The city’s Public Information Officer Casie Yoder informs us that the city’s recently completed “Diversity Project results PowerPoint presentation from the Aug. 4 City Commission work session is now available here. The full written report is being finalized and will be available later this month.”
Christian Perry, a master’s candidate at GSU in the Public Studies program and a Decatur High grad, who is interning at the city presented some of his findings at Monday’s Decatur City Commission meeting. You can view the presentation HERE. Also, Decaturish has a summary of Perry’s presentation HERE.
Among other items, the deck shows that Decatur’s white and “non-black minority” groups have steadily grown from 1990 to 2010, while the black population declined, which is inverse to Atlanta’s race trending over that period. Decatur is also getting older, as 25-34 year-olds registered the largest decline from 2000-2010 and 55-64 year-olds registered the largest increase percentage-wise. The report also shows that Oakhurst and WInnona Park have seen large increases in median household income over the last 10 years.
That just scratches the surface. There’s much greater detail in the report breaking down the changing racial makeup of the city by neighborhood and age. It also looks at the city’s same-sex city households vs. other Atlanta cities and DeKalb and “educational attainment” over the last 30 years.
Man ya’ll are slipping. 8 comments on the turkey family and crickets chirping on this? To stimulate things a bit, here are the two comments from the Decaturish site
Decaturgal • 15 hours ago
This is not news at all. I’m afraid that this ship has already sailed, and it did so soon after the 2003 reconfiguration. This is market forces at work and is largely the unintended consequences of having a kick butt superintendent, school board and staff at CSD. The massive crowding of Decatur schools and the demographic changes go hand in hand… I wish this trend could be remedied, but I don’t see a feasible/constitutional way to counter the massive market pressure around here.
2 △ ▽
•
Reply
•
Share ›
−
⚑
Long Timer> Decaturgal • 14 hours ago
Actually, it was well-understood what was going to happen with the demographics back in 2003. It was brought up many times at the public meetings that the reconfiguration as proposed was going to decrease diversity over the long run. One proposed alternative was magnet schools. That might have preserved diversity longer. But the market trend to gentrification started before the reconfiguration. Folks were already buying the cheap south side real estate as an investment, knowing that values would rise. The reconfiguration just increased the rate at which they rose. The good news is that school quality was equalized across the system. The bad news is that the community that was supposed to benefit is no longer
OK. I’ll bite. I think folks are hesitant to discuss because a lot of times, comments or views are misconstrued, taken out of context, or inferred to have underlying meanings that weren’t intended. It’s a socio-economic issue and any debate quickly devolves into accusations about classism and the R-word.
Yup, it’s a lot easier to talk about turkeys. One-to-one or small group in-person conversations about complex and highly sensitive and politicized topics like this are probably more meaningful and productive than blog posts. Easier to understand others and harder to misconstrue their words when face to face.
I’ll second Eric. It’s a socio economic issue more than race, and not just for seniors. Taxes ran me from oakhurst (15 years) to east lake, sadly.
Sadly, I have to agree with what both commenters in the Decaturish article said. I wish there could’ve been a balanced approach to slowing the kind of developer-driven growth on the South side of town, but there just didn’t seem to be the will to do anything about it until it had passed the tipping point. Whether that was deliberate or not is anybody’s guess. I certainly think pairing the teardown conversation with the tree ordinance discussion in the same Commission meeting didn’t do it any favors (and in the end, the City Commissioners did what they wanted to do on both issues).
The thing that needs to be done now is community outreach for what’s left of our Black & Brown residents (e.g., to help with relations between the police & minority residents). That, along with some much-needed tax relief for our elderly folks, is what might actually stem the bleeding. Of course, I realize that there are those who don’t see the change in demographics or the unhealthy relations between our police & minorities who live here as problems to be addressed, and that’s likely a major reason people aren’t commenting (those who don’t feel that way are afraid of being flamed by those who do, & vice versa).
I don’t think gentrification & redeveopment are necessarily inherently evil, but they sure can (and do) create grief for a lot of folks who don’t have an ownership stake in the areas where this happens–and often, for those who do own their property but don’t have the means to keep it up. It’s been no different here in Decatur. I wish I knew what the solution was–I freely admit that I don’t. All too frequently, critics of gentrification & redeveopment have plenty of righteous indignation, but little else to offer displaced people. If there are others who have solutions that would pass Constitutional muster and/or community consensus, I sure wish they’d put it out there.
I’ve never understood why tax relief for the elderly doesn’t come up more often or with greater support. What are the arguments against it? Wasn’t there an effort a decade ago to have the age for some relief lowered and what happened?
