Why build affordable housing?
Why not just convert all the failed condo units?
| Posted at 11:11 AM | Permalink |
|
About
This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on January 10, 2010 11:11 AM.
The previous post in this blog was A true inconvenience.
The next post in this blog is As the raven flies, so go the 'dogs.
Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.
Comments (5)
Actually, that is a great idea. I bet you the condos sitting empty cost just as much to build as something like the the Sitka which sits in the Pearl District. PLus the developer would sell them for less than cost just ot get out.
Of course, it'd be cheaper since we couldn't do the drill of spending 3+ years and a zillion planner hours setting the thing up - which would probably doom it as a CoP project.
Posted by Steve | January 10, 2010 12:29 PM
These places are built to "condo" or "rental" standards depending upon their ultimate use. Those built to "condo" standards are more expensive.
Since the Sitka was meant to be low and mixed income rental, it is probably not as well built as the luxe condos. That's just a guess, though.
If you're looking for a higher quality unit to rent, look for the buildings built to be marketed as condos and have been forced to rent. Watch out, though. Most of these places will flip to condo the minute economic times improve and you'll have to decide whether to leave or buy your little slice of heaven at a price you will probably not be able to afford.
Do you think that the 90/303 people who paid 1 million to buy condos in NY's largely vacant Oro feel like idiots at this point? Especially if the Oro is offering specials or discounts to fill the rest of the building?
Posted by NW Portlander | January 10, 2010 1:49 PM
Converting affordable housing into unaffordable condos and back again. Our home is within walking distance of 3 of those 60's apartment complexes converted to empty condo units and then there were the nice older apartment complexes torn down to build big ugly modern empty condo units.
Posted by tom | January 10, 2010 4:33 PM
"Since the Sitka was meant to be low and mixed income rental, it is probably not as well built as the luxe condos."
If you can go to an open house, take a look. I've seen inside the Sitka and it is not that much worse than the Pearl/SoWa condos. Slab floors, slab walls, high-end IKEA cabinetry.
The market-rent condos might have nicer trim like stoves/refrigs, but that's about it.
I still think it is a good idea.
Posted by Steve | January 11, 2010 7:28 AM
Here's one in our own state that converted prior to selling any units.
Posted by John Rettig | January 11, 2010 12:06 PM