Gentrification

[LDF]

 

btw to all who posted on this subject.

 

it was a very enlightening discussion. no tempers, no cussing, and i hope

no hurt feeling.

 

a great debate. i enjoyed it.

[RockRaines]

people in poorer neighborhoods have been "stealing" their place, what? earlier you were describing these pre-gentrified areas as "s***holes" rock

I was specifically referring to the last few areas that have been gentrified in chicago. Moving into the west loop, I knew I was stealing my place at a cheap price since the area would improve and the location was choice. Same with Wicker, Logan, Bucktown etc.

[Jerksticks]

For every area that's seeing gentrification and increasing property values & outlandish rent....there's the opposite area, seeing degentrification and values plummeting, crime rolling in, malls folding up etc.

 

It sucks that people have to shuffle around against their will, but all races have to deal with it. Money talks. That's the rule.

[bmags]

For every area that's seeing gentrification and increasing property values & outlandish rent....there's the opposite area, seeing degentrification and values plummeting, crime rolling in, malls folding up etc.

 

It sucks that people have to shuffle around against their will, but all races have to deal with it. Money talks. That's the rule.

 

Somewhat true, it's one of the reasons why a city needs to do all it can to keep population growth. Doesn't have to be a zero sum game.

 

But if there's an area that is attractive, safe and doing well with schooling, city also needs to make sure housing growth is possible.

[mr_genius]

What's funny is that the people who start the gentrification process often get booted from the neighborhood. It's all cyclical

 

- hipster can't afford top neighborhood, moves to neighboring poorer community

- gentrification begins in poorer community, overall quality increases

- developers and investors see increase, start scooping up property left and right

- as neighborhood keeps improving, so do rents and housing costs

- hipster can no longer afford neighborhood, moves to neighboring poorer community

 

It's like what happened to Wicker Park and is now moving to Logan Square and /or Pilsen

 

I think the hipsters are already being priced out of Logan Square. Wonder what neighborhood they will move too..

[Y2HH]

I think the hipsters are already being priced out of Logan Square. Wonder what neighborhood they will move too..

 

They're starting to invade Bridgeport.

[Middle Buffalo]

I know a lot of people that my parents live near that would freak out the second a black person moves in, and that is completely wrong.

Not replying specifically to address your parents or their neighbors, but the "white flight" isn't always as simple as racism or prejudice. Plenty of people are motivated by their largest personal investment rapidly being devalued as their neighbors dump their houses and run to the next town.

 

And, this flight happens within racial groups, too. Black people move out of black neighborhoods. Hispanic people move out of Hispanic neighborhoods. The reasons are usually a little more nuanced than race alone as a factor.

 

Gentrification is a cycle tha reoccurs in all large cities. A big factor that leads to it is access to transportation. It's how big cities got big. People with more money wanted bigger houses and more land, so they move out of the city. Roads were built to support that. People with less money try to live close to their jobs. They don't have they money to maintain their houses. Property values drop. Taxes drop. Services drop. People see opportunity to buy fixer uppers. Neighborhood slowly changes for the positive. Rinse. Repeat.

 

It's not only black or Hispanic neighborhoods that undergo gentrification, either. See the neighborhoods right around the Cell for an example.

[Texsox]

As my wife and I are getting closer to retirement we are making some changes to our investments. One area is we have sold our undeveloped land and are looking at rental properties. This thread has helped a little in my process of putting a plan together. I've slowly developed a strategy for looking at homes. I've divided neighborhoods and/or homes into three opportunities.

 

1. Buy and improve

2. Buy and maintain

3. Buy and do as little as possible and keep it cheap.

 

Aesthetically and philosophically I can't do #3. That is about as close to slumlord as can be and not my style. I will be part of the "problem" as some people see the process. We are looking at buying three homes in developments that are between 15 and 25 years old. Typically they will need new roofs and major updates to kitchens and baths. My wife also enjoys landscaping. By the time we are finished they will rent at the high end of the market with several amenities included (lawn service and water). That will push out some potential renters. But I am looking for more solid middle class to upper class renters who are more stable and more dependable.

[farmteam]

As my wife and I are getting closer to retirement we are making some changes to our investments. One area is we have sold our undeveloped land and are looking at rental properties. This thread has helped a little in my process of putting a plan together. I've slowly developed a strategy for looking at homes. I've divided neighborhoods and/or homes into three opportunities.

 

1. Buy and improve

2. Buy and maintain

3. Buy and do as little as possible and keep it cheap.

 

Aesthetically and philosophically I can't do #3. That is about as close to slumlord as can be and not my style. I will be part of the "problem" as some people see the process. We are looking at buying three homes in developments that are between 15 and 25 years old. Typically they will need new roofs and major updates to kitchens and baths. My wife also enjoys landscaping. By the time we are finished they will rent at the high end of the market with several amenities included (lawn service and water). That will push out some potential renters. But I am looking for more solid middle class to upper class renters who are more stable and more dependable.