IMHO, we could all do better in living up to our legal and moral responsibilities to the elderly and persons with disabilities. Of course, I have a vested interest in this issue as I age….
We DO have tax relief for seniors. Isn’t the question how much relief is enough or appropriate? As our senior population grows with the baby boomers, we should be thoughtful about how much relief we pass out. Further lowering taxes on one population will raise taxes on everyone else. Won’t this just expand the burden on low income households?
I think the better solution is the planning strategy of record – to establish a housing code that enables higher density with lower square footage to enable housing that is more cost effective, easier to maintain and more accessible to amenities.
Yes we do, though I don’t believe they go far enough as the tiers are stagnant while home values rise rapidly. And the argument that lowering taxes on one population raises taxes on everyone else is somewhat of a strawman.
The other way to look at it is that more impactful tax breaks for ages and income levels would better, though not perfectly, align payment for services (mostly shools) to those who most use them (mostly prime-years-income-earning families). Not perfect alignment, but much better.
And certainly much better to help the aged than blunt-hammer anti – development , change-prevention approaches like burdensome tree ordinances or historic preservation schemes.
” And the argument that lowering taxes on one population raises taxes on everyone else is somewhat of a strawman.”
It isn’t a straw man. Your argument is how you fool yourself into thinking it won’t have a huge effing impact on the economy. This is basic math. Algebra 101. If you lower the denominator (in this case, the number of taxpayers) without reducing the numerator (in this case, the amount of tax dollars spent), the quotient goes up.
Why is the quotient of dollars spent per number of taxpayer the right metric for this question? That isolated metric doesn’t account for the fact that overall taxpayer DOLLARs are actually increasing. Yes, allowing for updated tax breaks for age and income levels would have the effect of raising the effective rate that the general population has, but that’s an indirect measure. The actual dollars a household would pay wouldn’t increase, only the effective rate. Sure, in a stagnant property market this would mean less tax revenue to cover costs, but we’re not in that environment.
All that said, if people can’t get past the “fairness” argument that ol’ Mr. Methuselah shouldn’t have a lower rate than me, then this idea will go nowhere.
“Sure, in a stagnant property market this would mean less tax revenue to cover costs, but we’re not in that environment.”
But we also can’t pretend (or enact policies based on fundamentally incorrect assumptions) that we will always be an environment where revenues continually increase. Way, way back in 2012 or so that wasn’t the case.
And IF you reduce the denominator, 1 of 2 things will happen, if not both. Tax dollars will decrease or those still paying taxes will pay more.
Toss this in … the current property tax exemption plan for seniors is based on income. Income does not include retirement pensions and social security. As today’s working generation without pensions ages, this model needs to change. Drawing from that personal 401k and Roth IRA to my understanding is not exempted income. Anyone know if I am correct in that thinking?
I’ve always felt that greater tax relief for seniors would be, without a doubt, the quickest way to slow the brunt force of market change. We do have certain Homestead exemptions tailored to the elderly but, in my opinion, they don’t go far enough. I’d fully support radical tax relief — frozen appraisals at some particular age, elimination of school taxes, etc.
Of course, the more radical such efforts are, the more the costs are pushed onto everyone else. I’m not saying that’s wrong. Just acknowledging that it sets up a political battle that, up to and including now, no one seems inclined to fight.
One thing that sometimes comes up is the fact that a certain segment of the senior population is doing quite well financially. It’s the last generation to have secure pensions, health benefits, etc., and many live in paid-off homes. Perhaps tax breaks for the elderly should be pro-rated depending on their financial resources. I’m sure that would get tricky.
Yep. I’d have to assume that the trickiness you speak of is the root of why it hasn’t been championed in an aggressive way.
+1
“developer-driven growth on the South side of town”
Just my opinion, but I don’t think the growth was “developer-driven”. Yes, developers tore down old houses and built spec homes in hopes of making a profit. But, if there was no demand to begin with, very few, if any, developers would have taken the initial risk. Further, if there was no market, all of the developers would have gone bust. The growth was consumer driven. The developers just played their role in the process.
Partially true but somewhat misleading. Yes, there is market demand driving development, but developers are choosing to woo only a small segment of that market- those who can pay upwards of 650k. There is a tremendous amount of demand for housing in the 400-500k range, but I haven’t seen any of those going up. Perhaps we could offer some sort of credit to any builder willing to construct new housing in that price range.
