HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 3:07 PM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 27,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by galleyfox View Post
Chicago: Households +9% Units +6% Population +1.9%

NYC: Households +8% Units +8% Population +7.7%
Just a guess, but pretty confident that NYC growth includes a much greater share of immigrants and Orthodox and Chi growth includes a greater share of young hipster/professionals/yuppies/whatever you want to call them.

So Chi can produce more households but less population growth, as there are more Beckys and Chads in Lakeview and Wicker Park and fewer Shulems and Rivkas with eight kids. Also Chicago immigration rates dropped off more than in NYC.

I suspect even the gentrified NYC neighborhoods have higher household sizes, as there's a lot more apartment sharing/boarding somewhere like Williamsburg compared to Bucktown. And NYC probably has a lot more Beckys and Chads than Chi, but it's more lost in the mix, given the other demographic factors and 3x the population.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 3:49 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 7,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
I believe that you meant FHA rather than HUD.
Yeah, HUD is the authority over FHA now, but yes, I was referring to the early FHA program.



Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
You can buy a multifamily up to four units with an FHA loan (I don't know about a VA loan).
But you couldn't buy a condo unit with an FHA loan, which put densely built cities at a disadvantage for attracting middle class families. This was more critical in the mid 20th century when banks had stricter standards for lending to buy homes. This would also disincentivize urban dense urban environments because building single-family houses would be less risky for housing developers.

Last edited by iheartthed; Nov 30, 2022 at 4:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 3:53 PM
galleyfox galleyfox is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
^ average household size in Chicago is now down to 2.36 as of 2020.

Conceivably, how much lower can it really go? There has to be a basement somewhere, right?
There’s still a 10-20% drop that is theoretically possible in the upcoming decades. Could easily happen if Hispanic and black households align more with white households.


For city propers

DC: 2.08
Seattle: 2.05
Atlanta: 2.03
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 3:57 PM
Obadno Obadno is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd3189 View Post
I'm relatively familiar with many of the issues that led to the decline of many American cities through the late 20th century up to now in certain areas. But it is interesting to see that many prewar American cities were at their all-time peak back in the 50s and 60s, right after WW II.
No US cities are not dense. It was because cars and changes to lending rules allowed for average people to afford a small single-family home (historically something only the rich could have) and commute into the city for work.

"overpopulation" isn't a thing unless you are talking Manhattan, Tokyo, Shanghai or some very specific area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 4:10 PM
jmecklenborg jmecklenborg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
But you couldn't buy a condo unit with an FHA loan, which put densely built cities at a disadvantage for attracting middle class families.
This really only pertained to NYC because cooperative ownership of apartment buildings barely existed elsewhere. NYC banks developed a process for creating mortgages on cooperatively-owned apartment buildings but banks in other cities didn't bother because it was such a small potential source of revenue.

A condominium is fundamentally different, legally, than a co-op, meaning a mortgage loan (an in fact the construction loan used by the developer) must be completely different as well. The condominium didn't really start until the 1970s because it required several simultaneous innovations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 4:17 PM
jmecklenborg jmecklenborg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
This would also disincentivize urban dense urban environments because building single-family houses would be less risky for housing developers.
You can't really have "developers" without loans. Yes, a real estate syndicate can pool hard money, but almost nobody does this since the whole magic of real estate investing is leverage.

Single-family homes are so damn popular in the United States because they're very easy to get loans to construct and it's easy to get loans to buy the finished product.

A single-family home is an easily quantifiable unit.

A multi-family is less so (how many 1-bedrooms? how many 2-bedrooms? is there street-facing retail?). You can get a conventional mortgage for up to four units but not more because it's unlikely that a 5+ unit apartment building doesn't have unique details that necessitate a custom loan that requires research by the bank.

A mixed-use project (hotel + office + apartments + street level retail) almost never happens outside the biggest cities because it's difficult to get the construction loan. Why is it difficult to get the construction loan? Because it's tough to offload pieces of the project should the market shift during the 2-3 year construction period.

