I am currently reading the book $20 Per Gallon by Christopher Steiner. One of the chapters has to do with what will happen when gas reaches over $10 per gallon and beyond. But more than the price of gas, it has to do with the price of oil. Oil is so much a part of our lives from the cars we drive, the packaging our food comes in, the production of that food to the asphalt we drive on. With tensions rising in the Middle East with Iran and skyrocketing use of oil in other parts of the world, the price will only go up. When this happens, people who live in the "exurbs", the suburbs on the outer ring, will be looking to move back into the city. The whole lifestyle of driving everywhere for everything from school, groceries, church and the gym will be curbed by the rise of gas and oil. The cost of heating and cooling the scattered Mc Mansions will exceed what many can afford on their already stretched budgets. There will be an increased interest in moving to more densely populated areas. New York has been working hard at maintaining its dense population while places like Detroit lost its dense population to cheap land and cheap oil. The great hope for the incredible shrinking city will be increased cost of oil. In some countries, living in the city is a status symbol. In Metro Detroit, the status symbol is owning a large home with a yard and driving a fancy car or SUV. That American dream will shift and supporters of Detroit will rejoice. I think that Detroit will be one of the last cities to be redeveloped in the US because it is so car focused. It is hard to believe that there was once a spiderweb of light rail over the entire Metro area.
One of the unique and exciting things about Detroit though is that there is so much open space that new buildings can be built. In other large cities like Chicago and New York, so much space is already developed and people have to adjust to the buildings they live in or do a lot of remodeling to make the layouts make sense. In Detroit they will have the opportunity to build new, energy efficient housing and apartments.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Monday, January 2, 2012
Looking to make the leap from condo to home ownership.
My wife and I have rented a condo downtown for the past four years. We did not know how lucky we were to find a two-bedroom, 1.5-bath condo to rent for under $800 so close to downtown until now.
When you look around the Rochester city limits, you will see a variety of housing. On the number streets west of Walnut, you will find historic homes, newer large homes, some duplexes, low-income apartments and a fringe of 1950s starter homes. The southwest is a mix of small old homes and apartments. To the northwest there are a mix of arts and crafts, old and new, a 1950s starter home sub, senior living, apartments and some condos. To the northeast you have many condos, a 1950's starter home sub, large estate home subs and a pre-1950s sub. To the southeast is mostly industrial with a sprinkling of apartments and original farm houses.
We have been looking around at the cost of housing in Rochester and have been discouraged.
There is a widening gap between expensive and inexpensive housing. On the low end of property cost, you get very little. For under $800 a month, you can rent a small apartment or a flat if you are lucky enough to find one. Then it jumps up to $900 to over $1,000 for a house, condo or large apartment.
Same with housing. You can buy a small house at 1,000 square feet for under $100,000 if you are lucky to find one still on the market. Then prices jump up into the upper $100,000's to $300k to $500k and up. As a couple just starting out, who have decided they want to buy a house in Rochester, the options are limited. We really want to live downtown, but the housing there is not for young people.
With price tags of $200,000 to half a million, there is no way we are living close to Main Street. The next option is an outer ring of 1,000-square-foot starter homes. Maybe my generation is spoiled and wants to start out having more than our parents did. I just can't see buying a house with tiny closets and tiny bedrooms and starting a family there.
The next option for purchase is a condo. There are many apartment-style condos available at decent prices but the walls are thin and parking is like musical chairs. There are several high-end condos with a several hundred thousand dollar price tag that are way out of our range. We could afford that someday but by then, we will most likely want a larger house. It would be great to live there next to the Clinton River trail but at $200,000 a unit, we could get a nice ranch minus the two flights of stairs.
So why might we have to leave Rochester? Our rent is going up so we are looking around at several real estate websites like Hotpads and Zillow. It is easy to see why people leave downtowns for the suburbs: It's cheaper!
I imagine that is another reason people left Detroit. They left the large older homes for rows of newer houses and strip malls. We personally don't like the idea of living in an endless sea of identical homes and strip malls. We enjoy the character and walk-ability of Rochester.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good thing for a city to maintain its property values, but who will move into the big, old, expensive houses downtown in another generation? I have heard it said that Rochester is in danger of turning into an "old person's" town.
I'm not sure how they are going to entice younger people to move here when their only options are small older homes, large expensive homes, overpriced condos, less expensive condos that are really more like apartments or small apartments.
I am not suggesting that we demolish historic buildings to make way for inexpensive condos. The subdivisions are set in place and the only changes made there are when someone tears down a small home and puts up a mega-home. Perhaps we need to explore new housing concepts with the remaining land we have. Maybe the downtown can grow vertically but maintain its brick and mortar appearance. After Hurricane Katrina, a project was launched called Make It Right. Although we have not had a natural disaster in Rochester, the housing concept can certainly be used here. Building affordable, green, efficient housing is something that would attract people to the area, including us. While Rochester is a great mix of old and new, time does not have to stand still here.
Take a look at the attached maps. You can see that Rochester has an interesting border. The other maps show home pricing. There are certainly some extremes. As we are getting ready to make our next step from a condo to a house, the leap may be too large for us.
We enjoy the city life and want to be a part of the growth but maybe we'll just have to come back when we're all grown up!
When you look around the Rochester city limits, you will see a variety of housing. On the number streets west of Walnut, you will find historic homes, newer large homes, some duplexes, low-income apartments and a fringe of 1950s starter homes. The southwest is a mix of small old homes and apartments. To the northwest there are a mix of arts and crafts, old and new, a 1950s starter home sub, senior living, apartments and some condos. To the northeast you have many condos, a 1950's starter home sub, large estate home subs and a pre-1950s sub. To the southeast is mostly industrial with a sprinkling of apartments and original farm houses.