How is Decatur planning to improve its diversity and/or increase its missing middle class when affordable rental property is sparse in the downtown area? And I’ve heard that the new rental properties going up have one-bedrooms starting at $1100. How is that affordable for a young working professional saddled with student loan debt?
Saddled is what someone does to you. Student loans are taken on willingly, so perhaps those are not the right properties for those who have other commitments.
Clearly, you have no problem with diversifying or driving people out.
Clearly, I don’t understand your point. You are correct when you say I don’t have a problem diversifying, whether that’s with people or investments. I do, however, have a problem driving people out…at least I think I do. I don’t know, I’ve never tried it.
Begin cheap shots (name calling) in 3,2,… Darn (self edited). Someone beat me to it.
Loans taken on by people who aren’t considered mature enough to drink alcohol probably shouldn’t be considered “willing”. It borders on coercion, and after graduation it’s practically extortion.
I guess all of the adults who make the decision to take out student loans are victims. Really? I personally know college age adults taking on what I think is way too much debt so they can go to a 4 yr private university halfway across the country. Sorry, but sometimes the answer is simply that you can’t afford it. Live at home, go to a local university for your first 2 years (even if it takes you 3), get a job, pay your way, save some money, etc. Maybe then go your dream school for the last couple of years. And even then don’t finance 100% of it.
Living alone / a one-bedroom apt. is not a given when you are first out of school or starting out or starting over (any time your budget is tight, really). And it’s pretty unrealistic if you are trying to live in a high-demand neighborhood.
It shouldn’t have to be. That’s the point.
So we, as a city, now have an obligation to create housing for recent grads?
Who said anything about recent grads? Loans can last 10-30 years. All I’m saying is it would be nice to have some decent rental property in the downtown area that started at ~$800. The Braden Fellman properties are dumps that don’t even have dishwashers or washer/dryers.
“All I’m saying is it would be nice to have some decent rental property in the downtown area that started at ~$800.”
And you have the ability to make it happen. Find some investors who share your vision (and who are willing to cut their returns in half) and get started.
“The Braden Fellman properties are dumps that don’t even have dishwashers or washer/dryers.”
The level of wealth in this country is pretty obvious when people are now entitled to dishwashers and washer/dryers. Or, maybe someone can decide what is more important to them – location or appliances.
Cool. Keep Decatur Wealthy. Cheers!
So, CoD should take action(s) designed to trend the level of wealth down?
You should run for office, and here is your slogan “Decatur, Let’s Take a Step Backyards”.
No, but there’s no harm in making a little a room for the middle class. I have yet to see this: http://www.decaturmetro.com/2014/01/10/decatur-udo-idea-2-missing-middle-district/
Even if those units existed, were available for rent and they cash-flowed at $800k a month, the market would nearly double those rental rates overnight. If a new construction, 2 BR/2 BA home in CoD was posted on Zillow, CL, etc at $800/mo, a bidding war would ensue and the landlord would probably rent it for $1,500/mo, unless of course you are advocating for mandated rent control.
article on rent control that may be of interest
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/28/magazine/the-perverse-effects-of-rent-regulation.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
New slogan:
Decatur – Where Berkeley Meets Cabrini Green
I’m not going to get in the middle of a discussion about what is the best socio-economic mix for Decatur. (Since I’m change-averse, I always vote for keeping things the way I’m used to them.) But the decent apartment discussion reminds me that there is an entire generation that does not know what to do if the microwave breaks down. I had to explain to my son that you can transfer things from plastic containers into metal ones that can go on the stove or in the oven. I think young folks can handle washing dishes in the sink or taking clothes to the Laundromat better than they can handle life without a microwave. It forces them to think completely differently about how food ends up on their plate.
Just how long does it take to fully load a dishwasher with one or two people? Is $300 a month the going rate for a once or twice a week benefit. Washer/dryer is more beneficial because of the time involved taking it out but most of us in an established age group (cute term I coined) have washed unmentionables in the sink and served time in a laundromat.
Don’t we have the Decatur Housing Authority? They’ve got some prime locations and very low rental rates (because they are tax free). Seems to fit the bill of what you’re asking.
You know what would also be nice – I would like to live in Manhattan, but all the $1,500 apartments there are dumps, would be nice if I could find a nice 2BR 2BA in my price range. Sadly I couldn’t, so I decided to live somewhere I could afford – Decatur.
