SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   City Discussions (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Sunbelt battle for #2? (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=240851)

bigstick Nov 3, 2019 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CherryCreek (Post 8735063)
Here's a map of the Sunbelt, so hopefully that settles things.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/42/43...74763c121c.png

Not really,,,all of NC, TN, AR, and OK are sunbelt...PERIOD...

dktshb Nov 3, 2019 5:06 PM

Certainly Denver and Salt Lake City are not Sun Belt cities as others have mentioned here.

Los Angeles probably was the first "Sun Belt" city when it experienced tremendous growth around the middle of the 20th Century, but it already was a city of 1.5 million people before WW2 even began let alone post war, and therefore looks and feels different from the Sun Belt cities of today. Sure anybody can point out similarities between any 2 cities in North America regardless of what artificial region they are placed.

lio45 Nov 3, 2019 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by liat91 (Post 8736968)
California stopped being Sunbelt in 2010.

This is ridiculous. Why not just say instead that some areas of the Sunbelt have now become pricy and urban to the point that instead of being a magnet, they now have negative net domestic migration numbers...?

The Sunbelt is the Sunbelt and will remain it regardless of what happens (short of maybe an ice age or nuclear winter). The defining characteristics are "no winters, and palm trees".

lio45 Nov 3, 2019 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawn (Post 8737287)
My wife grew up in Sunnyvale in the 90s. By 93 Sunnyvale was already approaching unaffordable for most. Last time we visited South Bay in 2016, we drove by her old house and Zillowed it for fun; the 4 bedroom 2.5 bath late 70s split level had been sold that year for $3.3 million.

4 bedroom 2.5 bathrooms is a pretty big house though. If well located, it's not that unreasonable. It's a super high wage area... Much more justifiable than seeing cookie cutter bungalows in Vancouver selling for that much.

lio45 Nov 3, 2019 11:48 PM

I wonder how much this would sell for... it was boarded up at the time of the last Street View a few months ago:

(wonder if it comes with the mid-1980s Toyota in the driveway)

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.3883...7i16384!8i8192

Crawford Nov 4, 2019 12:23 AM

Ugh. The housing stock in Silicon Valley, generally speaking, sucks.

It's one thing to pay millions for a special property, but crap like that should be demolished (and yeah, I get that no one is actually paying for the structure; only the land matters).

Dariusb Nov 4, 2019 12:44 AM

Overall which is Honolulu more expensive than the Bay Area or the other way around?

llamaorama Nov 4, 2019 1:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFTransplant (Post 8736004)
I never thought of "sunbelt" as a specific geographic region but rather a cluster of cities that shared common characteristics such as rather sunny and warm weather, explosive post-war growth, and a destination for retirees. As others have pointed out, they're lots of cities in the sunbelt "region" such as Jackson, MS or Montgomery no one would consider sun belt so I'm not sure arguing over geographic characteristics makes sense. And if we were, than we'd definitely want to include places like St. George, Denver, Yuma- i.e., the sunniest places in the US.

Agreed

To me the sunbelt is:

Phoenix
Orange County
San Diego
Tucson
Vegas
St George
Prescott
Palm Springs
Lake Havasu
Tampa Bay down to Naples
Miami
Orlando
Daytona and Cocoa Beach
Santa Fe
Key West

Maybe:

Hawaii
Albuquerque
Texas Hill Country
Rio Grande Valley
Pensacola
Savannah to Hilton Head
Charleston
LA in terms of the core city.

The following are NOT the sunbelt in my opinion:

El Paso
Jacksonville
Houston
Dallas
Mobile
New Orleans
Bay Area
CA Central Valley

JManc Nov 4, 2019 1:54 AM

:???: Houston/ Dallas not sunbelt?

JAYNYC Nov 4, 2019 2:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JManc (Post 8737882)
:???: Houston/ Dallas not sunbelt?

My thoughts exactly.

Houston and Dallas - NOT sunbelt, but L.A. (core city) - maybe Sunbelt. :rolleyes:

Sure thing. :koko:

llamaorama Nov 4, 2019 2:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAYNYC (Post 8737887)
My thoughts exactly.

Houston and Dallas - NOT sunbelt, but L.A. (core city) - maybe Sunbelt. :rolleyes:

Sure thing. :koko:

LA grew rapidly in the 20s and 30s as a kind of prototype of what was to follow after WW2. Hollywood is very sunbelt in its origins. People moved to California to chase dreams. It lured folks from the Atlantic seaboard. I say it’s only mildly sunbelt because by the 80s it was facing troubled times and modern reborn LA isn’t sunbelty either.