REITs don't really want to buy complex complexes. They want single-use complexes. All warehouse (no office). All office (no street level restaurant). All apartments (no condos).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 4:24 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 7,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
A mixed-use project (hotel + office + apartments + street level retail) almost never happens outside the biggest cities because it's difficult to get the construction loan. Why is it difficult to get the construction loan? Because it's tough to offload pieces of the project should the market shift during the 2-3 year construction period.
Yes, this is why cities with high land values are able to pump out these developments with ease, while cities with low land values struggle to do it. But my comments were about the mid-century shift from city to suburb. The early government backed lending programs made decline inevitable because families could not borrow money AND stay in the city once the city was all built out. The solution that some states enacted that benefited cities was to make it harder to develop single-family housing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 5:06 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 27,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
You can get a conventional mortgage for up to four units but not more because it's unlikely that a 5+ unit apartment building doesn't have unique details that necessitate a custom loan that requires research by the bank.
i wonder if there are local exceptions to that because 6-flats are a very common and formulaic building type here in chicago and they are built all over the place by small-time developers, who i imagine are not going through unusually complicated loan processes to fund their construction.







Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
The solution that some states enacted that benefited cities was to make it harder to develop single-family housing.
i'm curious to learn more about that.

which states? and what mechanisms did they use to make it harder to develop SFH?
__________________
"every time a strip mall dies, an angel gets its wings"

Last edited by Steely Dan; Nov 30, 2022 at 6:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 7:45 PM
jd3189 jd3189 is offline
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 5,419
Interesting stuff so far. I didn’t know much about the boarder and “kitchenette" situation back in the day.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
True, but the important part is "by American standards", which are really weird for global first world standards.

NYC has an "overcrowding problem" in immigrant neighborhoods and Orthodox Jewish neighborhoods, as displayed on the maps. The worst overcrowding is in the most immigrant- and Orthodox- heavy neighborhoods. This is the cultural norm. If you went to Borough Park, Brooklyn, and tried to explain to the Orthodox that their giant families were a problem, or if you went to Fresh Meadows, Queens, and tried to explain to South Asians that their grandparents and cousins living with them were a problem, you'd get some weird looks.

The "solution" to the overcrowding is gentrification, like in Manhattan and Brownstone Brooklyn which have normal household sizes. Absent that, there will be overcrowding.

I would think the solution to overcrowding is building more housing, not simply gentrification. The ethnic neighborhoods are relatively cheap and function well without much crime. I rather see more small scale investment in those neighborhoods rather than trying to make more TriBeCas or DUMBOs.
__________________
Working towards making American cities walkable again!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 7:53 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 27,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by galleyfox View Post
There’s still a 10-20% drop that is theoretically possible in the upcoming decades. Could easily happen if Hispanic and black households align more with white households.


For city propers

DC: 2.08
Seattle: 2.05
Atlanta: 2.03
hmm, those are really low.

i'm guessing around 2.0 would be the basement?

sad to think that chicago could see another siginificant increase in households this decade and still not see that translate into significant population growth as HH size decrease continues to take its bite.
__________________
"every time a strip mall dies, an angel gets its wings"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 8:47 PM
galleyfox galleyfox is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
hmm, those are really low.

i'm guessing around 2.0 would be the basement?

sad to think that chicago could see another siginificant increase in households this decade and still not see that translate into significant population growth as HH size decrease continues to take its bite.
One of the big reasons the 90s had such a huge population increase was because the new Hispanic households are so enormous compared to the outgoing families they were replacing. The new households of the 2010s were unbelievably wealthier but also much tinier.

Also it is absolutely in the city’s interest to channel gentrification near Bronzeville or Garfield Park in the interest of total population. Household sizes are not yet in the basement citywide because the bungalow belt supports larger families all around.

