I'm glad that condos never rally came back

[the urban politician]

Condos fueled the 1999-2008 boom.

Since the Great Recession they never came back, except as a niche for luxury buyers.

And I'm glad. Condos suck.

For Chicago, in particular, the apartment boom has allowed for less of a lender's frenzy. It has allowed for new zoning instruments like Transit-Oriented-Development with higher density and reduced off-street parking. It has created a shit ton of housing for people who want to be in certain areas.

I'm glad the condo craze never came back. Let it remain so, I say...

Thoughts?

[pdxtex]

these things are cyclical. im sure they will be back. apartment financing is starting to slow down too so we'll see what comes next. maybe a suburban highrise boom?? people might get sick of being renters after their urban stints but want to keep that lifestyle at a lower price. condos only suck if you live in a building full of degenerates and the books are all fcked up. HOAs are crazy out west right now. i live in a townhouse but also own the land my unit sits on, so the hoa is pretty low, but im also on the hook for maintenance.

[AviationGuy]

I wish reasonably priced condos or townhomes would come back. In this part of the country, the boom of luxury complexes is still on. In some cases, older complexes are being demolished and replaced with the luxury complexes. The price per square foot is ludicrous, and then you have to add hundreds of dollars per month in fees.

[pdxtex]

portland builders are designing some pretty interesting things these days. small scale, cohousing type developments, not tiny homes, but small homes clustered together around a courtyard, no garage but maybe a small parking pad or just street parking. were seeing alot of interesting multifamily infill too finally.

[mhays]

In some cities, they're not happening because liability laws got too tight and made them dramatically more expensive to build. In some states, in a multi-unit building lawsuits happen when the majority of the ownership wants them to happen, vs. in a single unit or a townhouse where the properties might be considered separate, and lawsuits don't need to have a ton of merit to make it to the courts. There are big differences between areas where developers have a chance to fix problems before it gets to the courts, vs. going straight to the legal system. That takes away a housing option. Then again people like me are making a killing because we own undersupplied assets that we bought when prices were much lower.

Hopefully this will be fixed. Condos are an important part of an urban core and any urban neighborhood. They don't have to have tons of parking, even though they often tilt toward people in established careers etc., and the parking tends to be more than with rentals.

[Omaharocks]

Well, I'm glad to make the counter-argument if that's what you're after.

1. Condos hardly fueled the 1999-2008 boom, even if there were plenty being built in places like Chicago's loop. But they only made up small percentage of the lending spree that led to the market collapse.

2. Condos did come back - pretty much everywhere the prices are at or higher than they were pre-recession. Demand is high, but not as many are being built due to tighter lending, which is good.

3. Niche for luxury buyers? If you mean the new condos that are being built are primarily for luxury buyers, that's true. However, it's also true for apartments. And absolutely true for the single family homes that are built in urban areas. It's not as though the thousands of new luxury apartments are aiding anyone's ability to live in any neighborhood of their choosing. In fact, they've had the opposite effect.

4. The benefits of buying a condo vs. renting an apartment has always been about how long you'll be there. In a city like Chicago, that's not as transient as say, DC or NY, and where buying is affordable, I'd think you'd be in favor of condos since that equity builds quickly, and favors the buyers vs. the landlords.

5. What the hell does condos vs. apartments have to do with density or parking requirements? You do realize that most condo buildings have a considerable number of rentals, right? And that many apartment buildings flip to condos depending on the market?

Most condos are the affordable alternative for home ownership, for those looking for a smaller, easy-to-maintain place. In many cities they are the only option on a middle-income, or even in general. What exactly sucks about that?

[dave8721]

Condos never came back?

[Crawford]

I'm a bit confused. There's nothing being built around me but condos. Rentals are rare, and co-ops basically aren't built anymore.

Also, not sure what TODs and parking have to do with rentals vs. condos. I doubt too many cities set parking requirements based on whether a housing unit is owner vs. renter.

[Doady]

Condominum, freehold, rental refers to type of housing ownership.

Apartment, townhouse, semi-detached house, detached house refers to type of housing structure.

TOD refers to increasing density and designing neighbourhoods to make transit more accessible. It has nothing to do with discouraging home ownership.

