What's Most Important In A Condo?

[jm1fd]

Owning is always better than renting.

[Parrothead]

I have to disagree. While there are extenuating circumstances, the main group of people that lost out in the 80's in Houston were those that were foreclosed upon. The market was horrible, yes, but only in comparison to what it was during the oil boom a few years prior. People still made money, there was still appreciation from the date of purchase (though not as much as they wanted obviously, or what they could have gotten a few years before), when they could sell--but that was the problem, most of Houston could not sell. However, only a small percentage of owners took a loss when at the closing table (not including commercial or builders/developers). You can see stats at TAMU's real estate website. It's very interesting.

A perfect example of this is my parents. They bought their house in Kingwood in 1977. Ten years later, when my dad died, my mom sold the house. The real estate market was still very slow--1987 was no boom year by any stretch--the average time for a house on the market was 9 months (compared to 30-60 days right now). It took us a year and a half to sell that darned house, but we did, and Mom made a profit of almost $30K--even then. What makes me cringe is that same house sold in 1995 to a dentist for almost $48K more than what my mom got. Ah, well, it's all timing, isn't it? Can you imagine if you purchased a home in Briargrove or Tanglewood in 1970 and you currently owned it? It's still hard to find an investment out there better than real estate.

You will always be (with conditions of foreclosure excluded) in a better position financially if you are an owner of a property rather than a renter. There's not much anyone can say to change my mind on that. It's common sense to know that if you borrow a bike from someone it's not yours to keep, no matter how long you ride it. Eventually you have to give it back. As for appreciation and depreciation--what goes up must come down, and what goes down eventually comes back up. You say not to bring that up, as if it holds no validity, but how can you not? It's an investment, and like any other investment, it has its ups and downs. The best thing about it is its long-term appreciation.

An interesting tidbit: More people in Texas were foreclosed upon last year than in 1982. (courtesy of TAMU Real Estate Center) That's thanks to creative financing that companies offer now, knowing full well the mortgagors cannot afford to take on such financing. They sure make it sound good, though, don't they?

If you want to rent, rent. That's fine--I'm certainly not opposed to it. Per month, I'm sure it's cheaper, especially if you're inside the loop. But you can't say that renting an apartment long-term is financially better than owning. It simply isn't. Cheaper, maybe. Wiser? Doubtful.

[LTAWACS]

Proximity to light rail is a good one.

Balcony and a View are the biggest ones.

Perhaps the lazy developers out there will get off their haunches and bring us some real choices.

[uncertaintraveler]

If your mom's electric bill is $45 and she lives in a house, well I'd like to know where she lives. That's truly astounding. Is she in a retirement/senior living patio home area where lawn maintenance is included? If so she has it pretty good if she's paying $160 at the minimum. My guess would have been closer to $250 with everything she would need to live in a decent subdivision.

My mom just moved to a new house in Atlanta. Yes, I know Atlanta isn't even close to Houston, but she moved from one house in Atlanta (that had an electric bill of around $150 a month) to a new house a county away (that now has the aforementioned $45 a month bill). She was shocked at how low the bill was...the electric rate is the same, so the cost difference has to be attributable to more efficient appliances and better insulation.

Your mother may go along just fine at $160 a month, but what happens when her roof needs replacing or her siding is falling off? What happens when her pipes bust in her house or her driveway needs replacing or repairing? How about painting, cleaning gutters, pest control, foundation issues? They add up over the years.

Its a brand new house, and aside from pest control and gutter cleaning, I don't think any of these issues will arise before she sells the place.

However, what is striking to me is you make it sound as if condos don't have any of these issues. Condos aren't immune from the ravages of age either....and trust me, you'll have to ante up to pay the tab just like a single family home-owner would.

[jm1fd]

Extenuating circumstances? Wha? What happened to "Owning is always better than renting. Always, always, always."?

I have to disagree.  While there are extenuating circumstances, the main group of people that lost out in the 80's in Houston were those that were foreclosed upon.  The market was horrible, yes, but only in comparison to what it was during the oil boom a few years prior. People still made money, there was still appreciation from the date of purchase (though not as much as they wanted obviously, or what they could have gotten a few years before), when they could sell--but that was the problem, most of Houston could not sell.  However, only a small percentage of owners took a loss when at the closing table (not including commercial or builders/developers).  You can see stats at TAMU's real estate website.  It's very interesting.