Loop: 1.61
Near North: 1.56
Lincoln Park: 1.90
Lakeview: 1.78
Lincoln Square: 2.09
North Center: 2.35
Uptown: 1.71
Edgewater: 1.75
Rogers Park: 1.98
West Ridge: 2.85

Near West: 1.88
West Town: 2.03
Logan Square: 2.22
Avondale: 2.48
North Park: 2.61
Irving Park: 2.42
Jefferson Park: 2.48
Edison Park: 2.43
Norwood Park: 2.47
Portage Park: 2.68
Albany Park: 2.74
Forest Glen: 2.79
O’Hare: 2.18

Lower West: 2.44
East Garfield: 2.50
West Garfield: 2.59
North Lawndale: 2.66
South Lawndale: 3.30
Humboldt Park: 2.82
Belmont Cragin: 3.32
Hermosa: 3.18
Austin: 2.66
Dunning: 2.73
Montclare: 2.85

Bridgeport: 2.52
McKinley Park: 2.87
Brighton Park: 3.31
Garfield Ridge: 2.87
Archer Heights: 3.40
West Elsdon: 3.50
Clearing: 2.75
Ashburn: 3.14
New City: 3.14
Chicago Lawn: 3.28
West Lawn: 3.64
Gage Park: 3.82

Near South: 1.80
Armory Square: 2.45
Douglas: 1.87
Grand Blvd: 2.16
Oakland: 2.11
Kenwood: 1.88
Washington Park: 2.61
Hyde Park: 1.79
Woodlawn: 2.19
South Shore: 2.06
South Chicago: 2.45
South Deering: 2.65
Hegewisch: 2.73
East Side: 3.10

Englewood: 2.52
West Englewood: 2.96
Fuller Park: 2.25
Greater Grand Crossing: 2.43
Washington Heights: 2.45
Chatham: 2.11
Avalon Park: 2.28
Calumet Heights: 2.37
Burnside: 2.44
Auburn Gresham: 2.48
Roseland: 2.54
Pullman: 2.28
West Pullman: 2.70
Morgan Park: 2.52
Beverly: 2.60
Mt. Greenwood: 2.67
Riverdale: 2.87
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2022, 10:55 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
i'm curious to learn more about that.

which states? and what mechanisms did they use to make it harder to develop SFH?
I'm sure it's easy in every metro. The variable is land availability and cost. With solid growth management policies, sites will be limited and expensive. This includes all the major West Coast metros.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2022, 12:32 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 27,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
growth management policies
What the hell are those?

Never heard of 'em.

Out here in "the land of infinite land", there are no rules.

__________________
"every time a strip mall dies, an angel gets its wings"

Last edited by Steely Dan; Dec 1, 2022 at 5:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2022, 4:36 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 7,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
i'm curious to learn more about that.

which states? and what mechanisms did they use to make it harder to develop SFH?
New Jersey has strong protections for farmland. They also have an amendment in the state constitution (the Mount Laurel doctrine) that requires all municipalities to provide housing for low income residents. To avoid lawsuits and protect demographics, many NJ suburbs have stopped allowing new housing to be built at all.

New York has a law that requires all state infrastructure projects to assess the impact on subsidizing and encouraging sprawl.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2022, 7:12 PM
pdxtex's Avatar
pdxtex pdxtex is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,929
No, they were due to the peak of domestic manufacturing. Once factories started closing or relocating, the population started to decline in Central cities. Couple that with white flight, fha loans and highways and thats the bulk of late century American history.
__________________
Portland!! Where young people formerly went to retire.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2022, 7:36 PM
jd3189 jd3189 is offline
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 5,419
^^^ I would believe that too. Interesting that at the peak of domestic manufacturing, American corporations just decided to slowly offshore many urban jobs. One of the dumbest decisions ever made for the economic health of this country. But at least we can get cheap shit from China.
__________________
Working towards making American cities walkable again!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2022, 7:44 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 27,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd3189 View Post
Interesting that at the peak of domestic manufacturing, American corporations just decided to slowly offshore many urban jobs.
don't forget about industrial automation.

people ALWAYS forget about industrial automation.

in 1970, US Steel's MASSIVE steel plant in Gary, IN employed about 30,000 men with solid, middle-class, union-backed, family-supporting jobs.

that steel mill was the foundation of the city's entire economy. it was literally the very reason why the city of Gary even existed in the first place.

today, that plant is still the largest integrated steel works in north america and makes boatloads of steel, but it now only employs about 3,000 people.

NW Indiana still makes more steel than anywhere else on the continent, but it just doesn't require much manpower anymore, relatively speaking.
__________________
"every time a strip mall dies, an angel gets its wings"

Last edited by Steely Dan; Dec 1, 2022 at 8:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:35 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.