| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 4/4 |
| 2008/2/21-25 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:49210 Activity:low |
2/21 Google for Las Vegas luxury condo meltdown. Luxury condos still
doing well? Doubt it.
http://www.lvrj.com/business/7742187.html
\_ Is SF more like Las Vegas or Manhattan?
You may wish to read:
http://www.examiner.com/a-1233204~Prices_to_buy__rent_in_city_climb.html
http://preview.tinyurl.com/235swl (examiner.com)
\_ How the hell do the "affordable unit" things work? Do you have to
enter some kind of lottery to get below-market rates? What is the
point anyway, seems to me like they should just build more units
instead of subsidizing a few.
\_ The incentive is for the developer to build more units. All
new construction must contain some mandatory number of such
units, often in exchange for some other concession like
relaxed zoning. Just hoping a developer builds more units doesn't
work so well.
\_ Yeah it is some kind of lottery. There are set-asides for families
making area median (~80k/yr) as well as 80% and 60%. You are
required to sell the unit back to the agency that runs the
thing when you are done, at a price equal to what you paid
\_ Yeah it is some kind of lottery. There are set-asides for
families making area median (~80k/yr) as well as 80% and 60%.
You are required to sell the unit back to the agency that runs
the thing when you are done, at a price equal to what you paid
plus inflation, when you move. The reasoning goes that even
if 3k more units were released to the market it would not
lower prices that much, certainly not enough so that anyone
making 80k/yr would be able to afford one.
\_ key word: usually |
| 4/4 |
|
| www.examiner.com/a-1233204~Prices_to_buy__rent_in_city_climb.html San Francisco, but the added supply has not reduced the price; the cost to buy a home, as well as rent, is reaching levels experienced during The City's dot-com days, according to a city report. The price to rent a two-bedroom unit increased from $2,229 a month in 2005 to $2,400 in 2006. A two-bedroom unit averaged between $2,500 and $2,750 in 2000, according to a new "housing inventory" report recently released by The City. Similarly, the cost to buy a three-bedroom house has constantly increased during the same time period, from $543,059 in 2000, to $846,640 in 2005 and $849,750 in 2006. Crowd fights health care cuts "When we under produce housing every year we force people to compete with each other for the scarce supply," Metcalf said, adding that the scarcity drives housing costs up. San Francisco's Housing Element, a planning document required by the state to outline how a city's housing needs will be met, notes that The City should create about 3,000 housing units annually with 1,000 at affordable levels. Of the 10,317 new units constructed in San Francisco between 2002 and 2006, 3,039 were priced at "affordable," below-market rates, according to the report. Matt Franklin, director of the Mayor's Office of Housing, who blamed it on a "dearth of investment" in housing in 2002 and 2003. Since then, Franklin said, The City has invested more, and the 2006 numbers are still low because it takes about four years for affordable housing projects to be realized. Franklin said that in a year and a half, 1,396 affordable-housing units will be constructed. Additionally, there are about 4,800 affordable-housing units in the planning stages, he said, which are likely to be constructed in two to four years. The way to help solve the problem is "to be aggressively building more affordable housing," Daly said, adding that he disagreed with the assumption that "hyper-construction" would drive down prices. Daly has also championed a ballot measure that would require 50 percent of a new Bayview-Hunters Point development to be affordable, up from the current plan to offer 30 percent of the housing at below-market rates. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Dede said: Eliminating rent control promotes investment in existing rental stock and redevelopment of existing stock. Eliminating condo conversion restrictions does much of the same. Reducing the risk to developers in the entitlement process will also facilitate development - and reduce the cost of housing. Eliminating inclusionary housing will reduce the cost of housing. If the city want's to buy down units to make them affordable - great. Otherwise it is a tax on every other buyer - and I mean every because the cost of new housing raises the price of existing housing. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Examiner Reader said: It doesn't matter how much "affordable" housing you try to create, supply will never meet demand. So San Franciso currently houses less than 03% of the US population. As I said, supply and demand will always be out of balance. Herr Daly can do what ever he likes but there will NEVER be enough "affordable" housing. I am not saying its right or wrong, but "it is what it is." Get over it and try and make life bearable for those who actually do what it takes to live here. I would vote for the $2 billion to go toward MUNI and improving the 38 Geary rather than build a bunch of cheap apartments to house the lucky thousand who win a lottery of some sort. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Examiner Reader said: It doesn't matter how much "affordable" housing you try to create, supply will never meet demand. So San Franciso currently houses less than 03% of the US population. As I said, supply and demand will always be out of balance. Herr Daly can do what ever he likes but there will NEVER be enough "affordable" housing. I am not saying its right or wrong, but "it is what it is." Get over it and try and make life bearable for those who actually do what it takes to live here. I would vote for the $2 billion to go toward MUNI and improving the 38 Geary rather than build a bunch of cheap apartments to house the lucky thousand who win a lottery of some sort. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" logicbomb said: Seven and Reader: New units are not subject to rent control, so your economic theory that rent control is curtailing development in San Francisco is null and void. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Garwood said: Hey Josh Sabatini (author) - thanks for giving the landlords of San Francisco to get on the bank wagon and raise the rents. Gee wiz, everybody must be raising the rents, so why shouldn't I? If you story is supposed to be a pubic service of some sort, well, you blew it, really blew it. When I get my rent increase letter from my landlord, I'll be sure to think of you. Landlords that might be on the fence as far as raising rents will go for it now after you've given permission to every penny pinching landlord is the City to do so. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Examiner Reader said: Expensive housing? Rent control is nice for the few that live under it but the widespread and long term cost is a housing market that is artificially manipulated to the point that costs in both rent AND sales continues to rise. Rent control has been studied to death and always is proven to make matters worse. Erasing rent control would be the fastest method and the cheapest method to create housing for everyone. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Examiner Reader said: I meet a married couple recently who were enjoying the life of "affordable" housing despite both working with good companies and making good money. THEY decided to have three kids before planning their life and so, the kids cost was deducted somehow from their gross pay which then qualified them for Burbank Housing (low rent / public subsidized) rentals. I'm not paying taxes just to make life easy on people who chose to have kids they cant afford. They also told me that Burbank Housing cannot "discriminate" against people coming out of prison and only view the persons income. So, "affordable" housing also is used to support ex-cons. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" MS Jackson said: Don't be too alarmed, the Examiner makes this sort of announcement in an effort to bolster rents (Examiner is pro-landlord all the way) about once every two months regardless of the state of rentals in SF Do your thinking on this subject for yourself - check Criagslist. "Ballot measure aims to make The Citys housing affordable" Examiner Reader said: the problem with this initiative is that it is classic ballot-box planning and offers a one-size-fits-all solution to complex planning problems. the question is how to provide this housing in the context of detailed neighborhood plans. the measure for example allows builders the right to dramatically reduce rear yard open space (to 10'). this would undo much of the actual detailed planning work that has occurred in the market-octavia area and undermine other efforts to trade density for a broad range of desired community benefits. the affordable housing defined in this measure incidentally will be for households with close to $100k/year incomes. i wouldn't necessarily argue that incentives are not needed to produce housing for households in this range, only that voters should consider both what is being traded and what other benefits they might prefer out of such an exchange. "Supervisor Daly wants half of proposed Treasure Island housing to be affordable" logicbomb said: A) Just because you make the housing affordable, doesn't mean it will be affordable to live there. Residents will still need to pay for a car (plus bridge toll, regardless of whether they work in SF or East Bay), bus, or ferry to get to work. B) Making 50% of the housing affordable is a sweet way to deter the 50% market units from selling. |
