Is America's suburban dream collapsing into a nightmare?

[Maitre D]

I'm no suburb apologist  , but all those McMansions in Joco will likely be fine.  The Federal Reserve put out an interesting study (and there are many out there, so this isn't the end all and be all to foreclosure studies) showing that out of the entire metro area, Joco has the lowest foreclosure rate (less than .5% of all mortages there ended in foreclosure in 2007).  I'm sure someone's already posted here somewhere.

http://www.marc.org/gif/FRB_ForeclosurePres.pdf

Families will continue to live where the woman in the home wants to live.  As I"ve pointed out repeatedly, women make home purchase decisions - men only veto the "runners up".    To the extent women want to abandon their suburban homes, then this may happen.


I'm betting they won't.

[chrizow]

so only males are buying condos and homes in the city?  i think not.  besides, no one expects 100% of people to buy in the city.  if 10-20% of our metro area lives in the RCP area, our city will be awesome.

[Maitre D]

so only males are buying condos and homes in the city?  i think not.

I'd bet 80% of all condo purchases within "the city" as we'd define it,  "RCP", are indeed purchased by males.   (Or homes with a male buyer involved)  Maybe Ignatius has the data.


 

besides, no one expects 100% of people to buy in the city.  if 10-20% of our metro area lives in the RCP area, our city will be awesome.

No doubt.  Still though, I have a hard time seeing women giving up on Suburbia.  Having been around mostly suburbanite women, I rarely if ever hear them talk about DT or urban areas.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Think again.  KCMO  does dominate metro jobs, about 1/3 of the metro, 3x more than the next metro city.  Downtown alone has 10% of the metro workforce, more than any one metro city.

I wouldn't say those numbers dominate the market.  All that it shows that the area has jobs spread throughout the area and that KCMO has a fair (not dominate) share of them.

Should KCMO have 1/3 of the jobs?  Well, yes, given its size and population but to be dominate it should have over 50% with about half of that downtown.

Again, if you want the high population density then KCMO better get way more jobs than it has now in its downtown and surrounding area.

[chrizow]

No doubt.  Still though, I have a hard time seeing women giving up on Suburbia.  Having been around mostly suburbanite women, I rarely if ever hear them talk about DT or urban areas.

while i know that lots of people of both genders are wedded to the suburban lifestyle, many are seeking to be in or near the city as well.  of the 15 or so young women i know at my work who started around the same time i did, all but three have bought property somewhere in brookside, midtown, or downtown or are seeking to do so.  two of the other three are in fairway.  the other is in olathe.  scientific?  no, but there is a palpable interest in urban living among both sexes for sure.  similarly, in my circle of friends and acquaintances, the thought of living in the suburbs is anathema - they speak as though they are urbanists who post on this forum (and a few do, i suppose). 

the majority?  no, but a nice percentage.

[Maitre D]

Well, if you're counting Brookside......

[chrizow]

brookside might be the overland park of KCMO, but it is midtown manhattan compared to anything in JoCo. 

[LenexatoKCMO]

Once again, KC is a terrible example for this scenario to happen - we don't have the building stock, among numerous other problems.  That doesn't make the scenario invalid or mean that it won't likely happen in many other parts of the nation - sounds like it already is.  In many ways KC is just hosed when it comes to facing 21st centruy realities. 

[Maitre D]

brookside might be the overland park of KCMO, but it is midtown manhattan compared to anything in JoCo.   :)

True dat, but it still reeks of the "comfortable" place where educated women - who aspire to be "urban" - default to when it comes time to plunk down the money.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Once again, KC is a terrible example for this scenario to happen - we don't have the building stock, among numerous other problems.  That doesn't make the scenario invalid or mean that it won't likely happen in many other parts of the nation - sounds like it already is.  In many ways KC is just hosed when it comes to facing 21st centruy realities. 

Funny, but those office buildings that have been converted into living spaces were filled with jobs 20 years ago.  And not much has gone up in the area to replace, let alone grow, jobs in downtown.  If you want more people living downtown, of course past a certain point, the job base has to grow and grow at a good pace.  Otherwise, what you might end up with are people living downtown and commuting to JoCo for a job - like I believe some who post here do.

[ignatius]

Downtown had 104K jobs in 1977 and today it's 100K-107K depending on whose numbers you use.  While office space in the loop has been converted to residential, Crown Center has offset lost office space in the loop over the last 20 years.  Downtown has more Class A/B/C office space than some cities larger than KC - Detroit, San Diego, STL, Phoenix.

http://forum.kcrag.com/index.php?topic=11878.0

But there's no doubt that if more people live downtown, the jobs would have to follow.  And chances are, that would happen.

[Maitre D]

That is silly, to live DT and commute 30-45min each way for a job.  That's an hour+ in the car.   For some going to Lee's Summitt or Olathe, even more.   That sucks.


One study says that a 1-hr commute each way requires a 40% hike in pay to compensate for your misery:  http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007 ... rentPage=4

[chrizow]

That is silly, to live DT and commute 30-45min each way for a job.  That's an hour+ in the car.  For some going to Lee's Summitt or Olathe, even more.  That sucks.

sure, but such is the reality of our car-centric town.  people commute 30-60 minutes to go from east jack to joco, joco to downtown, northland to joco, etc.  the good thing about downtown is that you are never more than 5 minutes from any number of major interstates, whereas in the burbs it can take 20 minutes just to get to the highway. 

plus, without exception, a downtown --> suburb commute means youre driving against the rush hour traffic.  i had to go to downtown olathe a couple of weeks ago during rush hour and it took me less than 30 minutes from union hill.  my guess is that it would have taken 45+ minutes to get from downtown olathe to downtown KC at that same time.

[Maitre D]

Yeah but with $4 gas, these commutes are not going to be as common in the future.

[KCPowercat]

agreed..that's where mass transit connections will grown more popular with employers. 

[chrizow]

exactly.  i look forward to seeing light-rail stops at corporate woods. 

[KCPowercat]

md you say its silly to live dt and commute to the burbs?  don't you live in the burbs and commute to the plaza?  wouldn't that also be silly?

seems if you are living downtown and commuting out, at least your free time is with the fun stuff (bars, etc) instead of free time being spent next to a target strip center.

[Maitre D]

md you say its silly to live dt and commute to the burbs?  don't you live in the burbs and commute to the plaza?  wouldn't that also be silly?

seems if you are living downtown and commuting out, at least your free time is with the fun stuff (bars, etc) instead of free time being spent next to a target strip center.

My decision was made several years ago.  When I was working down the street from my home.  Lots changes in life.  At this point, selling my house would be suicide (from what realtors are telling me in my neighborhood)

[KCPowercat]

ahhhhh..ok.  makes sense...that sucks.

yet another reason why to buy in a place you don't enjoy...in case you are stuck with it and can't really get rid of it.

[dangerboy]

Going with traffic or against it, the costs of long commutes are similar in either direction.  Reverse commutes can be even more expensive when you factor in the fact to transit is much less of an option for reverse commuters. 

If the urban redevelopment is to take hold, the city absolutely has to attract more jobs to the urban core.  Otherwise the new downtown/midtown residents will end up moving back to the suburbs to be closer to the office parks where they work.

The ideal of a live/work neighborhood will be hard realize if the jobs don't follow the new residents.