KCRag Forum

I just saw this event and thought I’d post it on here.

https://www.facebook.com/events/316031832249113/?ti=icl

thoughts? Looks like there’s some rabble rousing with ulterior motives going on here but it might be good for there to be real dialogue between developers, communities and city leaders to avoid the downsides of gentrification (low income communities priced out, the market flooded with only new high income housing, etc).

Is gentrification even an issue in KC for the poor? There are no large tracts of urban KC being gentrified, every gentrification effort is pretty small scale and localized (e.g., Beacon Hill and West End). Also, somewhere on this forum, someone posted recent population trends for the the portion of KCMO in Jackson County and the those trends are all downward. People are not leaving Brookside, they are leaving lower income housing in the city for the northland, Blue Springs, Lees Summit or wherever. I would think there's plenty of housing available in KC for non-subsidized lower income people. Probably too much. Urban KC was devastated by white flight in the 60's but has never experienced the large scale gentrification that has brought so many people with higher incomes back into other cities apart from the apartment boom downtown which essentially displaces nobody. Right now, gentrification in KC is a much needed good thing with almost no downside. It will be a long time before displacement of the poor is a problem in KC.

That is, word for word and idea for idea how I feel. Which is why it’s irritating there’s a forum being put on to rally people against a fake evil. It’s so clearly being done for personal political purposes and I imagine to help the realtor who is helping moderate the discussion. Everything about the Facebook event seems fishy.

I've been seeing the term used more and more in my neighborhood (Volker) group on Facebook. In the past few months apartment dwellers are reporting that they're being given less than one month's notice to vacate their apartment, and then the building or unit is being renovated and rent increased substantially. Also, houses going on the market don't last long and are selling for more than the asking price.
The established residents and younger renters are upset about the change of the neighborhood's character, being priced out of their current living situation, increased traffic and popularity of the area's bars recently. The area has been undervalued or underutilized for so long, it's only natural for a walkable neighborhood close to everything to see increased demand.

Highlander wrote: People are not leaving Brookside, they are leaving lower income housing in the city for the northland, Blue Springs, Lees Summit or wherever. I would think there's plenty of housing available in KC for non-subsidized lower income people. Probably too much. Urban KC was devastated by white flight in the 60's but has never experienced the large scale gentrification that has brought so many people with higher incomes back into other cities apart from the apartment boom downtown which essentially displaces nobody. Right now, gentrification in KC is a much needed good thing with almost no downside. It will be a long time before displacement of the poor is a problem in KC.

This is why NKC is more diverse than many areas south of the river. The magnet school program didn’t create a diverse urban district. Instead we got diverse near suburban schools. A couple of years back there was a classroom photo from Englewood Elementary. It was way more diverse than any stereotypes would have you believe.

The long term efforts will probably require giving up some of the political expectations we have of east vs west. It’s increasingly going to become uncommon that east side means black and northland means white.

I expect some developer to come into the areas east of the Paseo near downtown and renovate it. There’s a few areas that seem to be at risk of a tear down and be replace garden apartments with larger building.
Did this ever go up? viewtopic.php?t=20196

kcjak wrote:I've been seeing the term used more and more in my neighborhood (Volker) group on Facebook. In the past few months apartment dwellers are reporting that they're being given less than one month's notice to vacate their apartment, and then the building or unit is being renovated and rent increased substantially. Also, houses going on the market don't last long and are selling for more than the asking price.
The established residents and younger renters are upset about the change of the neighborhood's character, being priced out of their current living situation, increased traffic and popularity of the area's bars recently. The area has been undervalued or underutilized for so long, it's only natural for a walkable neighborhood close to everything to see increased demand.

This was always going to happen. So many of the south of downtown into east side neighborhoods are crazy under priced. Even lots are about 20-40% too low. Many $30k lots should be priced at $50k. There’s a reno near Locust and 34th that is priced about $100k too low at $149k. Another around 3500 Cherry that should sell as is for $250k and renovated for $450k. It’s priced at $215k. There’s a new home at half the size priced for $300k. That’s in line with the market right now.