| preview.tinyurl.com/235swl -> www.examiner.com/a-1233204~Prices_to_buy__rent_in_city_climb.html San Francisco, but the added supply has not reduced the price; the cost to buy a home, as well as rent, is reaching levels experienced during The City's dot-com days, according to a city report. The price to rent a two-bedroom unit increased from $2,229 a month in 2005 to $2,400 in 2006. A two-bedroom unit averaged between $2,500 and $2,750 in 2000, according to a new "housing inventory" report recently released by The City. Similarly, the cost to buy a three-bedroom house has constantly increased during the same time period, from $543,059 in 2000, to $846,640 in 2005 and $849,750 in 2006. Crowd fights health care cuts "When we under produce housing every year we force people to compete with each other for the scarce supply," Metcalf said, adding that the scarcity drives housing costs up. San Francisco's Housing Element, a planning document required by the state to outline how a city's housing needs will be met, notes that The City should create about 3,000 housing units annually with 1,000 at affordable levels. Of the 10,317 new units constructed in San Francisco between 2002 and 2006, 3,039 were priced at "affordable," below-market rates, according to the report. Matt Franklin, director of the Mayor's Office of Housing, who blamed it on a "dearth of investment" in housing in 2002 and 2003. Since then, Franklin said, The City has invested more, and the 2006 numbers are still low because it takes about four years for affordable housing projects to be realized. Franklin said that in a year and a half, 1,396 affordable-housing units will be constructed. Additionally, there are about 4,800 affordable-housing units in the planning stages, he said, which are likely to be constructed in two to four years. The way to help solve the problem is "to be aggressively building more affordable housing," Daly said, adding that he disagreed with the assumption that "hyper-construction" would drive down prices. Daly has also championed a ballot measure that would require 50 percent of a new Bayview-Hunters Point development to be affordable, up from the current plan to offer 30 percent of the housing at below-market rates. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Dede said: Eliminating rent control promotes investment in existing rental stock and redevelopment of existing stock. Eliminating condo conversion restrictions does much of the same. Reducing the risk to developers in the entitlement process will also facilitate development - and reduce the cost of housing. Eliminating inclusionary housing will reduce the cost of housing. If the city want's to buy down units to make them affordable - great. Otherwise it is a tax on every other buyer - and I mean every because the cost of new housing raises the price of existing housing. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Examiner Reader said: It doesn't matter how much "affordable" housing you try to create, supply will never meet demand. So San Franciso currently houses less than 03% of the US population. As I said, supply and demand will always be out of balance. Herr Daly can do what ever he likes but there will NEVER be enough "affordable" housing. I am not saying its right or wrong, but "it is what it is." Get over it and try and make life bearable for those who actually do what it takes to live here. I would vote for the $2 billion to go toward MUNI and improving the 38 Geary rather than build a bunch of cheap apartments to house the lucky thousand who win a lottery of some sort. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Examiner Reader said: It doesn't matter how much "affordable" housing you try to create, supply will never meet demand. So San Franciso currently houses less than 03% of the US population. As I said, supply and demand will always be out of balance. Herr Daly can do what ever he likes but there will NEVER be enough "affordable" housing. I am not saying its right or wrong, but "it is what it is." Get over it and try and make life bearable for those who actually do what it takes to live here. I would vote for the $2 billion to go toward MUNI and improving the 38 Geary rather than build a bunch of cheap apartments to house the lucky thousand who win a lottery of some sort. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" logicbomb said: Seven and Reader: New units are not subject to rent control, so your economic theory that rent control is curtailing development in San Francisco is null and void. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Garwood said: Hey Josh Sabatini (author) - thanks for giving the landlords of San Francisco to get on the bank wagon and raise the rents. Gee wiz, everybody must be raising the rents, so why shouldn't I? If you story is supposed to be a pubic service of some sort, well, you blew it, really blew it. When I get my rent increase letter from my landlord, I'll be sure to think of you. Landlords that might be on the fence as far as raising rents will go for it now after you've given permission to every penny pinching landlord is the City to do so. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Examiner Reader said: Expensive housing? Rent control is nice for the few that live under it but the widespread and long term cost is a housing market that is artificially manipulated to the point that costs in both rent AND sales continues to rise. Rent control has been studied to death and always is proven to make matters worse. Erasing rent control would be the fastest method and the cheapest method to create housing for everyone. