Jump to content

C-Dawg

Members
  • Content Count

    6,541
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. C-Dawg

    Personal Finance / Investing Thread

    I read around some more on that site and all of his articles come across the same way. There's even a post about how to "stay under the radar" and connect with the common folk. I have a feeling he's some Silicon Valley millionaire and his target audience is people who have a net worth north of 7 figures. At least, that's what I've gathered after reading a few articles and his follow-ups in the comments. Probably why he's complaining about his tenants, while not entirely taking responsibility for letting them pay rent late 8 times in 24 months. He is a San Francisco millionaire and that is his target audience. Keep in mind that place he rented in SF's Marina District was $9,000 a month. Even for the Marina, that's a little bit expensive (five bros in that lackluster rental should be more like $7500-$8500 a month). He's likely making money hand over fist on that property so his "woe is me" attitude is hilarious. None of those pictures are remotely bad. Tenants in SF are remarkably good compared to most cities since everyone lives in fear of eviction and becoming homeless or moving to Oakland. With that said, of course tenants in the Marina are going to party hard. It's fraternity/sorority central, but luckily for landlords, roughly 60% of the neighborhood under 35 is female. The north side of San Francisco has the nicest flats and rentals, and the single women up there generally keep them clean. And most of those renters are rich enough to hire maids too. That's pretty common in neighborhoods like the Marina and Pacific Heights. I'm not saying all frat bros are dirtier tenants, but in San Francisco, the cleanest neighborhoods are the female-dominated ones. Pacific Heights is spotless. The heavily male-dominated neighborhoods are filthy (with the exception of the Castro). SOMA and the Tenderloin are disgusting (though at least the TL is fun!). It's pretty shocking to look at the gender disparities among young singles in San Francisco, but if you live in the Bay, you see it and feel it. Most of these singles are of course renters: http://visualizing.nyc/bay-area-zip-codes-singles-map/ If Financial Samurai wanted spotless tenants, he shouldn't have picked a bunch of frat bros likely fresh out of college from out of town. I've had a few dirty female roommates, but only in Oakland. Generally speaking (these are broad strokes), the kind of wealthy sorority girls who dominate the Marina and North Side SF are quite high-maintenance and clean. They have big advantages when renting in a cut-throat market like San Francisco. It's illegal to discriminate on gender, but when 500 people apply for an apartment, landlords can get away with discriminating on all sorts of trivial matters ("They eat processed food! No way am I renting to them!"). The two sorority girls I lived with in San Francisco were remarkably clean (way cleaner than any girls I lived with in Ohio). One was a borderline clean freak, but she was an awesome roommate (one of my all-time favorites). We had keg parties too, but we always deep cleaned the flat right afterwards to make it spotless. Again, nobody wants to risk losing their flat in San Francisco! The consequences are grave. Financial Samurai would have a massive heart attack if he ever set foot inside any rental property in Athens, Ohio...lol, that dude needs to visit real America! *Now Oakland tenants can be real nightmares. Burning Man houses and illegal warehouses can get disgusting beyond belief. Hipster flats can get unbelievably disgusting too. Oakland landlords have way bigger problems than San Francisco landlords. Even San Jose landlords do too (San Jose can get a lot grimier than you'd expect). Hell, even when I lived with USF undergrads in The City, they were spotless compared to anyone I lived with in Ohio. These were some of the few college kids in the Bay who actually did know how to party, but they always cleaned up after themselves (though of course students everywhere in the Bay are lightweights compared to Midwestern party school kids at legendary places like Ohio U). Even the fraternity houses at Berkeley and Stanford are pretty clean. Students in the Bay are very serious about their careers at an early age. It seems like they miss out on some of the fun of college, but most of them walk into extremely high-paying jobs at 23, so who can blame them? Being a landlord of a student rental in the Bay is low-risk compared to places like Ohio. If San Francisco ever had tenants as bad as in Athens, Ohio, half of the buildings would be condemned after one semester! **The dude who writes Financial Samurai lives in a bubble lol. Even by SF standards, he's loaded, and being able to own multiple rental properties in SF means you're filthy rich by any real world standard. He should be thanking his lucky stars he is so wealthy. He constantly posts nonsense about how he thinks SF is undervalued for what it is, which anybody who lives in the Bay knows is pure BS at this point. It's insane how expensive it has gotten here and no amount of hometown bias can justify the Bay being so much more expensive than Toronto, NYC, London, or other truly global metro areas (those other metros have truly global diversity, not just rich kid diversity like in the Bay today). And nothing can justify this housing shortage or people bidding hundreds of thousands of dollars over asking price for marginal properties just because it's in Silicon Bay. While recent buyers in San Francisco will be alright, Oakland and San Jose are likely in massive housing bubbles again. Even lower-tier neighborhoods in SF like the Sunset District and Bernal Heights could see a major correction...Financial Samurai needs to stop pouring so much money into real estate at the top of the market! That's like some 2007 crap right there... The only people who should be investing in San Francisco real estate right now are people with inside connections, special deals, or those buying slightly below market rate in top tier neighborhoods with long-term stability (like Pacific Heights, Nob Hill, Noe Valley, Russian Hill, North Beach, Inner Richmond, Upper Haight, NOPA, etc.). In Oakland, the neighborhoods of Rockridge, Adams Point, Piedmont, and Eastlake/Cleveland Heights are just about the only sane places left to park a couple million dollars in real estate. There aren't many smart places left to buy anywhere in San Francisco and Oakland these days. Even buying in the hyper-gentrified, tech-obsessed Mission could be a gamble right now if there is a tech bubble...buying in SOMA right now could be a terrible idea for multiple reasons... Financial Samurai is right to point out that crowdfunding real estate development looks like a nice way to invest in real estate without the headaches. I think that is quite promising in most American cities. Let the professional developers and landlords deal with the headaches while you still get some solid returns.
  2. C-Dawg