Houston is a blue collar southern port city which became the undisputed global center of its chief industry, oil and chemicals. Dallas was an old school plains/middle America banking and commercial center not unlike Kansas City that became a corporate heavyweight.

Nothing about either was ever sunbelt, ever. Houston is way too working class and Dallas is too business focused, and the latter has somewhat cool winters.

Shawn Nov 4, 2019 2:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lio45 (Post 8737820)
4 bedroom 2.5 bathrooms is a pretty big house though. If well located, it's not that unreasonable. It's a super high wage area... Much more justifiable than seeing cookie cutter bungalows in Vancouver selling for that much.

4 bed 2.5 bath in the form of a late 70s split level isn’t that big. About 2200 sq feet. And it’s not a nice 2200 sq feet either, because half of it is half underground. Split levels suck. The property is about 1/8th an acre too.

JManc Nov 4, 2019 3:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by llamaorama (Post 8737906)
LA grew rapidly in the 20s and 30s as a kind of prototype of what was to follow after WW2. Hollywood is very sunbelt in its origins. People moved to California to chase dreams. It lured folks from the Atlantic seaboard. I say it’s only mildly sunbelt because by the 80s it was facing troubled times and modern reborn LA isn’t sunbelty either.

Houston is a blue collar southern port city which became the undisputed global center of its chief industry, oil and chemicals. Dallas was an old school plains/middle America banking and commercial center not unlike Kansas City that became a corporate heavyweight.

Nothing about either was ever sunbelt, ever. Houston is way too working class and Dallas is too business focused, and the latter has somewhat cool winters.

Those are old stereotypes that no longer apply to either city and haven't done in my lifetime. People have been moving to all Texas's major metros for similar reasons they did LA decades earlier.

lio45 Nov 4, 2019 5:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 8737837)
Ugh. The housing stock in Silicon Valley, generally speaking, sucks.

It's one thing to pay millions for a special property, but crap like that should be demolished (and yeah, I get that no one is actually paying for the structure; only the land matters).

Actually, people seem to keep those super-plain mid-1950s houses and update them. There's lots of examples like this:

https://www.redfin.com/CA/Sunnyvale/...5/home/1092636

I guess construction costs in Silicon Valley are so high that you may as well just keep the modest cookie-cutter design and make it nicer... otherwise just buy something bigger that already exists.

lio45 Nov 4, 2019 5:09 AM

And I'm in a position to answer my own earlier question now - that piece of crap house, in a condition where it needs a total rehab, would sell for $800k-$900k at the very least.

jd3189 Nov 4, 2019 5:48 AM

Again, you guys are making this Sunbelt definition thing so anally specific as if the term can only include fast growing locales in the South. If you want to do that, fine, but you’re still be anally specific.


The Sunbelt is essentially the Southern half of the lower 48. That map from Wikipedia is more or less what it is and all the cities that are Sunbelt are in it as well. It has rich expensive cities as well as poor cheap ones and everything in between. It can include working class towns as well as party tourist cities. Not sure why it should have a more exact definition.

Obadno Nov 4, 2019 3:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by llamaorama (Post 8737878)
Agreed


El Paso
Jacksonville
Houston
Dallas

Mobile
New Orleans
Bay Area
CA Central Valley

I would say those are all sunbelt probably.

Obadno Nov 4, 2019 3:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAYNYC (Post 8737887)
My thoughts exactly.

Houston and Dallas - NOT sunbelt, but L.A. (core city) - maybe Sunbelt. :rolleyes:

Sure thing. :koko:

Not to mention Dallas and Houston are cheaper than Arizona so :shrug: If the Criteria of cheap housing is still defining sunbelt that doesn't make a lot of sense.

Sun Belt Nov 4, 2019 4:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lio45 (Post 8737970)
Actually, people seem to keep those super-plain mid-1950s houses and update them. There's lots of examples like this:

https://www.redfin.com/CA/Sunnyvale/...5/home/1092636

I guess construction costs in Silicon Valley are so high that you may as well just keep the modest cookie-cutter design and make it nicer... otherwise just buy something bigger that already exists.

A lot of the old 1950s ranches have new editions built in the back of the house, or the old carport converted into additional space.

