but that should be done for all areas of a city regardless of gentrification.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2015, 02:03 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,009,893 times
Reputation: 1349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attrill View Post
My point is that gentrification is not a classic supply and demand situation - the supply of housing in the examples I gave are as ample as any in the developed world, yet the prices remain among the highest in the world. Providing more housing does absolutely nothing to provide affordable housing in gentrifying areas, and frequently an increasing supply drives the later stages of gentrification. Do you have any examples of gentrification being stopped by an increased supply of housing units?
Areas where gentrification tends to show up at a scale that makes is obvious and problematic are areas where the built form has been slow to change. It is hard to find areas off the top of my head where gentrification was a problem or a vanguard of a larger policy problem and the community had a dramatic shift in policy to address this issue. People, as a large social entity, generally do not shift voting and political habits quickly.

The examples you gave are areas I'm not intimately familiar with and I cannot make confident statements about what is happening. Making some assumptions, a place like Tokyo may not be facing the traditional gentrification problem because, I'll say it again, gentrification tends to be a low-density concept involving SFHs of various forms, not large, high-density condo towers. That said, the high prices of places like Tokyo, like Hong Kong, and like NYC would suggest that they have more demand than supply. But, this does not take in to account that there are upper limits on density even where people like density and, where this is the case, limits on horizontal spread come it to play. But this shortage in these hyper-dense cities, whatever the reason, is, AFAIK, not "gentrification."

Outside of your examples, where we see gentrification we tend to see policies in place that limit even moderate and thoughtful increases in density. So we see a bifurcation along socioeconomic lines between those who can afford SFHs and those who cannot.
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:

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 > General Forums > Urban Planning
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