    Gentrification News & Discussion

    Nob Hill is top notch. Nothing tops it as far as dating goes. It's an amazing neighborhood as a single male and that's where I usually go out. The women are incredible in Nob Hill and the entire north side of San Francisco...though most already have their own money. :wink: That's one of the few hoods where women I date usually live alone.
  3. C-Dawg

    Gentrification News & Discussion

    I have never seen a trashed apartment in San Francisco of anyone under 40. Nobody ever wants to get evicted, and usually renters do their own repairs and appliance upgrades on rent-controlled properties (we usually did). That's part of the deal when you have rent control. You never complain to your landlord and you take care of the apartment for them. That way, they are less motivated to evict you and then double/triple the rent to market rate. If you're 50% or more below market rate, you make damn sure your apartment is in good shape. *I imagine people on 6-month or 1-year rotations at tech companies who have their temporary housing paid for in full by corporate are far more likely to trash apartments. I've seen that a few times as places devolved into tech frats or social media marketing sorority party hubs on Ohio University level. **Oakland hipsters still trash apartments and houses on occasion, which risks eviction. The worst place I saw was a large Victorian house of hipsters in Temescal (single-family homes, condos, and duplexes in Oakland are not covered by rent control, so high eviction risk). These hipsters seemed to have all completely given up on life. The carpet in one of the bedrooms was caked in vomit, urine, and sex fluids. The kitchen had spilled beer and cigarettes everywhere. The backyard was littered entirely in trash. The smell of this place was ungodly, and I immediately bailed without finishing my interview. This was like five years ago, so I am 100% sure all of those hipsters are up in Portland now. Any reasonable landlord would have evicted them once rents spiked in Temescal (2013-2016 was the huge spike). This house was as trashed as Mill Street or Palmer Street in Athens... Obviously, Oakland's illegal Burning Man warehouses/art spaces are total hellholes too and major fire hazards. As we saw last year at Ghost Ship, these illegal Burning Man warehouses are deathtraps and pose serious hazards to their surrounding neighborhoods. That's why landlords are trying to tear these warehouses down and build legal housing on the sites in West Oakland and East Oakland. There is no reason for these warehouses to exist anymore and the sites can support much-needed high-rise housing. None of them are particularly historic at this point. But of course, being Oakland, people are violently protesting this housing, or burning it down as warehouses are converted to housing: Suspicious 5-alarm fire tears through Oakland condo project site It's the second fire at the million dollar condo complex under construction, and developers of the project say they are sure it was arson. The fire sent flames shooting high into the sky and sent smoke drifting as far as San Jose. "That's the second time they burn it down. It's unbelievable. It looks like somebody's against us," construction worker Matt Padilla, who worked on the condo project, said. The developer says he will not be deterred. "Whoever is doing this is not going to stop us from building housing. We had two armed guards and 12 cameras," Rick Holliday with Holliday Development said. http://abc7news.com/news/5-alarm-structure-fire-investigated-in-oakland-/1988484/ I thank my lucky stars I've been in a rent-controlled master tenant power position for years. As soon as a roommate crosses the line, I kick them out. I am admittedly more ruthless than the average soft, passive aggressive Oakland type (but I am only ruthless on the filthy rich trust fund kids, which have been most of my roommates). Most of my roommates have been clean and responsible because they know not to mess with me. Oakland's housing crisis is more recent, so people are still learning how to survive in a hyper-gentrified place like Oakland. I learned from being poor in San Francisco how to game the system and legally protect yourself from bad roommates. I make sure I always give myself eviction rights in roommate contracts. I only give one warning for contract violations. After the second violation, I kick them out! Of my last dozen roommates, only one has been dirty or damaged the flat. The bigger issues are always with relationships as roommates try to move in significant others since they can't find/afford their own place. I've had to warn two roommates about that and my right to evict them. They both left on their own once they knew I was serious about kicking them out. I also had to throw one of the girlfriends out of the shower once because I had a flight to catch! If you don't pay rent or utilities, you don't have shower rights. Couples should not live with roommates off of craigslist! I've lived with over 100 roommates over the last 10 years, so I've really learned how to protect myself, my money, and maintain an upper hand in apartments. Roommates only work when one has more power than the other ones. Only one person should ever be on the original lease. That's the situation in almost every San Francisco and Oakland rent-controlled flat. Landlords prefer it this way (less headaches and only one rent-controlled tenant), and it makes it easier for them to raise rent to market rate once that master tenant moves out.
  4. C-Dawg

    Gentrification News & Discussion

    That's hilarious. I've said it before and I'll say it again, real gentrification doesn't happen until middle class renters are being evicted. Lol, that Cincy townhouse looks like it's about to collapse! Would they rather see it collapse into the street or burn down in an arson fire? *I am 100% for historic preservation, but I know abandoned housing can reach the point of no return a lot faster than larger commercial buildings. That's a beautiful example of classic Cincinnati housing, but it looks beyond the point of no return. It's caving in on itself. I'm guessing there are foundation problems too given Cincy's well-documented erosion issues. I hope it can be saved, but I'm guessing it would take a labor of love with no ROI. :oops: I understand the frustration, but demolition from neglect is certainly not gentrification. In wealthy cities with real population growth and real gentrification, historic properties are the first to find investors, no matter the condition. That place would fetch $1-2 million in Oakland and $2-3 million in San Francisco. I wish Ohio cities could get some Silicon Bay wealth to save more historic properties like this...
  5. C-Dawg