A perfect example of this is my parents.  They bought their house in Kingwood in 1977.  Ten years later, when my dad died, my mom sold the house.  The real estate market was still very slow--1987 was no boom year by any stretch--the average time for a house on the market was 9 months (compared to 30-60 days right now).  It took us a year and a half to sell that darned house, but we did, and Mom made a profit of almost $30K--even then.  What makes me cringe is that same house sold in 1995 to a dentist for almost $48K more than what my mom got.  Ah, well, it's all timing, isn't it?  Can you imagine if you purchased a home in Briargrove or Tanglewood in 1970 and you currently owned it?  It's still hard to find an investment out there better than real estate.

You will always be (with conditions of foreclosure excluded) in a better position financially if you are an owner of a property rather than a renter.  There's not much anyone can say to change my mind on that.  It's common sense to know that if you borrow a bike from someone it's not yours to keep, no matter how long you ride it.  Eventually you have to give it back.  As for appreciation and depreciation--what goes up must come down, and what goes down eventually comes back up.  You say not to bring that up, as if it holds no validity, but how can you not?  It's an investment, and like any other investment, it has its ups and downs.  The best thing about it is its long-term appreciation. 

An interesting tidbit:  More people in Texas were foreclosed upon last year than in 1982.  (courtesy of TAMU Real Estate Center)  That's thanks to creative financing that companies offer now, knowing full well the mortgagors cannot afford to take on such financing.  They sure make it sound good, though, don't they?

If you want to rent, rent.  That's fine--I'm certainly not opposed to it.  Per month, I'm sure it's cheaper, especially if you're inside the loop.  But you can't say that renting an apartment long-term is financially better than owning.  It simply isn't.  Cheaper, maybe.  Wiser?  Doubtful.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[uncertaintraveler]

You will always be (with conditions of foreclosure excluded) in a better position financially if you are an owner of a property rather than a renter.  There's not much anyone can say to change my mind on that.  It's common sense to know that if you borrow a bike from someone it's not yours to keep, no matter how long you ride it.  Eventually you have to give it back.  As for appreciation and depreciation--what goes up must come down, and what goes down eventually comes back up.  You say not to bring that up, as if it holds no validity, but how can you not?  It's an investment, and like any other investment, it has its ups and downs.  The best thing about it is its long-term appreciation. 

An interesting tidbit:  More people in Texas were foreclosed upon last year than in 1982.  (courtesy of TAMU Real Estate Center)  That's thanks to creative financing that companies offer now, knowing full well the mortgagors cannot afford to take on such financing.  They sure make it sound good, though, don't they?

If you want to rent, rent.  That's fine--I'm certainly not opposed to it.  Per month, I'm sure it's cheaper, especially if you're inside the loop.  But you can't say that renting an apartment long-term is financially better than owning.  It simply isn't.  Cheaper, maybe.  Wiser?  Doubtful.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Also...I find it interesting that in your analogy about borrowing a bike, you leave out some of the more important issues.

For example, with renting, you have no responsibility for upkeep and maintainance--if something breaks, you aren't out anything to have it fixed, and if the property or location goes downhill, you can move without taking any financial hit or loss that you might otherwise would if you owned.

Additionally, as you mention, although what goes up will probably go down at some point and what goes down will go up too, it is all about timing. Hypothetically, let's say you buy a place today, only to find out in a month or two that you just bought at the height of the housing bubble. In two or three years time, when you need to move to a bigger place (or to a different town), if the market hasn't recovered, you'll have to sell at a loss. Maybe the housing boom will continue, or maybe it won't. But there are too many variables for anyone to say that anything is a sure thing, especially when some of the defining issues (i.e., the state of the economy in two, five, or ten years time) are totally out of one's control. My point is that there is no way anyone can definitively say that buying is always better than renting...just as no one can never say "never," no one can always say "always."