We have been looking around at the cost of housing in Rochester and have been discouraged.
There is a widening gap between expensive and inexpensive housing. On the low end of property cost, you get very little. For under $800 a month, you can rent a small apartment or a flat if you are lucky enough to find one. Then it jumps up to $900 to over $1,000 for a house, condo or large apartment.
Same with housing. You can buy a small house at 1,000 square feet for under $100,000 if you are lucky to find one still on the market. Then prices jump up into the upper $100,000's to $300k to $500k and up. As a couple just starting out, who have decided they want to buy a house in Rochester, the options are limited. We really want to live downtown, but the housing there is not for young people.
With price tags of $200,000 to half a million, there is no way we are living close to Main Street. The next option is an outer ring of 1,000-square-foot starter homes. Maybe my generation is spoiled and wants to start out having more than our parents did. I just can't see buying a house with tiny closets and tiny bedrooms and starting a family there.
The next option for purchase is a condo. There are many apartment-style condos available at decent prices but the walls are thin and parking is like musical chairs. There are several high-end condos with a several hundred thousand dollar price tag that are way out of our range. We could afford that someday but by then, we will most likely want a larger house. It would be great to live there next to the Clinton River trail but at $200,000 a unit, we could get a nice ranch minus the two flights of stairs.
So why might we have to leave Rochester? Our rent is going up so we are looking around at several real estate websites like Hotpads and Zillow. It is easy to see why people leave downtowns for the suburbs: It's cheaper!
I imagine that is another reason people left Detroit. They left the large older homes for rows of newer houses and strip malls. We personally don't like the idea of living in an endless sea of identical homes and strip malls. We enjoy the character and walk-ability of Rochester.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good thing for a city to maintain its property values, but who will move into the big, old, expensive houses downtown in another generation? I have heard it said that Rochester is in danger of turning into an "old person's" town.
I'm not sure how they are going to entice younger people to move here when their only options are small older homes, large expensive homes, overpriced condos, less expensive condos that are really more like apartments or small apartments.
I am not suggesting that we demolish historic buildings to make way for inexpensive condos. The subdivisions are set in place and the only changes made there are when someone tears down a small home and puts up a mega-home. Perhaps we need to explore new housing concepts with the remaining land we have. Maybe the downtown can grow vertically but maintain its brick and mortar appearance. After Hurricane Katrina, a project was launched called Make It Right. Although we have not had a natural disaster in Rochester, the housing concept can certainly be used here. Building affordable, green, efficient housing is something that would attract people to the area, including us. While Rochester is a great mix of old and new, time does not have to stand still here.
Take a look at the attached maps. You can see that Rochester has an interesting border. The other maps show home pricing. There are certainly some extremes. As we are getting ready to make our next step from a condo to a house, the leap may be too large for us.
We enjoy the city life and want to be a part of the growth but maybe we'll just have to come back when we're all grown up!
City Planning (Or Lack Thereof)
When is the last time you heard of a new city or town being planned and built in America? Imagine, a new gleaming city with well planned out housing, shopping, offices, parks, parking, transportation and infrastructure to fit the needs of the people in it. Hard to imagine right? Most new cites just kind of happen. They spring up from farm land around a new mall and between old brick and mortar downtowns, a collection of subdivisions and strip malls.
Here in Southeast Michigan, there are several old downtowns: Mt. Clemens, Utica, Rochester, Birmingham, Royal Oak, Ferndale, Clawson, Grosse Point and a few others. The rest of the "cities" were formed in the vast spaces in between creating an endless, faceless suburbia.This past fall a historic home on Rochester Road met its end to an onslaught of bulldozers to be turned into mixed residential, retail and restaurants. Do we really need another sprawling plaza with sidewalks that lead nowhere? Don't we already have enough empty store fronts? How does this fit into the overall big picture of Rochester Hills? This got me thinking about a subject I have always been passionate about: city planning. Most new subdivisions and strip malls seem like they are built to be their own private entity without thought of being part of a community. They have an entrance and exit onto a road and are required to build a sidewalk across the road front property. Often these sidewalks lead to nowhere and don't tie in with existing sidewalks or trails. Case in point, last summer a friend and I rode down the Clinton River trail from Rochester to Auburn Hills. On the way back we wanted to cross Adams and have lunch at the strip mall by Walmart. When the retail center was built across from the bike trail, there was no thought put into local bicycle or pedestrian traffic. There was no cross walk to be found. We had to navigate 10" high curbs and a grassy median to get across. Once across we couldn't find one bike rack anywhere! If you look at the attached photo, you will see there is a sidewalk across the front of that property that ends on the west side and doesn't tie into the community at all. Who is responsible for connecting the sidewalks: The Friends of the Clinton River Trail, the developer, the tax payers of Rochester Hills?
If you visit this area, you will also notice the many empty store fronts that have never been occupied. This ghost box (empty big box stores) problem is all over and yet more retail space keeps going up. Drive up and down Rochester Road and you will see empty store fronts from Hamlin to Avon. For an extreme example, go see the Bloomfield Park development on Telegraph that was never finished. Aren't we saturated enough already? I understand that it is the contractor's job to build new buildings but at what cost? How do these developments tie into the community? The more chain stores they build, the more we look like Main Street USA, indistinguishable from any other strip in America. Rochester and Rochester Hills boasts beautiful scenery, three rivers, miles of bicycle trails, two colleges, a historic downtown, diverse housing options and a variety of manufacturing business. How can we tie these all together to prevent us from looking like just another strip mall commuter suburb? Can we pass laws that require cities and developers to work together to create more walkable, linked in communities?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)