    Liberal extremism

    ^Truth. The creation of "lifestyle cities" like Portland, Austin, Oakland, and Boulder is very recent. In the past, economic opportunity had a much stronger influence on migration. The Rust Belt cities all boomed in the late 19th/early 20th century because of great job options. I think the erosion of the entry-level job market in much of America and also the growth in trust funds has fueled this recent millennial migration pattern. Millennials had the worst job prospects in generations (maybe American history), but they also now have the most inherited wealth. Baby boomers made a lot of money during America's glory days and many passed it on to their kids in lifestyle/scenester cities. The number of kids with trust funds or parents paying their rent in Oakland is simply astounding. And it's shocking to see so many recent Oakland migrants hate on SF. They are entirely bypassing The City on purpose because they hate SF's Marina Girl culture. These are kids who can actually afford The City. Job opportunities and career growth are still the reasons many college grads flock to SF/NYC/LA/DC, but in many other cities, people are moving for cultural reasons. They want to live in a city surrounded by people like themselves. Hence how hipster echo chambers like Oakland and Portland exist. The recent growth in Portland is shocking considering the economy there. Of course, many recent migrants are remote workers from the Bay and Seattle too...The Bay's takeover of Portland's housing stock is equally shocking to see play out. Portland really doesn't want it, but can't stop it. The same thing is happening in Seattle as Bay Areans keep flooding that market with cash in hand.
  6. C-Dawg

    Liberal extremism

    Oakland kicked this off, and now it has spread to Berkeley. It's pathetic how Oakland officials let rioters destroy small businesses over and over again. And it's May Day, so probably more riots tonight. Here is a look back to the election...Republicans are right to criticize Oakland and Berkeley for their support of extremist politics. Democrats in San Francisco and real America are criticizing it too. Sadly, Oaklanders are taking this crap to Portland now after leaving Oakland. Extremist politics are spreading on both the left and right. Oakland: After second night of anti-Trump violence, officials at loss to stop it By ERIN BALDASSARI | ebaldassari@bayareanewsgroup.com and TAMMERLIN DRUMMOND | tdrummond@bayareanewsgroup.com | Bay Area News Group PUBLISHED: November 10, 2016 at 1:30 pm | UPDATED: November 11, 2016 at 4:18 am OAKLAND — The day after the presidential election, Assan Jethmal was disappointed and in shock over Donald J. Trump’s unexpected win. A co-owner of Good Mother, an art gallery downtown, Jethmal felt much the same way as many of the demonstrators who marched through the streets of Oakland and in cities across the country, chanting “Not my President.” And yet, Jethmal’s shop was among the dozens that got vandalized Tuesday night when nearly 7,000 people flooded downtown in an anti-Trump march. “I left around 9 or 10 o’clock and when I came back an hour later, the whole block was on fire and the window was smashed,” he said. Jethmal has insurance, but like many small business owners, he’s still on the hook for a big deductible. He said he was hustling to get the window fixed in time for a show at the gallery on Saturday. Throughout the day Thursday, business owners downtown and in Chinatown swept shards of glass from the sidewalk, nailed plywood over broken windows and scrubbed spray paint off of storefronts with a weariness that comes from having gone through the same exercise so many times before. Dozens of buildings had windows broken out, including City Hall. Downtown was covered in anti-Trump and anarchist graffiti. “It looks like someone took a can and just spray-painted graffiti everywhere,” said Oakland resident Tracy Tillman. “This has nothing to do with Trump. It was just an excuse for people who want to get their frustrations out. It makes me feel really bad for my city.” A night earlier, police had arrested 30 people on various charges ranging from vandalism to assaulting a police officer. Three officers were injured by projectiles, according to city officials. At moments throughout the demonstration, officers declared the protest an unlawful assembly and used tear gas to disperse the crowds. Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf said the vandalism was some of the worst she had seen in the aftermath of protests. She, city officials, and community and business leaders implored demonstrators to channel their frustration in a more positive direction. They visited businesses, handing out information to help owners file insurance claims and seeking to calm shattered nerves. CONTINUED http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2016/11/10/oakland-after-second-night-of-anti-trump-demonstrations-officials-call-on-citizens-to-take-care-of-oaklanders-first/
  7. C-Dawg

