Crikey, my house is probably almost in the negative-dollar range in real terms then, never mind what the appraisal says. Ye gods.
Austin went in big for urban density in the 1990s. There were talks about “desired growth corridors” vs places that should be left completely undeveloped [unpaved] because impervious cover [pavement] really screws up recharging the aquifer upon which all life depends here in Central Texas.
(My apologies that I can’t round up a “shot from same perspective” set of images, I need to get back to work while it’s still not 99°F out. Y’all get the idea.)
Sooooooo the Austin (et al) geniuses who went all in for the idea and reality of verticalization and urban density solved the housing needs in a very specific-to-the-region way. It’s a bit unreal, going downtown, as new skyscrapers keep popping up–I’ve been here since 1990 and it feels like a kind of Emerald City with a lot of voices still singing “follow the yellow brick road.”
I recall Portland, Oregon basically drew a ring on a map around its city and said something like “we’re leaving this greenbelt here, so hands off, you developers” and I haven’t really gotten the update on how that worked out. If you are reading this and live in Portland, I’d love to hear your take on the current situation re housing in your city.
JFC what an utterly utterly jack move.
Late stage capitalism yet again.
I am truly sorry to hear this.
I hear you. Oh yes. The trade-offs can be unlovely. I have lived this. I hope y’all are doing ok.
Indeed. It’s in the state constitution, so it’s not just Portland. Sprawl-limited urban planning is required everywhere. We call it the Urban Growth Boundary and I love it. It forces development spending back into the city. There are also good terms in it that require developers to build a balance of low-income housing when they build luxury housing.
It’s a damn sight better than the uncontrolled sprawl of other cities I’ve lived in.
I’d say the core problem here isn’t mestasized megawealth, it’s that the notion of home equity being the key to growing middle class wealth is in serious tension with universal affordable housing.
Financialization had changed the housing market forever. Houses are now more prone to be priced high relative to rents, and to see their prices fluctuate with the market. The very features that made home buying an affordable and stable investment are coming to an end.
But the illiquidity that made houses a safe investment also made America less dynamic and mobile. In coastal markets with strong demand for housing, market forces would normally have led to the replacement of single-family homes with duplexes and apartments. But existing homeowners are reluctant to agree to development with unknowable effects on the value of their most precious investments. The result is less development — and sky-high rents for any residents not lucky enough to own their own home.
*Update: A happy(?) ending for this particular house.
The house sold in less than 4 days to a local couple who plan to fix it up….
“There were many brisk offers, but they (the buyers) are neighborhood locals and that’s one of the reasons their offer was accepted,” Foster said. “The buyers grew up in the neighborhood, they have friends on the cul-de-sac. They are anxious to bring it back to its majestic glory. We didn’t take the highest offer, we took the best offer.”