Isn’t the question that is being posed about whether Decatur wants to become Manhattan? (By the way, even Manhattan has Spanish Harlem and regular Harlem, although they are getting gentrified a bit too.) Or Buckhead? Or Druid Hills? Or other areas that are hard for even upper middle class professionals to afford unless they are lucky enough to have some family wealth behind them? And since race/ethnicity still tends to trend with family income, these areas are going to be less diverse although of course there’s still plenty of non-white wealthy folks who live there, just proportionately less than wealthy white folks. I read the issue as: what kind of community do we want to have? Not: who deserves to live here?
Whether or not City of Decatur can truly steer itself towards becoming one kind of community or another, is not my area of expertise.
Since I’ve failed at staying out of this discussion, I’ll add: somewhere along the way in school and life, I was taught that a robust, relatively prosperous and content middle class is they key to the stability and strength of the United States compared to most of the rest of the world. Middle class as a term has had a positive connation for me and I’ve been proud to grow up in the middle class and be part of it. I consider most everyone I know in Decatur to be middle class. Or has middle class become the new lower class kind of like age 60 has become the new middle age?
“I was taught that a robust, relatively prosperous and content middle class is they key to the stability and strength of the United States compared to most of the rest of the world”
Trying to avoid a macro-economic policy discussion, for argument’s sake let’s stipulate that statement is 100% true. But, that still doesn’t mean that CoD must have a strong middle class (which I think it does BTW) in order for the US to prosper, or even for CoD to prosper. The US can/will still have a strong middle class even if there are places like Decatur and Buckhead and numerous other towns and cities nationwide where the cost of living is higher than most of the middle class can easily afford.
I’m glad to see you think COD has a strong middle class because I think so too. And that goes along with the whole small community, walkable schools, pedestrian-friendly, cute Downtowns (Downtown and Oakhurst Village), thing. Gated estates don’t lend themselves as much to the small community feel.
I was just getting the vibe on this thread that the ungrateful, entitled middle class was trying to bust its way into our lovely enclave. I thought we were already here.
If you can afford a proper house in Decatur, you’re probably more likely into what’s referred to as the “upper middle” class – household income in the 90,000+/yr range, at least one adult in the household with advanced degrees (beyond a B.A.), and at least one adult in the household employed in a professional field (medicine, law, the fine arts, higher education, etc.)
It’s not cops and middle school teachers and
If you can afford a proper house in Decatur, you’re probably more likely into what’s referred to as the “upper middle” class – household income in the 90,000+/yr range, at least one adult in the household with advanced degrees (beyond a B.A.), and at least one adult in the household employed in a professional field (medicine, law, the fine arts, higher education, etc.)
It’s not cops and middle school teachers and office workers who live in Decatur these days, it’s lawyers and college professors and middle management.
I think the difference between Manhattan and Decatur is that in NYC people have to go very far from their workplaces to find affordable housing. Decatur’s function for most of its existence is as a bedroom community for people who work in Atlanta and surrounding areas. If most people worked in Decatur and couldn’t live anywhere near it, that would be a big problem. But most people who live in Decatur work elsewhere, and Decatur is just one of many places that you can live near Atlanta and work. If you work downtown, there are numerous places where you can live close to your work for a reasonable rent: West End, Capitol View, Vine City, Edgewood, Reynoldstown, Medlock Park, Grant Park, Ormewood Park, EAV. What you pay for in Decatur is the privilege to live near a higher percentage of upper middle class and wealthy people.
“What you pay for in Decatur is the privilege to live near a higher percentage of upper middle class and wealthy people.: Wow. Things have really changed. That used to be why folks moved to Morningside, not Decatur.
Housing for a variety of incomes would be a good thing, yes. And besides, I thought were were supposed to encourage revenue-positive households to come here?
I agree, I have student loan debt and with my current income would not be able to afford $1100 rent. I currently live 6 min away and pay way less. I think Decatur is only interested in catering to people with higher incomes or or couples with 2 incomes that can afford $1100. Yes there are the projects but the waiting list is 10+ years and your income has to be below federal poverty level. And please for the commenter saying that student loan debt is self imposed, try going to grad school and not able to work with no debt, have you seen the cost of tuition these days. Realistically, in my opinion, middle class is probably around $65,000 for a single person so consider yourself working class and Decatur is probably not for you.
Were you required by law to go to grad school? If not, then your student debt is self imposed.
+1
I think the cost-of-college-student-loan-debt discussion is somewhat overblown. Yes, college costs have risen. But my experience is that kids are choosing to go to colleges with brand new housing, student centers, football stadiums, etc. There are schools that offer great educations without the frills for a reasonable cost. When these colleges & universities start being embraced again, perhaps we will see the market correct itself.