    Liberal extremism

    This is an example of East Bay "liberal" extremism...but really anarchists hijacking the liberal movement in Oakland-Berkeley. The problem is that Democrats in Oakland and Berkeley have created safe spaces for these trust fund kids to riot. Police are ordered to let these riots happen, and they happen over and over and over. There is no end to this. Oakland has been rioting since 2011, and now Berkeley is rioting too. This is giving Democratic leadership a big black eye in the Bay and real America. San Francisco doesn't let this crap happen because its liberal Democrats are sane. SF stops its riots. Liberal leadership in Oakland and Berkeley is entirely responsible for letting these riots happen in the East Bay. And they are entirely responsible for letting BART and the freeways get shut down repeatedly. Democrats in Oakland and Berkeley deserve all of the blame since they are afraid of these rich kids suing if police stop them.
  8. C-Dawg

    Liberal extremism

    Not in Oakland. They are clearly economic arguments. People here actually believe (or at least say they believe) building adequate housing supply "will just raise prices." It is a price-based argument in Oakland. They feel by building housing to match population growth, it will just create more demand and upward price pressure. By keeping Oakland in a perpetual housing shortage, they feel demand will magically go away. The problem is that in the Bay, demand is higher in Oakland than anywhere else now (hence the tens of thousands of evictions over the last few years). The only way to keep prices in check is to build housing. You can't win this argument with Oakland housing protestors. The real reason they want to maintain every urban prairie in Oakland is so their property values can keep going up 20-30% a year! This is why Oakland is littered with vacant lots. The housing shortage is enforced by housing objections, appeals, protests, and full-blown riots. NIMYBYs in the Bay are almost entirely Democrats, which is where the regressive movement is at. Republicans here are progressive and pro-housing. Most Republicans think housing is too expensive here and want to fix it. Democrats in Oakland are fine with the status quo. Even in more progressive SF, there are still a lot of Democrats OK with the status quo...though that number is shrinking.
  9. C-Dawg

    Liberal extremism

    Science, no. But I do think there is some data-based fact in Economics that liberals struggle with. Though, that certainly cuts both ways. I'm not sure that's the case. Trickle Down Economics has been largely been debunked, but is a bellwether of the Right despite how many studies show it doesn't work. That was the crux of the "cuts both ways" comment Out of curiosity, what widely debunked economic theories do liberals tend to support? The law of supply and demand when it comes to housing. People protesting housing construction in the Bay don't understand the law of supply and demand. They think housing construction will do nothing to lower home prices. They are unbelievably misinformed and have been hoodwinked by rich property owners making millions off of the housing crisis. Or, in many cases, they are false flag protestors. Oakland and Berkeley are the definition of liberal extremism...but what real America doesn't understand is that East Bay rioters and protestors are overwhelmingly trust fund kids organizing false flag protests. Many are actually hard right anarcho libertarians in liberal clothing. At some of the recent East Bay riots, "liberals get the bullet too" has been spray painted on buildings right next to the anarchy logo. Similar to how these wealthy right wing anarchist libertarians have hijacked the Black Lives Matter movement, they have also hijacked the Occupy movement. *The Midwest doesn't have liberal extremism...except maybe in Athens and Ann Arbor.
  10. C-Dawg