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" Examiner Reader said: I meet a married couple recently who were enjoying the life of "affordable" housing despite both working with good companies and making good money. THEY decided to have three kids before planning their life and so, the kids cost was deducted somehow from their gross pay which then qualified them for Burbank Housing (low rent / public subsidized) rentals. I'm not paying taxes just to make life easy on people who chose to have kids they cant afford. They also told me that Burbank Housing cannot "discriminate" against people coming out of prison and only view the persons income. So, "affordable" housing also is used to support ex-cons. "Prices to buy, rent in city climb" MS Jackson said: Don't be too alarmed, the Examiner makes this sort of announcement in an effort to bolster rents (Examiner is pro-landlord all the way) about once every two months regardless of the state of rentals in SF Do your thinking on this subject for yourself - check Criagslist. "Ballot measure aims to make The Citys housing affordable" Examiner Reader said: the problem with this initiative is that it is classic ballot-box planning and offers a one-size-fits-all solution to complex planning problems. the question is how to provide this housing in the context of detailed neighborhood plans. the measure for example allows builders the right to dramatically reduce rear yard open space (to 10'). this would undo much of the actual detailed planning work that has occurred in the market-octavia area and undermine other efforts to trade density for a broad range of desired community benefits. the affordable housing defined in this measure incidentally will be for households with close to $100k/year incomes. i wouldn't necessarily argue that incentives are not needed to produce housing for households in this range, only that voters should consider both what is being traded and what other benefits they might prefer out of such an exchange. "Supervisor Daly wants half of proposed Treasure Island housing to be affordable" logicbomb said: A) Just because you make the housing affordable, doesn't mean it will be affordable to live there. Residents will still need to pay for a car (plus bridge toll, regardless of whether they work in SF or East Bay), bus, or ferry to get to work. B) Making 50% of the housing affordable is a sweet way to deter the 50% market units from selling. |
| www.lvrj.com/business/7742187.html Gina Jacson shows a furnished model condominium inside Sky Las Vegas on Tuesday. Las Vegas-based SalesTraq reported 213 escrow closings at Sky Las Vegas in April at an average price of $723,480 a unit. Housing observers say many condos are returning to the market for resale. Bruce Hiatt of Luxury Realty Group said that of his 40 clients who bought at Sky Las Vegas, about a dozen are considering renting out their units. Several investors are making their units their second homes. Potential supply is flattening and market demand is modest in Las Vegas' luxury condominium market, a local research analyst said. Potential inventory levels declined for the first time since the condo boom struck Las Vegas in 2003, Brian Gordon, principal of Applied Analysis, a Las Vegas financial consulting firm, said in his first-quarter luxury condo report. The report showed 4,214 existing units with another 13,409 under construction. Total units that are built, proposed or canceled exceed 97,000. Industry insiders are saying that many high-rise condos are being put back on the market for resale and, like single-family detached homes, they're not selling. Las Vegas Resorts Never Looked Better One luxury condo broker said he walked the floors at Metropolis and saw lockboxes on nearly every door. Real-estate agents use lockboxes to access empty homes for showing. He said 70 percent of the units at SoHo Lofts are listed for sale. "Of course, every project has investors," said Aaron Yashouafar, developer of Sky Las Vegas, which opened this month on the Strip. "Our percentage of investors is substantially less than other projects because we had a hold-back period in the contract from Day One." Sky Las Vegas owners are restricted from selling for at least six months after buying, he said. About 80 people are making their primary residence at the 409-unit, 45-story building near Circus Circus. Las Vegas-based SalesTraq reported 213 escrow closings at Sky Las Vegas in April at an average price of $723,480 a unit. About one-third of high-rise closings are showing up for resale the next day on the Multiple Listing Service, SalesTraq President Larry Murphy said. At the end of the first quarter, an estimated 754 existing luxury units were on the market, Applied Analysis reported. The average asking price was $803,900, or $622 a square foot. Resale units that were sold during the quarter averaged $764,500, or $537 a square foot. The mix of properties available continues to determine market-average pricing, Gordon said. Eric Smith, owner of Corporate Housing by Owner, a Colorado-based company that matches owners of executive homes with potential renters, said: "There's so many condo owners trying to figure out what to do with their property. Smith, who opened an office in Las Vegas this month, said