It is also a choice, an investment someone decides to make in their future.
Not unlike the choice many families with young children are making – invest in their children’s future by moving to Decatur and sending their kids to Decatur schools.
Um, where are those cheaper no-frills colleges? Even state schools are pretty darn expensive and there’s a limited number of spots at any particular school. Plenty of solid DHS students do not get into Georgia Tech or UGA and many of the state schools which didn’t used to be so competitive have become much more so–e.g. Georgia College/State University at Milledgeville and Georgia Southern. I’m shocked about how NICE even state schools are–the dorms at many of these schools are gorgeous and new, ditto for their athletic facilities. No more college cafeterias–they are food courts now. I’d love it if we could go back to more a basic, no frills college experience but that ship has definitely sailed. The colleges are competing with one another with amenities, foreign travel programs, athletic facilities, food service, etc.
They have to compete on amenities because kids will not live in a crappy $800 no dishwasher apartment. They deserve granite counters and a nice pool.
I maintain that there’s plenty of parents who would choose the no-granite counter option if it was available but it’s not. Go to state school websites and look at the breakdown of costs. You have the option of choosing your housing but not much else. State schools are not that much cheaper than private schools if you take into account that private schools compete by offering huge scholarships. I kept thinking the college cost bubble would burst by the time my little ones grew up but it shows no signs of doing so.
“State schools are not that much cheaper than private schools if you take into account that private schools compete by offering huge scholarships”
Have you priced schools lately? Basically every private university east of the Mississippi is $55k a year. UGA, without HOPE, is about $25k. And if you don’t qualify for HOPE, you aren’t getting into UGA (or Southern, Tech or State). With HOPE, those schools are about $12k a year. And those private schools aren’t offering $40k scholarships.
That puts Hope at less than 50% coverage, doesn’t it? I thought it was in the 80s. Or are you factoring in all the other out of pocket costs (like living expenses) that Hope doesn’t cover?
The latter. The dorms, meal plan, “activity” fees and books at UGA run about $12k, and that is only with the highest level of HOPE which pays 100%. If you had the standard HOPE, you would have to pay some portion of the tuition.
If you go to a state school as an out of state student the tuition is close to a private school. College tuition is much higher than it was 20 years ago, adjusting for inflation. This is a problem.
My alma mater, a state university, has torn down the older share-a-room, no AC dorms so everyone can have their own room and not be too warm. We did fine in the old dorms with roommates and box fans for the 3 weeks of hot weather we had to endure each year. I have three children to put through college and frankly, I would prefer to pay less then make sure they had their own private bathroom (or to pay the construction costs of building those dorms).
+1. There are a rare few not-well-known colleges that have purposely not upgraded their facilities because they are keeping costs down, but in general, even publicly-funded colleges are keeping up with the Joneses. They want the best scholars and best athletes that they can attract. So they upgrade everything so costs go up so they need to attract students….on and on in an upward spiral. No signs of a downturn. The most that colleges did during our recent major recession was hold costs for a year or two, not reduce costs. It would take a concerted commitment on the part of both private and public colleges and universities to reduce this trend.
Hi.
I’m actually a college professor, so allow me to chime in on Why College Is So Expensive.
Yes, amenities are part of it. There’s an “arms race” to get the most desirable students (e.g. the ones who can pay the most money into the institution and more importantly are likely to become big donors after graduation), but a great deal of the spike in costs over the last 20 years has gone into the creeping growth of administration – folks who work for the institution but don’t teach classes. Your Dean of Financial Affairs or Senior Vice President for Governance or what-have-you.
I can tell you point blank it isn’t going into faculty salaries.
That’s evident to us parents. It’s telling that no one on this thread said to pay professors less. On college tours, I keep getting confused as to what the assistant provost for blah, blah, blah does vs. the associate senior dean for X,Y, Z. I want to know who teaches English 101 and whether there’s campus security. Don’t really care about the climbing walls, multiple cafe options, and ability to see whether a washer/dryer is available via an app.
“I agree, I have student loan debt and with my current income would not be able to afford $1100 rent. I currently live 6 min away and pay way less.”
So what’s the problem exactly? Sounds like you are doing the right thing, rather than overpaying for housing you can’t afford, as so many do (you can bet there are plenty here in Decatur who are tapped out and house poor).
That said, if you really wanted to live here, could you not consider a roommate? Or, assuming you have a car, could you eliminate that expense if you were closer to MARTA, and perhaps better afford more rent? My point is, I’m seeing quite a few complaints from people about affordability, but not much in the way of willingness to compromise in other areas in order to be in a prime location.