Obadno Nov 4, 2019 4:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Belt (Post 8738239)
A lot of the old 1950s ranches have new editions built in the back of the house, or the old carport converted into additional space.

Agreed most of the nicer mid-century homes in Phoenix are getting remolded and selling for double the price of newer suburban homes. People love the mid century look but it actually goes well in our environment and climate so I totally get why.

hell I live in a 1965 updated mid century building

lio45 Nov 4, 2019 5:54 PM

These cheap (when built), car-oriented early 1950s homes in Sunnyvale are the epitome of Sunbeltness to me.

Obadno Nov 4, 2019 6:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lio45 (Post 8738394)
These cheap (when built), car-oriented early 1950s homes in Sunnyvale are the epitome of Sunbeltness to me.

Could not agree more :tup:

http://spineprint.co/wp-content/uplo...ve-phoenix.jpg

jigglysquishy Nov 4, 2019 6:13 PM

The sunbelt around here refers to American places for snowbirds to go. So Phoenix, Florida, and Palm Springs.

Looks like everyone on this forum has their own definition.

craigs Nov 4, 2019 6:29 PM

^Deep front yard, wide street frontage, three-letter address. Where is that?

Obadno Nov 4, 2019 6:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by craigs (Post 8738466)
^Deep front yard, wide street frontage, three-letter address. Where is that?

Idk central Phoenix someplace that’s what older central Phoenix neighborhoods look like

llamaorama Nov 5, 2019 12:23 AM

There are houses like that in Ohio, which we might all agree is like the anti-sunbelt.

I think words like sunbelt, rust belt, bible belt, etc, are loaded terms that mean something particular. The sunbelt therefore cannot just be literally half the country. It can't just mean any place that had some sunbelt traits, it has to mean places that were fundamentally shaped by certain forces that correspond to certain eras in American history that have some cultural and political overtones as well.

To me, "sunbelt" is a way of characterizing places that grew quickly at the peak of the postwar economic mobility by selling a certain lifestyle or aura to a certain generation of Americans.

They'd have at least most of these traits:

1. An economy that has grown in spite of being mostly low-wage services or tourism focused(Florida). Or, places that developed things like a strong foundation of white collar jobs or prestigious universities only after a lot of people started moving there(San Diego). All the wealth was made outside and then imported.

2. Attractive to members of the Boomer and Greatest Generation who wanted to live in a particular type of suburbia and liked particular forms of leisure activities that have since become sort of passe elsewhere, like golf.

3. A retirement destination for old-school style snowbirds. Is there a Del Webb master planned community in the metro area? Are there manicured communities for 55+ people to toodle around in golf carts?

4. A lot of real estate investment is bubblicious. Places that saw the greatest overall riches to rags decline after the Great Recession.

5. A certain kind of sedentary vacationing and conference travel is a selling point.

6. Finally, the sun part. But specifically, sunny places that are either deserts with desert scenery and zero humidity or sunny places that are beachy and have palm trees. Not just any old subtropical or desert climate can do.

badrunner Nov 5, 2019 12:33 AM

Good effort but still not hair-splittingly specific enough for this forum.

liat91 Nov 6, 2019 3:41 AM

Post WW2, lots of domestic inflow, cookie cutter, southern half of country, generally cheaper than established coast and large population gains within a generation.

At least that’s my take. Denver and Salt Lake City live on the edges of the Sunbelt and qualify due to being strong in at least 3 of the criteria listed.

Jackson, Memphis and Albuquerque are Sunbelt because they are deep within the four corners of Phoenix, Vegas, Raleigh and Miami (Soon to be Orlando).

KB0679 Nov 7, 2019 2:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by llamaorama (Post 8737906)
LA grew rapidly in the 20s and 30s as a kind of prototype of what was to follow after WW2. Hollywood is very sunbelt in its origins. People moved to California to chase dreams. It lured folks from the Atlantic seaboard. I say it’s only mildly sunbelt because by the 80s it was facing troubled times and modern reborn LA isn’t sunbelty either.

Houston is a blue collar southern port city which became the undisputed global center of its chief industry, oil and chemicals. Dallas was an old school plains/middle America banking and commercial center not unlike Kansas City that became a corporate heavyweight.

Nothing about either was ever sunbelt, ever. Houston is way too working class and Dallas is too business focused, and the latter has somewhat cool winters.

