Comments on: The Economics of Redevelopment http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249 Rob Goodspeed's blog Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:37:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Dave http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249/comment-page-1#comment-523983 Dave Fri, 14 Aug 2009 13:15:31 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249#comment-523983 Just letting you know that the condo at 1516 10th is actually 487 sq ft, the excess is made up of it's back patio. Just letting you know that the condo at 1516 10th is actually 487 sq ft, the excess is made up of it’s back patio.

]]> By: Richard Layman http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249/comment-page-1#comment-274048 Richard Layman Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:47:17 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249#comment-274048 Another thing you might have missed about the way these projects are being done. They are being built to maximum FAR and usually end up being four stories, although the basement floor doesn't count towards FAR, and are divided into 2 2 floor condos, speaking of maximizing sales value. Another thing you might have missed about the way these projects are being done. They are being built to maximum FAR and usually end up being four stories, although the basement floor doesn’t count towards FAR, and are divided into 2 2 floor condos, speaking of maximizing sales value.

]]> By: Richard Layman http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249/comment-page-1#comment-274047 Richard Layman Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:45:13 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249#comment-274047 When I first became involved in local land use issues, back when neighborhoods like H Street were disinvested, I used to think this was a beautiful sight too, a sign of improvement. Until the building started getting erected, and the design was more than likely to be butt ugly. Most of the micro developers involved in this kind of activity are bottom feeders, completely driven by value engineering, with little concern about design quality, and tending towards very suburban "modern" design sense. But I agree with the general sense of your point. When I first became involved in local land use issues, back when neighborhoods like H Street were disinvested, I used to think this was a beautiful sight too, a sign of improvement.

Until the building started getting erected, and the design was more than likely to be butt ugly.

Most of the micro developers involved in this kind of activity are bottom feeders, completely driven by value engineering, with little concern about design quality, and tending towards very suburban “modern” design sense.

But I agree with the general sense of your point.

]]> By: Brendan http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249/comment-page-1#comment-267504 Brendan Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:33:43 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249#comment-267504 It's very hard to build DC housing with today's zoning on historic size lots. Because of minimum standards for size of lot, width of house, etc., many historic lots are too small. It doesn't mean it's impossible, it means the applicant needs to get a zoning appeal approved by BZA. That takes 6 months minimum. It's also why the city's Planning Office is currently rewriting the zoning regs. The first update to zoning since the 1950s. Bottom line, building something profitable on an undersized urban lot that also must meet modern building, zoning and historic codes is difficult, but not impossible. A small time, flip-this-house type speculator will be in over their head. Post script, this lot only has a permit for a foundation. As you can see from the HPRB staff report, the February approval was not final, but rather requires the applicant to revise the design and come back for final approval. The fact they have a permit for a foundation only, but haven't gone back to HPRB is kind of screwy and a good clue that the developer attempting this project is a first-timer. It’s very hard to build DC housing with today’s zoning on historic size lots. Because of minimum standards for size of lot, width of house, etc., many historic lots are too small. It doesn’t mean it’s impossible, it means the applicant needs to get a zoning appeal approved by BZA. That takes 6 months minimum. It’s also why the city’s Planning Office is currently rewriting the zoning regs. The first update to zoning since the 1950s.

Bottom line, building something profitable on an undersized urban lot that also must meet modern building, zoning and historic codes is difficult, but not impossible. A small time, flip-this-house type speculator will be in over their head.

Post script, this lot only has a permit for a foundation. As you can see from the HPRB staff report, the February approval was not final, but rather requires the applicant to revise the design and come back for final approval. The fact they have a permit for a foundation only, but haven’t gone back to HPRB is kind of screwy and a good clue that the developer attempting this project is a first-timer.

]]> By: The Bellows » What’s It Cost? http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249/comment-page-1#comment-267369 The Bellows » What’s It Cost? Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:09:38 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2249#comment-267369 [...] Goodspeed has a post up on the economics of the decision to build on vacant land in the District. I’m into it and [...] [...] Goodspeed has a post up on the economics of the decision to build on vacant land in the District. I’m into it and [...]

]]>