The big mover in sales is they’re so cheap that there’s a lot of profit margin in them. New builds are crazy expensive, can’t build for under about $250k.

flyingember wrote:

Highlander wrote: I expect some developer to come into the areas east of the Paseo near downtown and renovate it. There’s a few areas that seem to be at risk of a tear down and be replace garden apartments with larger building.
Did this ever go up? viewtopic.php?t=20196

It hasn't started construction yet, and is still in the planning stages. I think the developer is in the process of seeking various housing subsidies since it's supposed to be have some mixed income housing/artist housing.

http://brinshore.com/dev/pendleton-artsblock/

flyingember wrote: This was always going to happen. So many of the south of downtown into east side neighborhoods are crazy under priced. Even lots are about 20-40% too low. Many $30k lots should be priced at $50k. There’s a reno near Locust and 34th that is priced about $100k too low at $149k. Another around 3500 Cherry that should sell as is for $250k and renovated for $450k. It’s priced at $215k. There’s a new home at half the size priced for $300k. That’s in line with the market right now.

The big mover in sales is they’re so cheap that there’s a lot of profit margin in them. New builds are crazy expensive, can’t build for under about $250k.

I think you are over-rating North Hyde Park.
That $149k house at 34th and Locust is a reno "opportunity"...it's a real junker that may be more cost effective to tear-down. So essentially a $149k plus demo cost lot. $100k more for that is a joke (40 days on market).
The $215k home at 3500 Cherry you claim should list for $250k has been on the market for 567 days. Doesn't look over-priced to me.

Critical_Mass wrote: I think you are over-rating North Hyde Park.
That $149k house at 34th and Locust is a reno "opportunity"...it's a real junker that may be more cost effective to tear-down. So essentially a $149k plus demo cost lot. $100k more for that is a joke (40 days on market).
The $215k home at 3500 Cherry you claim should list for $250k has been on the market for 567 days. Doesn't look over-priced to me.

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. That $149k "tear down" will be snapped up. I'm sure it has multiple offers already. The house on Cherry is so weird. I've called on it and would pay $215k but the bank received a short sale on the property and has just never responded. They can't take another offer to them until they respond to the first. Strangest thing I've ever seen. I've literally called ever month for the last year. The house is stuck. Has nothing to do with the price.

beautyfromashes wrote:

Critical_Mass wrote: I think you are over-rating North Hyde Park.
That $149k house at 34th and Locust is a reno "opportunity"...it's a real junker that may be more cost effective to tear-down. So essentially a $149k plus demo cost lot. $100k more for that is a joke (40 days on market).
The $215k home at 3500 Cherry you claim should list for $250k has been on the market for 567 days. Doesn't look over-priced to me.

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. That $149k "tear down" will be snapped up. I'm sure it has multiple offers already. The house on Cherry is so weird. I've called on it and would pay $215k but the bank received a short sale on the property and has just never responded. They can't take another offer to them until they respond to the first. Strangest thing I've ever seen. I've literally called ever month for the last year. The house is stuck. Has nothing to do with the price.

The renovation/tear-down opportunity may get snatched up, but it is certainly not worth $100k more as-is like you claimed:





especially compared to an already nicely renovated home listed at 3321 Holmes which is asking only $86k more.

First, if that was a "nicely renovated home" it'd be sold by now. They carpeted hardwoods, put down cheap floating floor and did a pedestrian job of that rehab, and that's being generous. Second, I never said $100 undervalued for that other house. It is definitely priced to sell though. You also have to look at the difference in square footage. One is 1000 more ft2 than the other and further west. Renovated, I could see it going for $269k, easily. Haven't seen the inside myself, but if $70k-$80k renovates it, $149k is a great price.

There’s a reno near Locust and 34th that is priced about $100k too low at $149k.

I was directly responding to this statement

^ That was flyingmember, not me.

The houses on Cherry and Gillham are both under contract. As mentioned, Cherry is a short sale, hence the length of time "on the market". Both of the houses need extensive work. I think the prices on both of them are appropriate for the amount of work they need (Gillham may end up selling for over asking).

3321 Holmes is a terrible rehab and the house appears to have foundation problems.

KCtoBrooklyn wrote:The houses on Cherry and Gillham are both under contract. As mentioned, Cherry is a short sale, hence the length of time "on the market".

Cherry is actually going to sell?!? I guess I can stop calling about it. It’s been pending with the bank since the summer.