Lastly, I do believe that for some people, renting is financially better than owning, even over the mid to long term. While everyone's numbers are different, using my personal numbers (decent salary, little debt, but having expensive tastes when it comes to housing), I have calculated that, at the moment, the cost to buy a place would cost me anywhere from $500 to $750 more each month than it does to rent an equivalent place. Now, if you took the $500 a month and invested it, and you earn an average of 7% a year, I am reasonably confident that you come out ahead than if you had sunk that money into a house.

Plus, although you say that the best thing about owning is long-term appreciation, how many people really stay in a house long enough to really capture such appreciation? Doesn't the average person just stay in the same house for about ten years? I would wager that except for a select few (say, those in the middle 30's to early 50's), in select neighborhoods (say, the $300K to $500K "established" places), and in select economic cycles (say, like the one we are having now), can one really expect to gain much long-term appreciation during their tenure as a homeowner. Especially, given the way people have mortgaged their homes to the hilt, since prices are going to have to rise substantially for someone to walk away with any profit after paying off all the banks they are indebted to.

Ultimately, I think you would agree with me that it is all a gamble. Some people who buy a house will come out with great profits, some may very well lose tens of thousands of dollars. But to say that people will "always" come out ahead is, at best, naive, and at worst, outright dishonest.

[Parrothead]

Look, I am really not going to argue this. Sorry. As for extenuating circumstances, I ONLY mean idiots who get themselves in a foreclosure situation. If you're smart, that won't happen to you in this market.

Owning is better than renting. Period, end of story. If you disagree, fine. It's your bank account!

[jm1fd]

Look, I am really not going to argue this.  Sorry.  As for extenuating circumstances, I ONLY mean idiots who get themselves in a foreclosure situation.  If you're smart, that won't happen to you in this market. 

Owning is better than renting.  Period, end of story.  If you disagree, fine.  It's your bank account! 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I suspected you were a loudmouthed moron....this confirms it.

[dbigtex56]

So owning is "always, always, always" better?

As an owner, I would expect no more -or less - than I already have. I'd require a desirable, safe, close-in location (preferably in an historic neighborhood). Stores, entertainment, professional services and public transportation must be within easy walking distance, so that owning a car is an option, not a necessity. If I do choose to get a car, covered parking will be provided.

I also demand a swimming pool, landscaping, and kitchen appliances, all of which will be maintained free of charge. I do not want to pay for insurance, nor property taxes. I'll pay for electricity, but not for heat, water or water heating. Structural problems with the roof, the plumbing, the air conditioning (and anything else that can go wrong) is strictly someone else's responsibility. Oh, and I do not have money for a down payment, and my monthly note cannot exceed $500.

I also want the option of getting out of this home with one month's notice, with no worries about finding a buyer or paying penalties.

If you know of a property which matches this description, please PM me immediately. After all, an agent is "always, always, always" eager to earn a commission.

[rps324]

Our office just took a bunch of listings on condos at Commerce Towers. I have to admit I wasn't that familiar with the project before. With all the talk about the Shamrock and other places, it seems like this building hasn't been discussed on here before, (or maybe I missed it).

I was curious what people preferred in the way of loft look vs. finished out. These do not have the open trusses, etc of the more rustic loft set up. It is in a historic building though. It is on the rail line, and the tunnel. I was just wondering if the lack of the exposed brick wall, high ceiling, open trusses, loft set up in favor of a more finished look would be a benefit or a hinderance with condo buyers.

Any thoughts?

[Guest danax]

Our office just took a bunch of listings on condos at Commerce Towers.  I have to admit I wasn't that familiar with the project before.  With all the talk about the Shamrock and other places, it seems like this building hasn't been discussed on here before, (or maybe I missed it). 

I was curious what people preferred in the way of loft look vs. finished out.  These do not have the open trusses, etc of the more rustic loft set up.  It is in a historic building though.  It is on the rail line, and the tunnel.  I was just wondering if the  lack of the exposed brick wall, high ceiling, open trusses, loft set up in favor of a more finished look would be a benefit or a hinderance with condo buyers.

Any thoughts?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I personally like the industrial touches it's just a question of how much. I wouldn't want to live in a raw warehouse-like setting nor would I want a white-walled suburban style box. I like high ceilings, even if bills are higher, and if it's in a historic building hopefully they have left some reminders of the original in each unit, even if it's just the windows.