This is the hugest stretch if there ever was one. If Houston and Dallas aren't Sunbelt, then no one is.

jtown,man Nov 7, 2019 2:28 AM

Off-topic but why do so many homes have such large front yards? No one uses it. Its such a waste. Is it just so the drive way can be longer?

austlar1 Nov 7, 2019 5:05 AM

I am too lazy to read this entire quarrelsome thread, but surely somebody posted about the origins of the term "Sun Belt" by now. If not, there is this: https://www.thoughtco.com/sun-belt-i...states-1435569

Obadno Nov 7, 2019 1:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtown,man (Post 8741444)
Off-topic but why do so many homes have such large front yards? No one uses it. Its such a waste. Is it just so the drive way can be longer?

people like big yards and being set back from the street?

If you've not used your front yard you are missing out.:tup:

JManc Nov 7, 2019 2:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtown,man (Post 8741444)
Off-topic but why do so many homes have such large front yards? No one uses it. Its such a waste. Is it just so the drive way can be longer?

They are a waste. I never use mine and require a lot of useless maintenance but I think it has to do with street noise, codes and aesthetics. I lived in a 1840's house in New England which was about 6 feet from the street and I heard every car passing by. My house here in Houston is about 20' from street and only hear big trucks.

Sun Belt Nov 7, 2019 2:24 PM

Regarding front yards, consumers like the curb appeal of a house being set back from the loud noisy, dangerous street. People generally don't want other people lurking around right outside their windows.

For anybody who has ever lived in a ground floor apartment in the city, then you would understand why people like to have a front yards whether they use the or not. Most use their backyards -- pool, bbq, fire pit etc.

Steely Dan Nov 7, 2019 3:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtown,man (Post 8741444)
Off-topic but why do so many homes have such large front yards? No one uses it.

"no one" is an awfully strong statement.

our building has a small front yard (all of about 350 SF of grass), and since our back "yard" is just a small patio tucked in between the back decks and the parking pad on the alley, our kids actually do play in our front yard all the time.

it's not uncommon at all to see children playing in the front yard/sidewalk/parkway in my neighborhood. backyards are either so tiny or non-existant (and chopped up with fences anyway) that the front of the buildings is usually the largest open space for kids to run around, ride scooters, toss a football, splash around in a wading pool, build a snowman, etc.

Obadno Nov 7, 2019 3:25 PM

I cant think of a better example of a stark difference when it comes to people inside and outside of the urban bubble.

In most places around the world asking why people like big yards would make their eyes cross.:haha:

Its like asking why people like eating or sleeping.

iheartthed Nov 7, 2019 3:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obadno (Post 8741827)
I cant think of a better example of a stark difference when it comes to people inside and outside of the urban bubble.

In most places around the world asking why people like big yards would make their eyes cross.:haha:

Its like asking why people like eating or sleeping.

Yards aren't really a thing outside of North America, so I'm sure many non-Americans would want to know the answer too.

Boisebro Nov 7, 2019 3:49 PM

I have a decent size front and back yard. both used to be wide open green space which was great for kids to play and dogs to poop. and sometimes the other way around.

but I recently had the front redesigned to be more water-friendly, and the back I converted to a small garden with fruit trees and berry bushes. both are a massive improvement over the bland swath of grass they once were.

but mostly my front yard carries one purpose: for me to yell at young people to get the #@!$ off of it.

:sly:

JManc Nov 7, 2019 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boisebro (Post 8741852)
I have a decent size front and back yard. both used to be wide open green space which was great for kids to play and dogs to poop. and sometimes the other way around.

but I recently had the front redesigned to be more water-friendly, and the back I converted to a small garden with fruit trees and berry bushes. both are a massive improvement over the bland swath of grass they once were.

but mostly my front yard carries one purpose: for me to yell at young people to get the #@!$ off of it.

:sly:

Bingo. The only legit reason to have a front yard.

http://giphygifs.s3.amazonaws.com/me...1WatQ4/200.gif

bossabreezes Nov 7, 2019 10:22 PM

Even though maybe not the best urban feature, yards do serve a purpose: they absorb water. They are very important in subtropical and tropical places that have high rainfall.

Otherwise, flooding can be a really big issue. In São Paulo, there are some neighborhoods with little area for absorption. This coupled with torrential summer storms and steep hills = streets turning into waterfalls that can sometimes take cars down with them.

