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.
I don't think we've seen rents rise this fast ever. 40% in some places just this year. What are some of these cities going to start to look like, maybe San Francisco demographically in a place like NYC?
I'll preface this by saying I'm pro gentrification, it certainly beats the opposite extreme, although it's going suck for me personally wallet wise.
What are your thoughts and what are you seeing in regards to any changes visibly in the last few months or so? And where do you see it going?
Living conditions will worsen for many many people. We can't afford to keep building luxury apartments for the monied crowd. I do think it may result in more apartments over single family homes but they will be for rent and still extremely expensive.
Living conditions will worsen for many many people. We can't afford to keep building luxury apartments for the monied crowd. I do think it may result in more apartments over single family homes but they will be for rent and still extremely expensive.
Well if you don’t build new luxury apartments, investors are just going to buy the non-luxury buildings and convert them. And then everyone is worse off.
Blocking new housing is pretty much never the answer.
I don't think we've seen rents rise this fast ever. 40% in some places just this year. What are some of these cities going to start to look like, maybe San Francisco demographically in a place like NYC?
I'll preface this by saying I'm pro gentrification, it certainly beats the opposite extreme, although it's going suck for me personally wallet wise.
What are your thoughts and what are you seeing in regards to any changes visibly in the last few months or so? And where do you see it going?
I think it depends where you live. For instance, single-family rent growth in DC was lowest in the country in the chart below.
Well if you don’t build new luxury apartments, investors are just going to buy the non-luxury buildings and convert them. And then everyone is worse off.
Blocking new housing is pretty much never the answer.
Let me clarify, we need to build more housing that's not luxury apartments for rent and 4bd room mcmansions. Preferably not in the hands of private developers.
-Among the 20 metro areas shown, Miami, with an increase of 38.6%, stood out with the highest year-over-year rent growth in January, followed by Orlando at 19.9%.
And some people still say the Miami metro desirability boom is overhyped.
Let me clarify, we need to build more housing that's not luxury apartments for rent and 4bd room mcmansions. Preferably not in the hands of private developers.
Private developers are business people. They build what will sell.
They don’t want to build houses that will sit there unsold. If they are building it, it obviously is selling and in demand.
One problem is zoning. A lot of cities seem to require certain kinds of development, which exempts lower-income housing.
Cities are allowing low-income housing to be demolished in favor of larger, more pricey developments. I can show you where a few low-income trailer parks used to be that were demolished. Some remain vacant parcels.
Look what’s going on in Reno. Low-income hotels being demolished for bigger and glitzier. And all over America, small, old bungalows being cleared for McMansions. It’s almost like city leaders WaNT these places gone.
Please don’t encourage public housing. That has been an unmitigated disaster. Crime, drugs, gangs, policies that divided and broke up families (father-less kids), broken elevators, inoperable heat in the winter and no AC in the summer, etc. I haven’t seen 1 public housing project that provided a quality environment and didn’t bring down the whole city.
The section 8 program, where eligible families are being houses in privately-owned and maintained homes, seems to be scores better than any public housing program.
Private developers are business people. They build what will sell.
They don’t want to build houses that will sit there unsold. If they are building it, it obviously is selling and in demand.
One problem is zoning. A lot of cities seem to require certain kinds of development, which exempts lower-income housing.
Cities are allowing low-income housing to be demolished in favor of larger, more pricey developments. I can show you where a few low-income trailer parks used to be that were demolished. Some remain vacant parcels.
Look what’s going on in Reno. Low-income hotels being demolished for bigger and glitzier. And all over America, small, old bungalows being cleared for McMansions. It’s almost like city leaders WaNT these places gone.
Please don’t encourage public housing. That has been an unmitigated disaster. Crime, drugs, gangs, policies that divided and broke up families (father-less kids), broken elevators, inoperable heat in the winter and no AC in the summer, etc. I haven’t seen 1 public housing project that provided a quality environment and didn’t bring down the whole city.
The section 8 program, where eligible families are being houses in privately-owned and maintained homes, seems to be scores better than any public housing program.
Depends on the city.
How active preservationists are.
Also a city itself by zoning.
