Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

WendyArmbuster t1_j7wrrse wrote

Is there a way to re-zone this so that higher density housing can be built, but it must always be owner-occupied? Like, can we mandate that this development must be condos? I would imagine that that would be the end of it, because condos don't offer an eternity of income at the expense of the equity of the residents. Our ratios of rentals to owner-occupied are already way, way, way too high.

−2

VaderTower t1_j7xe5m6 wrote

The applicant would need to specifically ask for that condition. P&Z couldn't do it without the owner asking. City Council could, but very unlikely and unpopular intervention.

That being said you're right that condos would kill the project, but that's not because of the lack of infinite rent. Developers build condos all the time, build for $x sell for $x*150%. The demographic that would buy condos at the cost they would be build for, is non-existent in that location. I'd be pressed to find a specific location in Springfield that could support a condo development. People in Springfield, based on market studies, don't really want condos.

3

WendyArmbuster t1_j7xpm9v wrote

>People in Springfield, based on market studies, don't really want condos.

What's the difference between a condo and an apartment? What's the difference between a condo and a house? Why would people choose a house over a condo? Why would people choose an apartment over a condo? The answers to these questions tell us what our housing priorities should be in Springfield.

>What's the difference between a condo and an apartment?

A condo requires a decent credit score, some savings, and a good skilled job, while most people can get an apartment. But, an apartment is a constant financial loss, while a condo is an investment, and builds equity.

>What's the difference between a condo and a house?

Living in a house enables you to work on your own car, do your own projects, have a wood shop, a place to store your canoes and kayaks, grow a garden, and a multitude of other things that condo living doesn't generally afford. Condo living is generally no higher quality of life than living in an apartment.

>Why would people choose an apartment over a condo?

Either they are young and unsure of their future, like a college student, or because they have no other financial choice. There are just very few other reasons. The quality of life is the same, but the financial upsides of condos absolutely crush the financials of living in an apartment. It's insane that an adult would choose an apartment over a condo.

This begs the question: Why would the city of Springfield prioritize apartments? What is the long-term upside for Springfield?

−3