In the neighborhoods with yards, this almost never happens.

pdxtex Nov 9, 2019 4:58 PM

Dallas will be number two. It has the least amount of encumbrances; natural disaster, high prices, high heat, intense nimbyism, tax unfriendly....texas is the new California without the progressive politics and lower prices.

Centropolis Nov 9, 2019 9:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 8741824)
"no one" is an awfully strong statement.

our building has a small front yard (all of about 350 SF of grass), and since our back "yard" is just a small patio tucked in between the back decks and the parking pad on the alley, our kids actually do play in our front yard all the time.

it's not uncommon at all to see children playing in the front yard/sidewalk/parkway in my neighborhood. backyards are either so tiny or non-existant (and chopped up with fences anyway) that the front of the buildings is usually the largest open space for kids to run around, ride scooters, toss a football, splash around in a wading pool, build a snowman, etc.

yeah front “yards” do serve a purpose...helps with a tree canopy which is wildly important in a hot summer climate. if you’ve ever lived in sfh/row with just a front door stoop to the sidewalk the street noise can be annoying...coughing, talking, cars...i mean its not terrible but can be annoying. in walkups and euroblocks its less of an issue.

Sun Belt Nov 10, 2019 1:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bossabreezes (Post 8742407)
Even though maybe not the best urban feature, yards do serve a purpose: they absorb water. They are very important in subtropical and tropical places that have high rainfall.

Otherwise, flooding can be a really big issue. In São Paulo, there are some neighborhoods with little area for absorption. This coupled with torrential summer storms and steep hills = streets turning into waterfalls that can sometimes take cars down with them.

In the neighborhoods with yards, this almost never happens.

That's a good point. In arid regions, storm runoff is a big issue. Instead of precious rain waters replenishing aquifers, it's channeled out to sea, or in inland areas, it evaporates before it can percolate.

jtown,man Nov 10, 2019 1:22 AM

I should have been more specific.

This:
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.8651...7i16384!8i8192

or this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.8568...7i13312!8i6656
is not this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.8328...7i13312!8i6656



Trust me, I didn't get a ground-level apartment because of noise. I understand the issues. I don't think its weird Americans don't prefer Philly style row homes but I think front yards, overall, are too large. As far as actually using their yards, most people prefer privacy, you don't get that in the front yard. Also, more backyards are fenced than front yards, so people are more likely to trust their kids running around there or their dogs. Point? People use their backyards more, we all know this. Most people anyways. So the huge football field front yard makes zero sense to me.

dimondpark Nov 10, 2019 4:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdxtex (Post 8744072)
Dallas will be number two. It has the least amount of encumbrances; natural disaster, high prices, high heat, intense nimbyism, tax unfriendly....texas is the new California without the progressive politics and lower prices.

They need to create more to be the 'new' California. Poaching companies and workers makes you a cheap alternative, it doesnt make you California.

Sun Belt Nov 10, 2019 5:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dimondpark (Post 8744560)
They need to create more to be the 'new' California. Poaching companies and workers makes you a cheap alternative, it doesnt make you California.

I don't think it has to be one or the other. California and Texas will most likely remain population and economic powerhouses.

Texas definitely has the space to continue to grow rapidly this century.

chris08876 Nov 10, 2019 5:19 PM

^^^^^

Too much size. The state is bigger than France.

LA21st Nov 10, 2019 5:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dimondpark (Post 8744560)
They need to create more to be the 'new' California. Poaching companies and workers makes you a cheap alternative, it doesnt make you California.

Agreed. It's like all those place calling themselves Hollywood of the South, North etc Or Silicon Praires, Alley, etc. It's never going to be the same.

iheartthed Nov 10, 2019 6:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dimondpark (Post 8744560)
They need to create more to be the 'new' California. Poaching companies and workers makes you a cheap alternative, it doesnt make you California.

Industry poaching is actually another characteristic of the Sun Belt. California has done its fair share of it (especially L.A.), but nothing like the scale of the newer Sun Belt destinations.

pdxtex Nov 10, 2019 6:57 PM

Californians leaving California seem to think Texas is the next best thing. That was their top destination last year. Of the nearly 700k people who left, 10 percent ended up in Texas. Business also sees the writing on the wall as more and companies move their headquarters and large office dependent operations. I read somewhere genentech laid off about 300 workers in the south bay. Guess where 300 new genentech workers magically ended up? Portland , two floors below me where office space is a third of bay area prices....


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.