    Liberal extremism

    The gerrymandering in Ohio is disgusting. The Ohio 9th was clearly gerrymandered by Republicans to concentrate liberal Democratic strength into one district. "Hey, let's put all of those Lake Erie liberals into one district!" Its layout is insane. They basically drew up a narrow strip of land along Lake Erie to connect Toledo and Cleveland, and then eliminate one of their seats (Kucinich). It is textbook gerrymandering and pretty much the worst example of it in the entire United States. Join our tour of the worst Republican gerrymanders, with Ohio's 9th District! By Stephen Wolf Saturday Dec 03, 2016 · 7:59 PM PST Ohio’s 9th Congressional District previously centered on Toledo, but after the 2010 Census, Republicans gerrymandered it again to include distant western Cleveland, making it just barely contiguous along the Lake Erie shore. That threw Toledo-based Rep. Marcy Kaptur and Cleveland-based Rep. Dennis Kucinich together, and Kaptur defeated him in the 2012 Democratic primary by 56-40. The current Democratic vote-sink backed President Obama by 68-31, which helped Mitt Romney win the four districts to its south and west. Rep. Kaptur has been in office since 1983 and easily won 69-31 in 2016, even as Hillary Clinton was much weaker in northern Ohio than Obama. This district was part of a broader Republican gerrymander that gave their party a staggering 12 of 16 congressional districts in the last three election cycles, even when Obama narrowly carried the state 51-48 in 2012. We drew nonpartisan proposals for every state, and our map created a compact Toledo-based seat, a wholly western Cleveland district, and even constructed a third seat situated between the two. The Toledo and West Cleveland districts would have voted for Obama by 17 and 14 points respectively, while the district in between would have backed Obama by 5 percent. That means Ohio’s 9th district alone might have cost Democrats one or two extra seats on average. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/3/1602495/-Join-our-tour-of-the-worst-Republican-gerrymanders-with-Ohio-s-9th-District *The thing is Democrats do it too, especially in states like California. It is a bipartisan issue. To quote a friend in CA politics, "This is just how the game is played." I find that attitude towards gerrymandering just as disturbing coming from a Democrat as I do a Republican.
  11. C-Dawg

    Gentrification News & Discussion

    Oh yeah, Nashville is insanely overpriced compared to Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Toledo. I can't believe so many people are still moving down there! Its housing is mostly low quality and its urban structure is weak. *I guess the people are nice, but I've never felt comfortable with Southern hospitality...
  12. C-Dawg