luxury condo rentals fit investors' goal to hold for long-term appreciation and can save investors from selling at a loss. "There's huge demand for corporate housing in Las Vegas, not like San Francisco, but it's a big market and people want to know what to do with their condo," he said. "If they furnish it, they can turn it into a hotel alternative." Vertical construction is becoming a more powerful element in the housing market, consultant Steve Bottfeld of Marketing Solutions said. Based on his research, the number of mid- and high-rise condo units closing escrow in 2007 will easily pass last year by 30 percent to 50 percent, probably totaling around 5,000 closings, he said. More than 14,000 units have suspended sales or have been officially canceled. Buyers at projects such as Krystal Sands, Vegas Grand and Icon filed class action lawsuits against the developer and the next potential lawsuit could involve Spanish View Towers, which has halted construction in the southwestern valley. "The luxury condominium market continues to evolve and respond to the latest market conditions," Gordon said. "Land owners and developers are dealing with conservative reactions by the investment community and potential buyers in response to recent reports that a supply-demand imbalance is inevitable." He said the vast majority of units in the construction pipeline have been sold and their total is "exponentially higher" than the present market inventory. Bruce Hiatt of Luxury Realty Group said: "We still think it'll take nine to 12 months to absorb the luxury condos coming on the market. In the future, you'll never see $600 a square foot again." Of his 40 clients who bought at Sky, about a dozen are considering renting out their units, he said. Several investors are making their units their second homes. "People are saying, 'I'm not sure what to do with it,'" Hiatt said. Now they've put their unit at Metropolis up for sale and they're going to keep Sky to live in." Las Vegas real estate agent Sabrina Porras said she thinks investors will become more receptive to converting their homes to corporate rentals, particularly in today's market of stagnant home sales. She plans to rent out a client's condo at Sky for $3,500 a month. About half of Corporate Housing by Owner's 34 properties in Las Vegas are high-rise condos. Porras said owners can expect a minimum net return of $500 a month, providing an avenue for cash flow while waiting out the market slowdown. com Leave Your Comment 12 Reader Comments Terms & Conditions The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. Please enter your name Name: Please enter your email Email: Please enter a comment COMMENTS : (word count limit is 300) You have reached the maximum number of words allowed Current Word Count: Post Comment Bubble Believer wrote on June 20, 2007 03:26 PM: Note today's business news report that Investor Kirk Kirvorian is pulling out of any buy in to the MGM stock which includes the City Center project. he smells a dead over priced Condo craze rat that will soon stink up the joint! Probably Some Guy who wonders when the Government is going to stop approving new construction while so many units sit unsold is one of those 'investors' and is counting on the government to bail him out. Real estate in this town is going to be down or level for the next 3-4 years. Longer if these 'investors' lose their primary home and move away. I bet you see condo units convert back to apartments because so many 'investors' are now broke and need a place to rent. Mr Peepers wrote on May 31, 2007 12:15 AM: Ok now mark this date and the comments in this article. Three years from now these condo owners who are left will be screaming to get out of these over priced sky boxes. Yes international buyers seeking a safer haven for their corrupt gottten gains ( aka china, middle eastern)however, local schmucks who buy thinking its the road to wellville will be sorely disappointed. these delusional buyers are being hyped again by the same unethical developers, brokers and lenders who brought you the current crisis in our local real estate market. " Wow, that less than two units out of an averaged nine units per floor that are owner-occupied after closing. Some Guy wrote on May 30, 2007 02:59 PM: When is the government gonna stop approving new construction while so many empty units sit unsold? Kyle Walton wrote on May 30, 2007 11:48 AM: check this out Kyle Walton wrote on May 30, 2007 11:48 AM: check this out Bruce wrote on May 30, 2007 10:51 AM: With soon to be announced residential condos near Sky having strong international demand at prices starting at $2000 a sq foot, the luxury residential condo market will increasingly become an international one. Land, contruction and other costs continue to rise 15% to 30% over the past two years resulting in very little luxury condo supply in the future. Most developers are cancelling luxury condo projects in the core Strip area as they cannot make a profit at these new price points. Good news for existing supply over a longer time period. Those buyers who take a longer term view will be the winners over all the short term naysayers. |