Author Topic: Gentrification News & Discussion  (Read 18937 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Brutus_buckeye

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3259
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #390 on: February 10, 2018, 12:57:00 PM »
^ without a doubt, the patient experience and even clinical experience is going to be better at Ohio Health than a for profit but the concentration of those companies in Nashville is quite impressive. It gives health care administrators and executive many options for talent down there.

Ohio has great hospital systems in the non-profit sector. Mercy Health is the largest employer in the state and it essentially mimics the for-profit model but does so in a much better non-profit environment.

Offline 327

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7302
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #391 on: February 10, 2018, 03:12:58 PM »
Ohio Health is nice and all for Central Ohio but it is nothing compared to HCA, Quorum, CHS, Lifepoint, Sutherland Global, RegionalCare and the numerous other hospital systems all based out of Nashville.

I imagine OhioHealth is better. Call me naive but I'd much rather go to an academic, non-profit, faith-based, or research hospital than a Wall Street-owned hospital any day, I'm glad we have strong nonprofit health systems in Ohio. As for our rural/community hospitals, better they are gobbled up by the Clinic and OhioHealth than HCA.

I agree, but many of those rural/community hospitals are going to close regardless of who buys them. 

Offline surfohio

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7717
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #392 on: February 11, 2018, 12:41:02 PM »
San Francisco Bay Area Experiences Mass Exodus Of Residents
By Len Ramirez

The number of people packing up and moving out of the Bay Area just hit its highest level in more than a decade.  Carole Dabak spent 40 years living in San Jose and now she’s part of the mass exodus that is showing no signs of slowing down.

The retired engineer’s packing up and calling it quits about to move to the state of Tennessee.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/02/08/san-francisco-bay-area-mass-exodus-residents/

Nationwide, the cities with the highest inflows, according to Redfin are Phoenix, Las Vegas, Atlanta, and Nashville.

Offline BigDipper 80

  • Key Tower 947'
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #393 on: February 11, 2018, 01:23:11 PM »
It just strikes me as so bizarre that these Bay Area people keep leaving one of the densest, most vibrant metro areas in the country for the likes of Phoenix and Vegas. Although I guess Phoenix sprawl really isn't that much different from the ugly subdivisions that dominate most of the cities south of SF and Oakland.
“To an Ohio resident - wherever he lives - some other part of his state seems unreal.”

Offline GCrites80s

  • Premium Member
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • ***
  • Posts: 9125
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #394 on: February 11, 2018, 01:33:13 PM »
They're trying to save money by leaving the overheated housing market. Las Vegas crashed horribly in the late 2000s and still has cheap properties. I bet a lot of these techies are designing their own tools that allow them to do their work remotely once they've built up enough skill and clout at their jobs.

Offline mu2010

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1842
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #395 on: February 11, 2018, 01:51:14 PM »
I was at this ULI real estate market panel a few weeks ago in Cleveland and they were talking about how teleworking might bring some kind of "leveling off" of the coastal metros and the great lakes and other smaller interior metros.

Offline BigDipper 80

  • Key Tower 947'
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #396 on: February 11, 2018, 01:56:15 PM »
They're trying to save money by leaving the overheated housing market. Las Vegas crashed horribly in the late 2000s and still has cheap properties. I bet a lot of these techies are designing their own tools that allow them to do their work remotely once they've built up enough skill and clout at their jobs.

I get that, but there are other cheap metros that are, well, more interesting. But maybe techies don't care about that and want to still be somewhat close to Burning Man.
“To an Ohio resident - wherever he lives - some other part of his state seems unreal.”

Online Dougal

  • Great American Tower 665'
  • ***
  • Posts: 698
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #397 on: February 11, 2018, 01:57:25 PM »
It just strikes me as so bizarre that these Bay Area people keep leaving one of the densest, most vibrant metro areas in the country for the likes of Phoenix and Vegas. Although I guess Phoenix sprawl really isn't that much different from the ugly subdivisions that dominate most of the cities south of SF and Oakland.

They're not talking about young up-and-comers. At a certain point in life, when one's earnings have probably peaked, affordable and convenient starts to matter a whole lot more than dense and vibrant.  Those are the people who are moving.
There's nothing wrong with optimism, as long as you don't get your hopes up.