Apartments (both condos and rental) are both higher density. A 300-unit condominum apartment building adds as much to the housing supply as a 300-unit rental apartment building. Both have to follow the same parking requirements.

A condominium apartment can be rented out too. A condominium apartment building can have many renters living inside it.

Condo-crazy Toronto is building a lot more apartments than Chicago, and CTA ridership fell by 5% in 2016. Chicago is a poor model for transit growth.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by dave8721

Condos never came back?

lol this is news to me as well, when did condos leave? Will they ever leave as long as humans and non-detached homes coexist? And how was one type of ownership responsible for the 2008 clusterfuck? so many questions.

[the urban politician]

I guess this is market specific.

In Chicago, condos are now a niche product for the wealthy. As far as residential is concerned, a vast majority of the new supply has been rental.

Also, for condos more parking is built whereas with rental he parking ratios are low, sometimes none, near transit.

[pj3000]

Some cities are still building lots of them.

That's just the way it seems to me, but I'm not knowledgable about overall/nationwide real estate development industry trends.

I mean, I think of some of the bigger markets and it seems that more often than not, if there is a high-rise under construction, it's a condo tower. Places like S Florida have never really even let up at all in condo construction. And in smaller markets, like here in Pittsburgh, a lot of the infill developments are smaller condo buildings with pretty high price tags for the units... and any proposed or u/c larger projects in the downtown area are condo.

[maru2501]

aren't you a landlord?

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I'm glad the condo craze never came back. Let it remain so, I say...

Thoughts?

You haven't mentioned why you don't like condos.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by maru2501

aren't you a landlord?

Point?

[maru2501]

interest of full disclosure etc

kind of like a dairy farmer being happy ice cream is still popular

[skyscraperpage17]

IMO, The Great Recession sort of changed everything for the worse from a real estate perspective:

*More and more areas of the country are increasingly underserved by commercial establishments because retail and restaurant chains have gotten a lot more picky about where they open / operate their locations (unless your area's rapidly growing or extremely wealthy, forget about it). For example, there's an AJC about how parts of DeKalb County, GA (which is no slouch in terms of size / income) have been completely ravaged by retail closures over the past few months / years.

https://www.myajc.com/news/online-compet...ox-stores-dekalb/wgFAyDabaC1f5LAcuBAIjP/

*Many parts of the country are facing severe housing shortages because it has become next to impossible for first-time buyers to receive zero-down payment loans, and also because construction costs have reached astronomical levels. Yet again, the only areas that are seeing a decent supply of new housing are those that are rapidly growing and extremely wealthy.

In other areas, you have developers / investors just sitting on land while the cost of renting and purchasing existing homes are getting to the point that working class / middle class families may never be able to afford them. This is despite surging demand with the economy having slowly recovered and modest growth still ongoing in many of these areas.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4134999-housing-shortage-got-worse-2017

This is why you hear a lot of people claim that they're not actually seeing / feeling the economic recovery on main street, despite the numbers saying otherwise.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by isaidso

You haven't mentioned why you don't like condos.

I thought I did in my first post....

But at least in Chicago, apartments have allowed developers some flexibilities that don't exist with condos. More density, smaller units, far less parking, more bike parking, ground level retail, etc. There remains a perception here that a condo should come with a parking spot, plus condo owners seem averse to ground level retail, often creating dead streetscapes.

Many of our ugliest parking podia are due to condos.

Plus, renters are less likely to be NIMBYs than condo owners.

So for Chicago, I think the shrinking condo market has been a good thing.

But every city is different, please share your own situation.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I guess this is market specific.

In Chicago, condos are now a niche product for the wealthy. As far as residential is concerned, a vast majority of the new supply has been rental.

Also, for condos more parking is built whereas with rental he parking ratios are low, sometimes none, near transit.

More parking does usually get built with higher end product regardless of the ownership structure.

P.S. It's rentals vs condominiums. Apartments is commonly used in place of rentals but, it's not accurate.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

More parking does usually get built with higher end product regardless of the ownership structure.

No, at least here parking ratios are substantially lower even with luxury apartments.