    Gentrification News & Discussion

    Cincy and Pittsburgh are unique situations given the hills and more importantly, erosion. They also have large-scale losses resulting from Rust Belt decline, just more concentrated in certain neighborhoods. They are going to be more multi-nodal for a while. With that said, barriers don't matter in healthy economies. They don't matter whatsoever if the demand is there among the prime demo of rich folks. Look at West Oakland. It's a pathetic neighborhood of trust fund hipsters/burners without a single redeeming feature, and it is completely snuffed by freeways. Not to mention those freeways like I-880 and the Bay Bridge approaches have the worst gridlock in America, which contributes to West Oakland's shorter life expectancy and high rates of lung disease. The pollution is terrible there. West Oakland has no good access to anything of interest in Oakland, and even its BART station is an anti-urban joke (the worst one in the Inner Bay). Given typical gentrification models, West Oakland should have been Oakland's last neighborhood to gentrify. There are plenty of superior, safer, cleaner, more functionally urban East Oakland neighborhoods with better transit that still haven't reached second wave gentrification like every part of West Oakland has. Eastlake for example annihilates West Oakland in terms of urbanity and amenities, yet it's cheaper. Fruitvale is way better than West Oakland too, and it always has been. *The key difference between hyper-gentrified hipster hubs like Oakland and the Rust Belt cities is crime (or the fear of it). Rich kids in the Bay don't care about living in high-crime neighborhoods in Oakland. If anything, their extremely sheltered 1% upbringing makes them oblivious to issues of the 99% like crime, joblessness, poverty, etc. A lot of these rich kids in Oakland are shocked the first time they are robbed or their car is broken into. To someone from a real city, these are just standard urban ills, but the rich kids moving to Oakland have no understanding of it since they've lived such sheltered lives. By contrast, kids from the Rust Belt have an acute understanding of these societal ills after seeing their cities and regions decline. This makes Rust Belters more hesitant to invest in Rust Belt urban neighborhoods until there is a consistent crime reduction. Oakland never had anything like a Rust Belt economic decline. Its problems are self-created due to extreme racism and destructive politics. Its population barely declined, and it has access to the best jobs on earth. Rich Oaklanders will invest early in a high-crime neighborhood as people are still being regularly shot in the street. In the Rust Belt, this doesn't seem to happen. People wait until crime is reduced. In Silicon Bay, high levels of crime did nothing to stop investors from flooding San Francisco's Tenderloin (great location, urbanity, and amenities, but absurd crime and homelessness for most of its history) and West Oakland (terrible everything, but the hub of rich hipsters and burners). People actually take much bigger investment risks on the West Coast. Oakland crashed harder than almost any other city on earth during the housing collapse. It could easily crash again, since the fundamentals of real estate investment aren't there. San Francisco is where the stability is at in the Bay. Yet no amount of random murders, shootings, street assaults, armed robberies, street rapes, or poor urban planning can stop hyper-gentrification in Oakland's slums. Everyone knew San Francisco's Tenderloin would come back due to its urban structure and location, but the level of hyper-gentrification in low density slums of Oakland with no amenities is truly shocking. West Oakland is entirely an island cut off from Oakland's Downtown/Uptown (where what slight amount of nightlife in Oakland is at). It is completely cut off from everything by freeways (and this was clearly done on purpose for historic racial reasons given the pointlessness of I-980). West Oakland defies traditional gentrification logic. Vastly superior and safer urban neighborhoods in Oakland are now cheaper than West