If there is more multiple lots allowed to be leveled for a larger mansion.
You might get a kick out of this 2018 Chicago city web- sight link as passing ordinance restrictions in 2018. To some it is Liberal restricting regulations.
This is for adding a full 2nd story limiting unflattering kinds. Hard to have them destroyed here.
From the city link.
The Chicago Bungalow Association (CBA) is a non-profit membership organization dedicated to helping homeowners maintain, preserve and adapt their unique Chicago bungalow, an indelible part of the City’s landscape. On behalf of CBA’s staff, our 16,000 members and the 80,000 Chicago bungalows, we have created the #StopThePop campaign in an effort to protect Chicago bungalows from this destructive trend. With your support, we hope to achieve the following:
- Educate developers and the public on “good” vs. “bad” additions through campaign-driven seminars, panels, fact-sheets and a comprehensive set of Design Guidelines for additions.
- Provide homeowners with direct access to qualified and affordable architects, engineers and contractors experienced in creating sensible second story additions.
- Bring awareness to Aldermen and the City of Chicago Department of Buildings through our campaign petition, homeowner testimonials, and statements of support from neighborhood organizations.
These above in the OFFICIAL Bungalow Belt were built 1910 thru the 1930s with most in the Roaring 20s of Al Capone the city still boomed. 80,000 built in the city proper alone not counting 2-3 flats.
Some Gentrified neighborhoods like Lakeview neighborhood and here below (a block from Wrigley Field and probably the sub-neighborhood called Wrigleyville).
How it appeared in 2009 a newer multi-residential building then a traditional greystone building and double-lot with a IN GOOD SHAPE Victoria-type wood-frame and a double-lot multi-residential building going up (probably height-wise the tallest allowed) and completed in 2019. The cinderblock building with brick building.
These are NOT the traditional Bungalow-belt neighborhoods and already had a lot of multi-residential buildings to high-rises along the lake.
Picture of a more premium home that got built next to a traditional Chi bungalow. Yet these bungalows do take to open-floor plans as that well built to have no problem.
Chicago did not always have preservationist to fight and win..... The lakefront North Shore from downtown especially, once was all Mansions. To see it today.... many were demolished for high-rises to skyscrapers 60s 70s and then fought demolitions stopped many. So many are landmarked now they cannot be demolished. More then got built downtown then where it was far easier zoned for it and areas a blank slate.
* Each city is different. Just I would not expect higher Conservative areas to add zoning or restrictions (red-tape) and Preservationist active to stop what you hope does not occur.
Private developers are business people. They build what will sell.
They don’t want to build houses that will sit there unsold. If they are building it, it obviously is selling and in demand.
One problem is zoning. A lot of cities seem to require certain kinds of development, which exempts lower-income housing.
Cities are allowing low-income housing to be demolished in favor of larger, more pricey developments. I can show you where a few low-income trailer parks used to be that were demolished. Some remain vacant parcels.
Look what’s going on in Reno. Low-income hotels being demolished for bigger and glitzier. And all over America, small, old bungalows being cleared for McMansions. It’s almost like city leaders WaNT these places gone.
Please don’t encourage public housing. That has been an unmitigated disaster. Crime, drugs, gangs, policies that divided and broke up families (father-less kids), broken elevators, inoperable heat in the winter and no AC in the summer, etc. I haven’t seen 1 public housing project that provided a quality environment and didn’t bring down the whole city.
The section 8 program, where eligible families are being houses in privately-owned and maintained homes, seems to be scores better than any public housing program.
I don't belive housing being in the hands of private developers as assets to profit from benefits us.
I'm very well aware of these homes, that's why I'm against their unmitigated construction.
Public housing was only a disaster because it was designed to be. Other countries have no problem providing adequate and quality housing for their citizens. Section 8 is also horrible as it incentivizes homeowners to be slum lords.
-Among the 20 metro areas shown, Miami, with an increase of 38.6%, stood out with the highest year-over-year rent growth in January, followed by Orlando at 19.9%.
And some people still say the Miami metro desirability boom is overhyped.
It absolutely is overhyped, including here on C-D. What ever happened to that popka guy?
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.
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.