Offline taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7733
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #398 on: February 11, 2018, 02:58:27 PM »
It just strikes me as so bizarre that these Bay Area people keep leaving one of the densest, most vibrant metro areas in the country for the likes of Phoenix and Vegas. Although I guess Phoenix sprawl really isn't that much different from the ugly subdivisions that dominate most of the cities south of SF and Oakland.

I also think that there are a lot of people who live in dense urban areas who are not actually that interested in urban issues. I have looked up a few people who previously used to own condos in my building in OTR to see where they live now. Several of them now live in the most generic subdivisions imaginable in cities all across the country.

This especially doesn't surprise me for the South Bay Area. Most of the built environment there is not great for walkability or transit usage. So people are leaving an expensive, dense, non-walkable area for less expensive, less dense, still non-walkable areas in other cities.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2018, 01:01:41 AM by taestell »

Offline surfohio

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7717
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #399 on: February 11, 2018, 05:31:28 PM »
It just strikes me as so bizarre that these Bay Area people keep leaving one of the densest, most vibrant metro areas in the country for the likes of Phoenix and Vegas. Although I guess Phoenix sprawl really isn't that much different from the ugly subdivisions that dominate most of the cities south of SF and Oakland.

They're not talking about young up-and-comers. At a certain point in life, when one's earnings have probably peaked, affordable and convenient starts to matter a whole lot more than dense and vibrant.  Those are the people who are moving.

Yeah, if you see the article I posted earlier they quoted a retired industrial worker who was going back to Tennessee, her original home. She didn't seem like the kind of person who would value urban amenities anyhow.

The article also tried to blame rising crime and certain liberal policies as causing the out-migration, which sounded forced. More like a manufactured case of sour grapes resentment to me.   

Offline surfohio

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7717
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #400 on: February 11, 2018, 05:32:41 PM »
This especially doesn't surprise me for the South Bay Area. Most of the built environment there is not great for walkability or transit usage. So people are leaving an expensive, dense, non-walkable area for a less expensive, less dense, still non-walkable areas in other cities.

Was going to say this exactly.

Offline GCrites80s

  • Premium Member
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • ***
  • Posts: 9125
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #401 on: February 11, 2018, 07:12:00 PM »
It just strikes me as so bizarre that these Bay Area people keep leaving one of the densest, most vibrant metro areas in the country for the likes of Phoenix and Vegas. Although I guess Phoenix sprawl really isn't that much different from the ugly subdivisions that dominate most of the cities south of SF and Oakland.

They're not talking about young up-and-comers. At a certain point in life, when one's earnings have probably peaked, affordable and convenient starts to matter a whole lot more than dense and vibrant.  Those are the people who are moving.

Yeah, if you see the article I posted earlier they quoted a retired industrial worker who was going back to Tennessee, her original home. She didn't seem like the kind of person who would value urban amenities anyhow.

The article also tried to blame rising crime and certain liberal policies as causing the out-migration, which sounded forced. More like a manufactured case of sour grapes resentment to me.   

That, or they lazily projected that one interviewee's opinion on everyone who is moving away.

Offline taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7733
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #402 on: March 07, 2018, 01:21:25 PM »
I started a new thread for all of the discussion about generic modern infill architecture since it's not directly related to gentrification.

Offline mrnyc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13464

Offline X

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 10132
    • Western Reserve Meadery
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #404 on: March 10, 2018, 01:47:57 PM »
Yeah, intimidation and violence to stop redevelopment in the central city, real great.  But hey, let's b-tch about suburban sprawl too.  Idiots.

Offline mrnyc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13464
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #405 on: March 16, 2018, 09:48:56 AM »
Yeah, intimidation and violence to stop redevelopment in the central city, real great.  But hey, let's b-tch about suburban sprawl too.  Idiots.


“If we don’t fight, we’re guaranteed to lose,” Rompe told them. “But if we do fight, we may not win — but at least we have a chance. So why not fight?”

Offline E Rocc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 9285
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #406 on: March 16, 2018, 02:49:25 PM »
Yeah, intimidation and violence to stop redevelopment in the central city, real great.  But hey, let's b-tch about suburban sprawl too.  Idiots.

It's pretty much one or the other, most places.   Gentrification or sprawl.