Oakland. BART does not explain it at all. West Oakland station has the second lowest ridership in Oakland after Rockridge. Even Coliseum station in deep East Oakland has higher ridership! Not many of those trust fund kids in West Oakland are working in SF. A huge chunk are young retirees who used their money to buy a home in West Oakland. In fact, most of them wouldn't be caught dead in sexy, clean cut San Francisco. They don't need to work and they hate San Francisco's mainstream culture. This is also why Oakland = West Coast Brooklyn is such a stupid comparison besides the obvious fact that Oakland = Newark with Manhattan housing prices. Brooklyn is urban and well-connected to Manhattan. Oakland is mostly streetcar suburban (even rural in the hills), and loosely connected to San Francisco. Oakland's gentrification patterns make no sense. Fruitvale actually should have gentrified long before inferior neighborhoods like Temescal and West Oakland. All I know is that a lot recent home buyers in West Oakland could be screwed if the tech bubble ever blows or Oakland's trust fund scene moves somewhere else (say cheaper, superior cities like Portland, Seattle, or LA). There are no anchor institutions in West Oakland and virtually no amenities. It is barely streetcar suburban at this point, and its low density coupled with entrenched crime makes it a bad long-term bet. And honestly, with the endless supply of urban prairies in West Oakland, if NIMBYs are ever overcome in Oakland (unlikely), West Oakland will see tons of infill, which will reduce home prices (or at least slow down appreciation to human levels). That housing is incredibly needed, and West Oakland has the most space for it in the entire Inner Bay. No other part of the Bay has that many empty lots. It makes a lot more sense to invest in undervalued high density neighborhoods if appreciation is your goal (like SF's Tenderloin circa 2008-2012). West Oakland is an overvalued low density neighborhood. Burner and hipster culture is the only reason its prices are so high. Many West Oakland and North Oakland neighborhoods are on second and third wave gentrification without the fundamentals to justify it (same situation in South Berkeley too). People keep pouring money into high-crime, low density slums with no amenities and low quality architecture that are surrounded by freeways. The East Bay housing market is total insanity. Crime and gridlocked freeways producing choking air pollution should be a deterrent, but they aren't. It doesn't matter how suburban, crime-ridden, and isolated the neighborhood is, people will line up for blocks to outbid each other for housing in West Oakland. By contrast, Toledo is just now experiencing first wave gentrification in its core after substantial reductions in crime. Downtown and Warehouse District redevelopment spilled over to Uptown, and substantial urban infill is likely just a few years away. In 5-10 years, Vistula and East Toledo could come back. Redevelopment in the Rust Belt tends to follow reductions in crime. People don't take as big of risks in cities like Toledo and Detroit, hence why so much focus is on the Downtowns right now. That makes perfect sense when you consider what happened to the economies in these cities. It's the same story in Cleveland, Buffalo, Cincinnati, and even Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh still has a lot of vacant land and bombed out areas. They've just been better at contiguous urban development since its economic decline leveled off earlier. Toledo is the Rust Belt's best comparison to Oakland since they are nearly identical cities in size, scale, density, and geography (excluding the Oakland Hills). However, Toledo's urban bones and culture are superior to Oakland. Toledo has more surviving pre-WW2 architecture, more Victorian housing, and a much better Downtown core. Toledo also has fewer freeways and better urban planning despite being much grittier and more abandoned. On top of this, Toledo is more racially integrated and has strong Eastern European and Middle Eastern ethnic culture that is entirely lacking in Oakland. Oakland's success and extreme flood of