You make a great point about the entitlement mentality. But, stripping this discussion down to student loan debt is way oversimplifying. What is one’s chosen field? A grad degree doesn’t necessarily equate to higher income. People often choose to work for non-profits or the public sector. Maybe someone hasn’t put their time in yet. etc. etc. etc.
If the consequence of a series of prior decisions of a young professional is that he can’t afford to live in a certain area, I too see no problem with that.
I work in a field where a graduate degree is required. It is not a high paying field. The average salary is around $54,000.
You can tell me I chose the wrong career to live in Decatur, (although I never heard of Decatur when choosing this career or knew what the salary was) but when I moved to Decatur, people with professions such as teachers, nurses, and firefighters could afford to buy houses.
Hess’ comment almost pulled me back in. And you, of all people, helped relieve me of that desire by posting a proper (and more civil) response! Thank you, sir.
Personally, I don’t see why any young person without children would want to live in Decatur. By dint of living in Decatur, I can’t afford to eat at many of the fancy restaurants there, and except for Tacqueria del Sol and the centrally-located library I don’t see what’s so great about Decatur as a town vs. Kirkwood, O4W, Reynoldstown, or Grant Park. Decatur was cool for young people about 10 years ago, but now it’s more of a place for the older set.
Funny how that age thingy works…. 🙂
And then in the near future, Decatur will have Google Fiber. That will be another catalyst of growth & change.
hopefully once we get fiber, trader joe’s will follow.
Had dinner last night with a young couple (mid to late 20s) who bought a house last year just outside of Decatur in the hope that they would be annexed by the time they have kids. No idea how typical they are, but if demand for schools here are that high, you can pretty much forget about anything being affordable in the CSD limits– certainly not anything detached, anyway. But I do think all of the apartments coming on board will help some of those without kids who would like to live here but have few options to do so now. Not “affordable” for all, certainly, but better than the current situation.
The trouble with planned diversification – of racial, economic, religious, cultural – groups is that it usually runs counter to free-market capitalism. Obviously we don’t live in a pure capitalist state or we wouldn’t have publicly-funded roads or schools, but if you own an acre of land in the CSD, would you rather build twenty housing units to sell for $600k each or generously provide thirty units that rent for $800/month and have washers and dryers and dishwashers?
Would you appreciate being told you must do the latter?
Would you willingly pay increased taxes so that the city can make the latter more financially attractive to landowners and developers?
Will the shareholders of development companies agree to seeing lower returns on their investments – where they may have sunk their savings in order to retire – because they opted to bring in less money in the name of diversity?
I don’t have the answers, but in a society that is built about amassing as much private capital as possible in order to retire comfortably and provide for your descendants, a magic diversity wand has to be built with the (relatively) free movement of capital in mind.
As for affordable housing, I grew up in a project, followed by a trailer, and when I arrived in Decatur I was in a tiny, creaky Braden Fellman rental with no amenities. I survived.
I think it’s safe to say that we’ll never solve the problem of declining diversity in Decatur when the majority of the “majority” doesn’t think it’s a problem in the first place.
Or maybe they just have a problem with the proposed “solutions”.
Maybe, but it doesn’t come across that way online.
By the way, instituting the R-50 zoning that is being proposed is the only chance we have at getting builders to build new homes that will be priced under $400k. This is one way that we can use widely-accepted governmental tools (zoning) to help the free market find success in selling homes at more affordable price points (which would still likely reach into the $300s or more). Currently builders must build bigger homes on bigger lots, if they are going to do multi-acre new development. R-50 would allow them to build at a smaller scale, with the added density allowing them to cover the cost of the land.
It’s not the only way. Don’t forget the UDO also envisions allowing rentals in carriage houses (over garages for those of us that are less up-town). These are ideal for the young, cash poor professionals looking for an affordable rental.
….especially if there’s a microwave.
see my comment below on carriage houses- the way the UDO is currently drafted, there will only be studio space/425sf max above garages.
I think most people in Decatur realize and are concerned about the lessening economic, racial, and age diversity in our city. However, I think that most people in Decatur also would be opposed to the blunt instruments that would be necessary to reverse this trend.
The only two sure fire ways to reverse the trend would be to:
(1) Make the community a less desirable place to live (such as increase crime, failing schools and having a dysfunctional government). I don’t think there is anyone that wants that.