Wouldn't this segment you're targeting be less likely to rent in the first place?

[bmags]

Not replying specifically to address your parents or their neighbors, but the "white flight" isn't always as simple as racism or prejudice. Plenty of people are motivated by their largest personal investment rapidly being devalued as their neighbors dump their houses and run to the next town.

 

And, this flight happens within racial groups, too. Black people move out of black neighborhoods. Hispanic people move out of Hispanic neighborhoods. The reasons are usually a little more nuanced than race alone as a factor.

 

Gentrification is a cycle tha reoccurs in all large cities. A big factor that leads to it is access to transportation. It's how big cities got big. People with more money wanted bigger houses and more land, so they move out of the city. Roads were built to support that. People with less money try to live close to their jobs. They don't have they money to maintain their houses. Property values drop. Taxes drop. Services drop. People see opportunity to buy fixer uppers. Neighborhood slowly changes for the positive. Rinse. Repeat.

 

It's not only black or Hispanic neighborhoods that undergo gentrification, either. See the neighborhoods right around the Cell for an example.

 

The problem with this is you are really only referring to a specific time period (post-world war II) where the accessibility of the automobile is what created the suburbs, not wealthy suddenly wanted more land. When the wealthy wanted more land prior, they just bought more land in the city, which are the outrageous plots you see sometimes around town.

 

The car allowed people with modest amounts to get space and land for cheap, while still being about as close to work!

 

Of course, by "people" I'm being generous, as a fairly large swath of the population was not allowed to engage in this, and were basically forced to stay "close to their jobs" (as evidenced by "drive to you qualify" not being applicable to "people with less money try to live close to their jobs"). They also did not get the same access to mortgages, and if they wanted access to housing were pushed into predatory deals where the landowner was incentivized to evict often and keep the cash down payment. For those that had the means and access to move into nice areas of the city, they were often met with riots and even getting their houses burned down (we see you bridgeport).

 

Post 1985, we have seen a slow and steady trend to moving back toward urban areas, and the gentrification heating up. From New York City we can see that wealth moving back to the city is absolutely a positive thing. The housing stock improves from slums, and on net, nicer housing becomes MORE affordable. But ultimately within 2 generations, some groups of people were bullied into specific neighborhoods with poor conditions, then some years later pushed out of the same neighborhood to even worse neighborhoods, and basically the answer given is "This is better for you".

 

Basically, I find your evaluation disingenuous because it's basically saying "market forces at work" when really it has only been at work for certain groups, while regulatory and structural forces were at work for others. So when market forces again come to work, you have to at least understand why a group is not trusting and angry, and see if it can be done right this time.

[bmags]

As my wife and I are getting closer to retirement we are making some changes to our investments. One area is we have sold our undeveloped land and are looking at rental properties. This thread has helped a little in my process of putting a plan together. I've slowly developed a strategy for looking at homes. I've divided neighborhoods and/or homes into three opportunities.

 

1. Buy and improve

2. Buy and maintain

3. Buy and do as little as possible and keep it cheap.

 

Aesthetically and philosophically I can't do #3. That is about as close to slumlord as can be and not my style. I will be part of the "problem" as some people see the process. We are looking at buying three homes in developments that are between 15 and 25 years old. Typically they will need new roofs and major updates to kitchens and baths. My wife also enjoys landscaping. By the time we are finished they will rent at the high end of the market with several amenities included (lawn service and water). That will push out some potential renters. But I am looking for more solid middle class to upper class renters who are more stable and more dependable.

 

Knowing you live in Texas, I have to say good luck. With the lack of density there, the rental market may be very inconsistent. But, to answer your question, I don't think anyone would have a problem with you introducing better housing quality to the neighborhood. If a true market were in place and demand was there, better housing would continue to flood in, and your "quality housing for a higher quality tenant" may be available to lesser tenants in the medium-term.

 

I imagine Texas has pretty good housing policy, just a lack of preference for density. So maybe that is the case there.

[southsider2k5]

Knowing you live in Texas, I have to say good luck. With the lack of density there, the rental market may be very inconsistent. But, to answer your question, I don't think anyone would have a problem with you introducing better housing quality to the neighborhood. If a true market were in place and demand was there, better housing would continue to flood in, and your "quality housing for a higher quality tenant" may be available to lesser tenants in the medium-term.

 

I imagine Texas has pretty good housing policy, just a lack of preference for density. So maybe that is the case there.

 

Texas has no housing policy. As in they have no zoning laws, at all.

[StrangeSox]

Texas has no housing policy. As in they have no zoning laws, at all.

I thought that was primarily Houston?

[bmags]

Texas has no housing policy. As in they have no zoning laws, at all.

Which is much better than the oppo. They do regulate mortgages more.

[Middle Buffalo]

disingenuous

Sure thing.