If you run around threatening violence at people who are not being violent, quite honestly you deserve it back at you.

Offline TBideon

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3455
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #407 on: March 16, 2018, 04:20:08 PM »
There is without question a ton of hypocrisy with those who oppose "gentrification", however they define it, especially with racial dynamics. White people moving into low-income black or Hispanic neighborhoods are routinely vilified for pushing out local residents, which is such nonsense and limited to really a handful of cities in the US, and within them a handful of neighborhoods. Yet, at least in Chicago, you have protesters adamant about the Obama library NOT being built in Jackson Park, else the white gentrifiers will arrive and push out the poor black and Hispanic from those impoverished, high-crime adjacent neighborhoods. A completely fantasy, as South Shore and Woodlawn are years, maybe decades, away from being safe, functional neighborhoods, regardless of a museum nearby. 

And yet the people who protest the most about investors and white residents moving in are the FIRST to also vilify the more functional neighborhoods for not being diverse enough, which in itself is a false claim as there is much more to diversity than just black/brown or white.

The lesson of the day:

Diversity in poor areas = gentrification, pushing out the poor, and thus racism. And we can't have that, so let's block developments and damage new properties from new developers and residents alike. Let's protest new parks, stores, and museums, and other improvements because ALL improvements must be gentrification.

Yet a (falsely perceived) lack of diversity in more viable, peaceful, and gentrified areas = racism. How dare they not take in their share of section 8 housing, of affordable housing, of projects, etc, etc.

So basically gentrification is racism. Of course a lack of gentrification is also racism. And finally diversity in poor, non-gentrified areas is also racism.  The only thing that isn't racism is thus diversity - and by diversity we're limited to just racial diversity - in functional, already gentrified neighborhoods. Shit gets confusing.

I swear you just can't win with some people.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2018, 04:22:19 PM by TBideon »

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15420
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #408 on: March 16, 2018, 04:56:30 PM »
^A good number of the white anti-gentrification people are quite conspicuously from wealthy families.  It's okay, in their own minds, for them to move into poor neighborhoods because they did it for the "right" reasons.  They act like they really care about the poor but they usually just want attention from their wealthy peers.   
« Last Edit: March 16, 2018, 05:06:15 PM by jmecklenborg »

Offline Brutus_buckeye

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3259
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #409 on: March 16, 2018, 05:12:29 PM »
I remember back 20-30 years ago, people talked about gentrification, it was spoken about as a positive thing for neighborhoods. Now gentrification is a 4 letter word.

The lesson of the day:
Diversity in poor areas = gentrification, pushing out the poor, and thus racism. And we can't have that, so let's block developments and damage new properties from new developers and residents alike. Let's protest new parks, stores, and museums, and other improvements because ALL improvements must be gentrification.

Yet a (falsely perceived) lack of diversity in more viable, peaceful, and gentrified areas = racism. How dare they not take in their share of section 8 housing, of affordable housing, of projects, etc, etc.

So basically gentrification is racism. Of course a lack of gentrification is also racism. And finally diversity in poor, non-gentrified areas is also racism.  The only thing that isn't racism is thus diversity - and by diversity we're limited to just racial diversity - in functional, already gentrified neighborhoods. Shit gets confusing.
I swear you just can't win with some people.

The funny thing about diversity and gentrification the housing advocates forget or wont ever realize -

You wont be able to get people in poor urban neighborhoods to ever move to wealthy areas and create diversity that way. The economics of it will never work.  Putting a housing project in Indian Hill for example would be completely asinine because you effectively put it on an island and cut them off from social services and ability to get to and from jobs, etc.  It makes a lot for sense to achieve diversity by moving the wealthy into poorer neighborhoods than the other way around. 

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15420
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #410 on: March 16, 2018, 05:16:48 PM »
^Also, the market can't build new housing for the poor.  Construction costs are too high in the United States. 


Offline freefourur

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4819
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #411 on: March 16, 2018, 05:20:37 PM »
I think the idea in the context of rust belt cities and Ohio in general is a different discussion than what is happening in coastal cities.  Generally, gentrification in Cleveland is a force of good. 

Offline freefourur

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4819
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #412 on: March 16, 2018, 05:22:12 PM »
^Also, the market can't build new housing for the poor.  Construction costs are too high in the United States.