(2) Interfere with people’s property rights by overly restricting development and thus reducing their property values. Most everyone would agree that some restrictions on property rights and development is a good thing that enhances property values, but that at a certain point it could go too far. For example, a law that says you cannot have a larger house than a 3BR/2BA house or over 2,000 square feet would most certainly have a negative impact on all of our property values.
So what do you do? There isn’t much you can do except increase the supply of housing, specifically housing for different types of ages, incomes, etc. This can either be done by the government (Decatur Housing Authority) or the private sector.
“…or the private sector.” : That could be done with incentives to builders/developers, right? That’s what I assumed this was all about. Not some kind of welfare for the middle class.
Sign of the times: “It also looked at the city’s same-sex city households…” didn’t raise a peep here. I’ll bet that wouldn’t have been true 20 years ago.
“That could be done with incentives to builders/developers, right?”
Yes, but then it falls back into the government action category.
Not necessarily. Take a look at recent sales data for lots that are under development. Most sold for 240-285k, and resold for 650-750k after construction. Let’s say CoD imposes a maximum size limit and now only allows homes that are 2500 sq ft and sell for 550k. There will still be demand, and if current property owners hold out for the current average tear down value, some developer is going to meet that price and continue to build. Not saying that’s the solution, just saying demand is such in this price range that property values will not be hurt.
What makes you think a 2,500 sq ft house sells for $550k? I know of a 2,600 sq ft new construction home that sold for $710k earlier this year. The builder bought the “lot” for $280k.
Was that in CoD? Because then they overpaid…
Yes, it was in CoD, and if they overpaid, it wasn’t by much.
Well, I guess we know you’re not in real estate. Those numbers are completely real right now. In fact, larger 1/3 acre lots are being bought by developers for $300k+ just to tear down and rebuild their $700K plus houses.
If lots are currently going for 240-285k, and resell for 650-750k after construction, and if the city restricts development such that you could only build a house that could re-sell for 550k, don’t you think the price of the lot (or teardown) would go down by 100k or so? The builder has to have a profit margin or they will not build.
Interestingly, if we were to go the direction of overly restricting property rights, the people we are trying to help stay in the neighborhood (low income elderly), might be end up being hurt the worst. Their entire nest egg might be tied up in their property. A 100k hit to their 285k property would be a huge hit.
One thing you could do is to create a new zoning category that allows for smaller houses on smaller lots on new multi-acre development. Smaller homes allows for lower prices on each individual house but because the density is higher the developer can still make his/her money. This is part of the impetus of the proposed new R-50 category – to help bring in a greater diversity of housing choices. You aren’t providing welfare for the developer and you’re not creating greater restrictions on him/her. Sounds like a good idea to me.
Agree with Geoff. Also, how about offering the incentive of loosened restrictions that pertain to density in exchange for a percentage of affordable housing? (Maybe this is already in the works?) Often, one of the key barriers to affordability is zoning policy that limits supply (sometimes, unfortunately, that’s the exact intent of the policy).
Decatur does offer a density bonus, brianc, which has been used in the past and would seem like a no-brainer. However, for reasons I don’t fully understand, the city says that downtown developers are currently choosing not to pursue it, apparently feeling that they can achieve the density they want by-right so any additional hurdles or headaches aren’t worth it.
Take as grapevine chatter, though. I don’t have a hard confirmation.
Maybe while COD promotes better estate planning for seniors who happen to be sitting on older homes that are now prime real estate, it could also promote the density bonus to developers? Maybe small, reasonable, less-controversial steps towards maintaining a housing stock of different levels of value is the way to go? Maybe there’s something between total government control and total individual control? Kumbaya?
Carriage houses and the broader ability to build them as proposed in the UDO have potential to supply more economical housing options. However, for R-60 (the vast majority of homes in COD), while a carriage house of up to 800 sf may be built, the total sf of a carriage house built as a second floor of a 2 car garage would only be max 424sf (studio size), due to the overall 1,000sf cap on accessory buildings (which equals garage sf + carriage house sf in this case). It would be more helpful for Decatur’s diverse housing needs if the 800sf max was allowed on top of the garage sf. That would allow for some additional 1-2 bedroom apartments built throughout town.
Am I the only one who thinks these African American seniors have families? Grandchildren? Great-grandchildren? Why doesn’t the city initiate an estate planning project for the few remaining African American homeowners? No one could object to them being counseled to keep their homes in their families like other families do. Sure, they could sell for the chump change a developer is offering and pass down a couple of bucks to their descendants, or they could pass down something more valuable to a member of their family with young kids…a prime property in a desirable location that they otherwise might not be able to afford, and a fabulous education to go with it. Is this radical or objectionable (to anyone besides developers)?