[jm1fd]

Our office just took a bunch of listings on condos at Commerce Towers.  I have to admit I wasn't that familiar with the project before.  With all the talk about the Shamrock and other places, it seems like this building hasn't been discussed on here before, (or maybe I missed it). 

I was curious what people preferred in the way of loft look vs. finished out.  These do not have the open trusses, etc of the more rustic loft set up.  It is in a historic building though.  It is on the rail line, and the tunnel.  I was just wondering if the  lack of the exposed brick wall, high ceiling, open trusses, loft set up in favor of a more finished look would be a benefit or a hinderance with condo buyers.

Any thoughts?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I like the more industrial look, and if it was in that type of old warehouse building, I would expect that....but I suspect most of the population will be looking for plain 'ol white.

[AAA]

Our office just took a bunch of listings on condos at Commerce Towers.  I have to admit I wasn't that familiar with the project before.  With all the talk about the Shamrock and other places, it seems like this building hasn't been discussed on here before, (or maybe I missed it). 

I was curious what people preferred in the way of loft look vs. finished out.  These do not have the open trusses, etc of the more rustic loft set up.  It is in a historic building though.  It is on the rail line, and the tunnel.  I was just wondering if the  lack of the exposed brick wall, high ceiling, open trusses, loft set up in favor of a more finished look would be a benefit or a hinderance with condo buyers.

Any thoughts?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I like both styles as long as they are done well. The big issues for me are association fees and valet parking. I want as low as possible association/maintenance fees. One of the Condos in Houston (maybe the Beaconsfield?) has maintenance fees that are significantly higher than an 80% mortgage! My other issue is forced valet parking. I want my own assigned parking spot, I dont want to wait on a valet everytime I want to get something out of my car. I simply wont buy a unit at a building that has mandatory valet parking.

[Trophy Property]

So owning is "always, always, always" better?

As an owner, I would expect no more -or less - than I already have. I'd require a desirable, safe, close-in location (preferably in an historic neighborhood).  Stores, entertainment, professional services and public transportation must be within easy walking distance, so that owning a car is an option, not a necessity. If I do choose to get a car, covered parking will be provided.

I also demand a swimming pool, landscaping, and kitchen appliances, all of which will be maintained free of charge. I do not want to pay for insurance, nor property taxes. I'll pay for electricity, but not for heat, water or water heating. Structural problems with the roof, the plumbing, the air conditioning (and anything else that can go wrong) is strictly someone else's responsibility. Oh, and I do not have money for a down payment, and my monthly note cannot exceed $500.

I also want the option of getting out of this home with one month's notice, with no worries about finding a buyer or paying penalties.

If you know of a property which matches this description, please PM me immediately. After all, an agent is "always, always, always" eager to earn a commission.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You make a great point. I prefer to own, but I understand it is not for everyone. I personally love the tax right off I get for all the taxes and interest, but I when I was single and making less money, apartment living was the bomb. I also loved having everything taken care of. I especially loved having a person collect all my packages and not having UPS leave them on my porch to get rained on.

[Parrothead]

I'm talking about what's better for your financial portfolio, folks. Not your personal preferences. Come on--please read my posts thoroughly.

And currently, I am not working, but when I am, dbigwhatever-your-name-is, I am not all about the commission, I am all about making my clients happy. I'm not here to sell you or anyone else anything, I'm just giving an informed opinion. Please don't make ignorant assumptions based on a stereotype of what you think you know. I am a professional and pride myself on that.

Please, by all means, throw your money away. It's yours to do so, and if it makes you happy, that's really all that matters.

[jscarbor]

I'm currently in the process of kicking around the idea of building small condo project, maybe 10-20 units. I am really interested in offering a product, small 700 sq ft for around $120K up to 1400 sq ft for say $200K depending on location, with very nice finishes. Parking would be some covered some outside and you would have them assigned based on how big your place is. Instead of balconies I was thinking nice rooftop terrace. I got off the balcony because they are fairly expensive to include and because of that you usually can't do anything very significant. I was really thinking of focusing on the terrace because of that. My goal is to have fairly low maint fees that would include up keep for terrace, ac/elect for common areas, elevator maint, required ins. After that I don't see much of a reason to include cable (except to keep sattelite dishes off property) when some people might want other options or nothing at all. When you get into many more amenities you obviously have to think about the $.