This can only be done with heavy subsidy.  But I hate when people say that building high end housing will drive up prices for houses.  If new housing isn't built the rich people will just bid on existing homes and cause greater pressure on affordability.  This is basic economics.

Offline eastvillagedon

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 5501
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #413 on: March 16, 2018, 05:24:07 PM »
^Also, the market can't build new housing for the poor.  Construction costs are too high in the United States. 



 

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15420
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #414 on: March 16, 2018, 05:35:49 PM »
^Also, the market can't build new housing for the poor.  Construction costs are too high in the United States.

This can only be done with heavy subsidy. 

It's unlikely that you can build a new apartment unit for under $100,000 as part of a plex without getting into dormitory-type construction with a shared bathroom at the end of the hall, which is illegal pretty much everywhere.  If such housing were suggested as part of a mixed development (for example 100 market-rate 900 sq foot apartments along with 100 450 sq foot apartments without bathrooms or AC) people would absolutely flip out. 





Offline GCrites80s

  • Premium Member
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • ***
  • Posts: 9125
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #415 on: March 16, 2018, 06:24:41 PM »
It's probably way more money over the lifetime of a building to pay a guy to keep them clean rather than having separate bathrooms.

Offline E Rocc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 9285
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #416 on: March 16, 2018, 09:17:18 PM »
There is without question a ton of hypocrisy with those who oppose "gentrification", however they define it, especially with racial dynamics. White people moving into low-income black or Hispanic neighborhoods are routinely vilified for pushing out local residents, which is such nonsense and limited to really a handful of cities in the US, and within them a handful of neighborhoods. Yet, at least in Chicago, you have protesters adamant about the Obama library NOT being built in Jackson Park, else the white gentrifiers will arrive and push out the poor black and Hispanic from those impoverished, high-crime adjacent neighborhoods. A completely fantasy, as South Shore and Woodlawn are years, maybe decades, away from being safe, functional neighborhoods, regardless of a museum nearby. 

And yet the people who protest the most about investors and white residents moving in are the FIRST to also vilify the more functional neighborhoods for not being diverse enough, which in itself is a false claim as there is much more to diversity than just black/brown or white.

The lesson of the day:

Diversity in poor areas = gentrification, pushing out the poor, and thus racism. And we can't have that, so let's block developments and damage new properties from new developers and residents alike. Let's protest new parks, stores, and museums, and other improvements because ALL improvements must be gentrification.

Yet a (falsely perceived) lack of diversity in more viable, peaceful, and gentrified areas = racism. How dare they not take in their share of section 8 housing, of affordable housing, of projects, etc, etc.

So basically gentrification is racism. Of course a lack of gentrification is also racism. And finally diversity in poor, non-gentrified areas is also racism.  The only thing that isn't racism is thus diversity - and by diversity we're limited to just racial diversity - in functional, already gentrified neighborhoods. Shit gets confusing.

I swear you just can't win with some people.

What they want, for others of course, is not merely racial or economic "diversity", but cultural diversity.   With the more "mainstream American" cultures deferring in all ways to the others of course.

That quite simply does not work when people have options.   Especially in denser neighborhoods.

Offline StapHanger

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 8718
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #417 on: March 16, 2018, 09:39:08 PM »
Yeah, intimidation and violence to stop redevelopment in the central city, real great.  But hey, let's b-tch about suburban sprawl too.  Idiots.

It's pretty much one or the other, most places.   Gentrification or sprawl.

If you run around threatening violence at people who are not being violent, quite honestly you deserve it back at you.


This dichotomy is a policy choice; an outcome of not permitting increased density in high market neighborhoods, accelerating spillover. Its not inherent.

There is without question a ton of hypocrisy with those who oppose "gentrification", however they define it, especially with racial dynamics. White people moving into low-income black or Hispanic neighborhoods are routinely vilified for pushing out local residents, which is such nonsense and limited to really a handful of cities in the US, and within them a handful of neighborhoods. Yet, at least in Chicago, you have protesters adamant about the Obama library NOT being built in Jackson Park, else the white gentrifiers will arrive and push out the poor black and Hispanic from those impoverished, high-crime adjacent neighborhoods. A completely fantasy, as South Shore and Woodlawn are years, maybe decades, away from being safe, functional neighborhoods, regardless of a museum nearby. 

