May 14, 2008
Dude, Where's my Housing Market?
Your article echoes the many objections that have been voiced, but without thinking about the real opportunity the changes give us. Consider the following:
1. Increasing land prices (including market forces, impact fees and common requirements) generally cause developers to build denser housing. This could significantly revitalize our central city AND improve the economics for transit (and biking and walking). As it was, the City has been subsidizing developers to build further out...where we have to build new schools, roads, and services. It's double jeopardy for the new homeowner who in the name of "affordability" gets to drive long distances and pay high taxes.
2. Building affordable housing 10-20-30 miles from work actually decreases the affordability of housing substantially. It's equal to $30 to 50,000 of home price (or mortgage).
3. Parks and common open space, neighborhood services, etc. all contribute to neighbors getting to know each other. This is the single most significant indicator for a low crime rate (at any price level).
4. Connectivity (aka the ability to walk places) could significantly improve our general health. One subdivision approved this past year had a school adjacent to it, but it required almost 2 miles of roadway to get to it from the adjacent lots.
You are generally an insightful reporter. There have been many unintended consequences from the existing city and county regulations. Let's encourage smarter and more sustainable growth. It will be more affordable and our taxes won't be subsidizing sprawl and auto dependent growth. I also know that our development community is smart and sharp enough to figure out how to make the new regs work. They just want to know the rules...and have an even playing field with the competition. They will make it work...and maybe improve upon it.
-- katie
------
Low income El Pasoans will not enjoy the benefit of the overpriced homes here in our city, the Builders make sure of that. Every time a house is built the builder will persure the city apraiser to increase the price of the new house therefor creating consequences not just for the everage buyer but the homeowner that happens for live nearby in an existing nieghborhood. The square footage on the new home compared to the nearby resident wil increase the Tax rate fort them and we all know were that leads to. I have seen the way new homes are built nowadays and they would not withstand a minor tremor.The exorbitant prices which are made a priority by the builders only lends to the imperative and immediate change needed to combat the outrages tax rates imposed on us.The builders claim that the materials have gone up in price, granted but
build them right the first time and you'll avoid all those law suits which of course lends you suseptible to convey your costs to the
entire community. If only the Central Apraisal would resist the absurd requests from the builders and consider the credibility of the source our taxes would maybe decline to the point where maybe more low income families would be able to afford this outrages prices. -- joe
------
"We've been able to have a high home ownership percentage because our previous ordinance allowed for developers and builders to produce lots of affordable houses. I think homeownership is a good thing even if your subdivision lacks 'connectivity.'"
Our previous mode of development also shortchanged the city on parks, libraries, open space and other amenities that make for a pleasant living environment, e.g., arroyos. At some point, policy makers have to ask themselves, "What kind of city to we want to leave for our kids and grandkids? What kind of people do we want to attract and retain here - low income or upwardly mobile?"
The developer/builder answer to that question is a city that is profitable for them or has been, as they can't go on forever laying out grids to the horizon. It is the role of elected officials to lead and also to take the concensus of the people. I think this is a good step in the right direction for El Paso.
Just take the Southwest flight from San Diego back to El Paso on a Monday morning. You'll see where the developers actually prefer to live (e.g., La Jolla) because the plane is full of them. They're not trekking to work from Lee Trevino and, if they vote with their money, they prefer to live in places that place a high value on "connectivity."
-- Jerry Kurtyka
------
Some people in this city seem to be under the delusion that every human being is by natural right entitled to home ownership. A lot of economic research has questioned the cost/benefit of owning vs. renting, especially in recent years.
I think El Paso has been on a several-year long sprawl to the East, which has resulted in miles and miles of future ghettos, especially in the Joe Battle area. Those houses are only a few years old and they are already taking on the familiar symptoms, including undeveloped landscaping and cars parked in yards. Home ownership is not a NECESSITY, and hopefully these stricter building codes will result in aesthetically pleasing neighborhoods, better infrastructure, and a refocus on infill development in the existing neighborhoods of the city.
Affordable housing is a good thing, and an economic attractor, but it shouldn't come at the expense of adequate streets and poorly planned developments. -- Will
******