Well, it could still fail to go through, as can happen with short sales. I don't know anything about what stage they are in of the process (sounds like you might have more info than me). Sometimes short sales just take a very long time.

As a resident of a Midtown neighborhood that has changed rapidly over the last 7 years, I used to get annoyed by people complaining about gentrification. As several people have pointed out, from a statistical point of view it's not happening in too many places in KCMO. I saw a study a few years ago that found that only South Hyde Park and part of the Northeast met their definition of gentrification. (And everyone seems to have a different definition, which makes it doubly challenging to have this conversation). And though it may still not be gentrification per se, I have seen people be displaced from my neighborhood through rent increases. Whatever you want to call it, it's pretty clear that something is happening in Midtown. So while I disagree with it being termed gentrification, I am sympathetic to concerns about displacement.

There are some pretty cheap houses in the neighborhoods to the north and south of us. Even cheaper ones to the east. So in that sense they're affordable. But that's a little deceptive because most of them come with a lot of expensive problems that need fixing, the total of which may be more than the purchase price of the house. So someone buying the house would be signing on for a lot more than the mortgage. The easier thing is to rent an apartment, but the downside of that is obviously the rent can be raised above what you can afford. There's something of a scarcity of apartments anyway, as a lot of the 4/6/8 plex apartments around me were torn down and either not replaced or replaced with a single-family house.

The way out of this seems pretty clear to me- so clear that I'm pretty sure there's something I'm missing. We need more housing density in Midtown, and we need a better affordable housing policy from the city. The density would help with the scarcity problem, and the housing policy would help to ensure that a portion of the new units would offer some ability for current residents to remain in an area as it became more affluent. KCMO is fortunate in two respects: it's early enough that gentrification can still be addressed in a meaningful way for most of the neighborhoods that are starting to see changes take place. And our relatively low density means that there should be enough space to develop in a neighborhood without having to physically move someone. Dealing with the rise in rent is tricker but could be offset with more/better affordable housing options.

Just some thoughts.

I wish there was a quality house that could be developed for areas like this. Something that fits in the scale of some of these old craftsman homes but has the quality to match it while not being overpriced. I remember how there used to be homes you could order in the Sears catalog. They would deliver all the materials and it would be put together ina kit format. Many of the homes in Midtown even have similar crests on the front. If a standard 4BR/ 3b house could be purchased at a bulk price of, say $140k while having modern interiors and quality looking steroids to match the neighborhood, it would be a game changer for Midtown. New houses on a nice lot with an external garage under $200k would fly off the shelfs in Midtown. Would modular be an option?

^Ban McMansions, legalize Rowhouses. and granny flats

https://www.theurbanist.org/2017/01/09/ban-mcmansions/

To echo one of chaglang's points, i think the effects of gentrification in KC are more felt among renters than buyers. It has always been true, even in KC, that folks will seek out "marginal" areas so their money will go farther in buying a home, which can result in these neighborhoods becoming more desirable (see Central Hyde Park, which is almost 100% rehabbed and homes are pretty pricey).

But renters often have fewer options. The effects are really being felt in the lower economic strata - I can't find it right now but there was an article in the KC Star about this in the last year or so--I remember it chronicled a family who lived east of downtown (like 8th and Prospect, or something) whose rent was like $450 and it was being jacked up to $650. $200 isn't a lot to folks in higher income brackets but that's basically a 50% rent increase for a struggling family who was barely making it already.

In midtown, there is no question that rents have gone way up over the past decade or so. Anecdotally, I am sure all of us have either rented apartments/houses, or had friends renting apartments/houses, in midtown that were huge, awesome, and cheap. (e.g., probably 10 years ago some good buddies of mine had a full floor, 3-bed apartment near the Westport post office. It was probably 2,000 sq ft and they literally paid something like $600 per month) Now unless you are lucky or have a connection, you're looking at probably $750 minimum for a 1-bed in midtown and probably another $300 per additional bedroom. Long-time renters in midtown are seeing themselves either priced out, or are basically just waiting for the inevitable.

Again, anecdotal, but among my friends, relatives, and acquaintances who one would peg for "midtowners" (circa 10+ years ago) (artists, musicians, bartenders, non-profiteers, eccentrics, whatever) many of them moved to Old NE, east of Troost, KCK, etc. years ago.