And yet the people who protest the most about investors and white residents moving in are the FIRST to also vilify the more functional neighborhoods for not being diverse enough, which in itself is a false claim as there is much more to diversity than just black/brown or white.

The lesson of the day:

Diversity in poor areas = gentrification, pushing out the poor, and thus racism. And we can't have that, so let's block developments and damage new properties from new developers and residents alike. Let's protest new parks, stores, and museums, and other improvements because ALL improvements must be gentrification.

Yet a (falsely perceived) lack of diversity in more viable, peaceful, and gentrified areas = racism. How dare they not take in their share of section 8 housing, of affordable housing, of projects, etc, etc.

So basically gentrification is racism. Of course a lack of gentrification is also racism. And finally diversity in poor, non-gentrified areas is also racism.  The only thing that isn't racism is thus diversity - and by diversity we're limited to just racial diversity - in functional, already gentrified neighborhoods. Shit gets confusing.

I swear you just can't win with some people.

Eh, this is a bit of a caricature you're painting here. The major strains of fair housing advocacy by and large don't care about diversity for diversity's sake. They care about access to neighborhood housing, and the forces that block it: rising rents (gentrification) in incumbent neighborhoods and the local police power of land use regulations, punitive policing, and transport policy, plus straight out racial discrimination by realtors and landlords, in overwhelmingly white neighborhoods with strong public amenities.  As a YIMBY type, I have all sorts of bones to pick with various aspects of housing advocacy and particular actors, and certainly agree about the misplaced gentrification angst in some places, but this "can't win with these people" attitude is a little obtuse.

Offline freefourur

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4819
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #418 on: March 16, 2018, 10:43:53 PM »
There is without question a ton of hypocrisy with those who oppose "gentrification", however they define it, especially with racial dynamics. White people moving into low-income black or Hispanic neighborhoods are routinely vilified for pushing out local residents, which is such nonsense and limited to really a handful of cities in the US, and within them a handful of neighborhoods. Yet, at least in Chicago, you have protesters adamant about the Obama library NOT being built in Jackson Park, else the white gentrifiers will arrive and push out the poor black and Hispanic from those impoverished, high-crime adjacent neighborhoods. A completely fantasy, as South Shore and Woodlawn are years, maybe decades, away from being safe, functional neighborhoods, regardless of a museum nearby. 

And yet the people who protest the most about investors and white residents moving in are the FIRST to also vilify the more functional neighborhoods for not being diverse enough, which in itself is a false claim as there is much more to diversity than just black/brown or white.

The lesson of the day:

Diversity in poor areas = gentrification, pushing out the poor, and thus racism. And we can't have that, so let's block developments and damage new properties from new developers and residents alike. Let's protest new parks, stores, and museums, and other improvements because ALL improvements must be gentrification.

Yet a (falsely perceived) lack of diversity in more viable, peaceful, and gentrified areas = racism. How dare they not take in their share of section 8 housing, of affordable housing, of projects, etc, etc.

So basically gentrification is racism. Of course a lack of gentrification is also racism. And finally diversity in poor, non-gentrified areas is also racism.  The only thing that isn't racism is thus diversity - and by diversity we're limited to just racial diversity - in functional, already gentrified neighborhoods. Shit gets confusing.

I swear you just can't win with some people.

What they want, for others of course, is not merely racial or economic "diversity", but cultural diversity.   With the more "mainstream American" cultures deferring in all ways to the others of course.

That quite simply does not work when people have options.   Especially in denser neighborhoods.


<eye roll>

Offline KJP

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 51147
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
Re: Gentrification News & Discussion
« Reply #419 on: March 17, 2018, 01:12:07 AM »
Have you looked at housing prices and short time spans that homes are on the market in the most dense, diverse, multicultural urban centers of this country?  Have you looked at housing prices and sale speeds in increasing numbers of Cleveland neighborhoods as well as densely developed areas of Lakewood and  Cleveland Heights? It's actually quite stunning. I've got lots of good material to write a very interesting blog about Greater Cleveland's urban housing market.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2018, 12:51:20 PM by KJP »
"Treat this (November 2018) election as if it's the last election in which you can fully exercise your democratic rights. Because it just might be." -- Margy Waller.