wealth is why I think the Rust Belt cities will eventually come back. The worst city on the West Coast now has the second highest rents after San Francisco! This is unsustainable, and rich people are going to start looking at other options... Provincial ignorance about real America is why Oakland is seeing so much gentrification and investment. Nothing about Oakland itself is fueling this flood of money. If these rich kids knew anything about the Rust Belt cities, they would be moving there... The thing is they don't know anything about the "flyover country" they deride. Many of them have never even been to Chicago! They think it's some small manufacturing town on a prairie, not the second best city in America and arguably our best coastal city (just on fresh water). Never underestimate the ignorance of elite coastal hipsters. The economic and cultural divide in the United States has never been greater. But how long can these rich hipsters in Oakland stay ignorant? Eventually they'll figure out they are being ripped off and will look at better cities for less money. Keep in mind I'm talking about people rich enough to not worry about work. This is where the Rust Belt's gentrification will come from. It will start with Chicago and Detroit, since those are the Midwestern cities in national/international conversation, and it will spread to other Rust Belt cities. Now is a great time to buy housing in Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Buffalo, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Cincinnati!
  13. ^Ugh, terrible. Too much surface parking, not enough street front buildings, and excessive green space in the urban core. Toledo already has way too much parkland, including massive metroparks that would be state parks in most other metro areas (I think Oak Openings may have even been a state park at one time). While these huge metroparks create a greenbelt around the metro area that limits sprawl, having them in the urban core is a waste of prime real estate. I supported the Middlegrounds Metropark since it was a brownfield, but the Marina District is shovel-ready for large-scale urban infill, not 3-story apartments with too much surface parking and only one or two commercial buildings built in an oversized park. The Marina District should not be a metropark with all that prime waterfront real estate and those amazing views of the skyline and shipping channel. Its location and infrastructure can support much higher levels of development than what is being proposed here. *I would be the first person to support the expansion of Oak Openings in western Lucas County and the restoration of critical Lake Erie marshes east of Oregon (which would also put pressure on Oregon to stop sprawling towards Sandusky along Route 2). Those would be fantastic expansions of Lucas County green space that would also help clean up Lake Erie and help stabilize the endangered plant and animal species around Toledo. But the Metroparks should not do further expansions in the urban core. A smaller park is fine in the Marina District and public access to the water should be maintained, but this tiny housing/commercial development is shooting for the gutter by preserving so much space for another metropark. It is not a good use of existing land and infrastructure with the carrying capacity for high density urban development. In an economically healthy city, this would be large-scale, high-end urban infill.
  14. The amount of development in Detroit right now is just incredible. It's outpacing much healthier cities, and is spilling over to Toledo. I hope Monroe, Michigan gets in on it too. That was always such a great historic port town between Toledo and Detroit. There also is a decent public beach in Monroe (decent by Lake Erie standards). Monroe has tons of potential for spinoff from Detroit and Toledo. Its urban core is solid and Monroe's historic housing is about as good as it gets in America for the price. Does anyone know if any projects have been announced in Monroe yet?
  15. C-Dawg

    Gentrification News & Discussion

    Lol, Riff Raff. I guess he can't handle how hard people go at Ohio U....
×