I think that’s a great idea. Coupled with a meaningful property tax break for seniors and a reduction in the millage rate for those with properties whose value makes them tear down candidates.
Yes, let’s subsidize properties just so Decatur can stay exactly how you like it.
I live here too, and I have different vision for Decatur.
Speaking of subsidies- every time a new home is built in CoD that is worth more than my palatial manse, my taxes go up. I’m tired of subsidizing rich people who move here so their kids can go to good public schools, walk on safe streets and shop at boutique markets.
Dawgfan I take it you have no problem with that sort if subsidy.
Judge – so you are not ok paying taxes to allow rich people to have a good quality of life? You only want your taxes to support a good quality of life for… who?
Why is it the city’s responsibility to provide financial planning to anyone, let alone a select group.
M1 and DawgFan, I’m not saying the city is responsible. But if I recall correctly, the citizens of Decatur made diversity a priority when developing the strategic plan. The people spoke. Besides, the estate planning professionals who do the seminars/counseling can be volunteers just like the doctors/professionals who do “Walk with a Doc”. Let’s not get our panties in a bunch over the logistics. I don’t understand what the problem is. Our tax dollars pay for a lot of things we don’t individually benefit from in order to create the kind of city we want to live in. We don’t just sit back and hope things happen on a whim and a prayer. And I can’t imagine that if there was an estate planning session hosted by the city, anyone would be turned away (so it wouldn’t have to be “someone else’s estate planning”). Honestly, it was just a thought and maybe the diversity intern we’re paying for can think it through.
“No one could object to them being counseled to keep their homes in their families like other families do”
I think your advice is sound. If nothing else, the “seniors” should know that their heirs will receive a step-up in basis if they inherit the house whereas the current sale may be taxable. But, I would absolutely object to being forced to pay for someone else’s estate planning
Dawgfan you seem opposed to anything but shoehorning giant houses into small lots so you can make a buck or two….
All of your assumptions about me are wrong. But, your posts are generally based on nothing more than unsupported notions, so I am not surprised. I am not a developer or builder and I am not making a dime off the new homes. What I am opposed to is CoD becoming a municipal HOA.
IMHO, I think my posts are just about as supported by the facts as yours are….and CoD is nowhere near becoming a municipal HOA. It could very well become Johns Creek, or Alpharetta or (insert name of sterile, lily white subdvision or city here..), though.
That’s not why I moved here, and I don’t think it’s why you moved here either…
Judgebrandeis,
Are you willing to sell your home for $100,000 less than its fair market value? If so, I can find you a buyer.
Nope, bc under my hypothetical scenario, that wouldn’t happen. There will always be someone willing to make a little less of a profit rather than no profit at all.
Or, back in reality, all of the builders would just focus on the boom in Brookhaven. And then the next hot area. But, that is what you really want anyway – no more teardowns.
doubt it.
Lot cost: $280k. Materials cost at $100/sq ft: $250k. Commission on $550k: $27,500. Closings Costs (both acquisition costs and credit provided to buyer): $5k – $10k.
Now, go find me a builder who will build that house in hopes of selling it for $550k.
(And I think $100/sq ft is actually low – I believe it is closer to $125 in Decatur, but I wanted to be conservative.)
You say “no more teardowns” like that’s a bad thing.
You want your neighborhood to look like a hockey player’s smile, be my guest.
It is a bad thing. What you or I want is irrelevant. It isn’t our property.
Decatur represents the free market system at work. I am fed up with entitlement mentality that refuses to clean up their neighborhood and use the R word when its convient. Racism is a two way street. Any person who priotizes where they live is a personal choice. I have no children in the City of Decatur Schools yet I pay my fair share of taxes. I live in a community where there is Home Owner Assoication and exterior conditons of homes around me are maintained. When a buyer choses Decatur they have high expectations and standards of home ownership because of what they pay for the property. In much of the county which I travel a lot during the week I see no pride of ownership. Most of the businesses look the same as the neighborhoods. Run down.
I have lived in the neighborhoods outside 285. Decatur just has the right mix that attracts a section of the market that just seems to be better citizens. They work with police rather than against police to keep crime in check.
I wish we could get this type of uprising about the spread of AIDS in African American Community that is out of control instead of wasting the energy that will be wasted over this report.
I would love to have a new Mercedes Convertible. I am not expecting a discount just for me to buy one.
ALL are welcome in Decatur !!!!