My main goals are to provide an interesting, good looking, well built product for an active inner loop person at very affordable prices while still being able to make good money. Typically the buyer would be a 25-35 year old well educated single person with a good job.

Id be very interested to hear from others to see if this is something they would want in a condo.

[uncertaintraveler]

Maybe this will bring life to an old thread, but I wish Houston had something like this:

http://www.metropolisatlanta.com/outside_frame.asp

It is more than the 10-20 units you are considering building, but I think this place has everything I would want in a condo.

Also...a roof-top terrace is nice, but the allure of a balcony is that it is your own private "outdoor" space. The balcony doesn't have to huge---just big enough for a few chairs and a table....all that matters is that it is there. When you are in a mid- or high-rise condo, the balcony _is_ your backyard....

Also...I would like it if developers would allow you to buy the shell and finish out the condo on your own. That way, someone could buy into the building, but put up their own walls and create their own floorplan.

[pwright1]

Are property taxes high in Houston? Someone told me they are extremely high. What's the truth?

[jscarbor]

Maybe this will bring life to an old thread, but I wish Houston had something like this:

http://www.metropolisatlanta.com/outside_frame.asp

It is more than the 10-20 units you are considering building, but I think this place has everything I would want in a condo.

Also...a roof-top terrace is nice, but the allure of a balcony is that it is your own private "outdoor" space. The balcony doesn't have to huge---just big enough for a few chairs and a table....all that matters is that it is there. When you are in a mid- or high-rise condo, the balcony _is_ your backyard....

Also...I would like it if developers would allow you to buy the shell and finish out the condo on your own.  That way, someone could buy into the building, but put up their own walls and create their own floorplan.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It would be tough to do both balconies and a roof top terrace. you see balconies are relatively expensive to build, they cost money to build and don't compute into sq footage. Still, it seems it is what people want. Maybe I'll just do that. I really thought the roof top would be better because it is a larger gathering place.

My prelim numbers are making it look hard to do this deal. I'm thinking to be profitable I would need to sell say a 700 foot condo for around $120K a 900 footer for $150's and a 1100 footer for say $190K. All these are min prices, it would be extremely tight.

Its hard for developers to let you buy the shell and finish out yourself. You have releases from the bank, bank draws, it really seems to be more of a hassle than what it is worth to the developer. Also, What if someone goes in and doesn't finish, or messes something up and it causes problems in other units?

[jm1fd]

Are property taxes high in Houston?

[pwright1]

Wow that seems awefully high. ^^ Here in Seattle it's 1.5 percent I think.

[hydepark]

HOA fees are a huge turnoff for me. Most of the "apartment style" or highrise condos have exorbitant fees that really take away the own vs. rent advantage that exists in the market right now.

Have the roof inspected that is the most important thing 76% of leaks are caused by the roofing problems.

Get an inspector to go over it completely, know him well.

Read your arbitration clause and get a lawyer to explain it. You are giving up your seventh amendment rights. If you find defects, or if there is something out of order run!

[TheNiche]

Thanks to everyone for the input.

Ahh, thanks Midtown Coog. I forgot Balcony. Please allow that to be a write in category.

TNJ

Adequate parking is something you're just going to have to include, whether people want it or not. City ordinance requires one space per bedroom, so unless you're planning on going wild with sunrooms and studies, parking is the most stringent and limiting factor by default.

[dbigtex56]

Another desirable amenity would be the use of sound-resistant materials. Hearing ones neighbors is a definate disadvantage of many muli-unit structures.

In some, the walls are so thin that normal conversation, flushing toilets and other daily activities (use your imagination) can be overheard.

[MidtownCoog]

In some, the walls are so thin that normal conversation,

Considering party walls are required between units, you really only see this in old dumps.

New contruction party walls work very well to keep sound out.

[dbigtex56]

Considering party walls are required between units, you really only see this in old dumps.

New contruction party walls work very well to keep sound out.

Ah! As a resident of an old dump, I did not know that.

Thanks for the info.

[goodfella]

For party, or demising walls, you really should be looking for double drywall layers with significant sound insulation between them. Anything less is cheap or apartment grade.

If the building is a mid- or hi-rise and is constructed out of steel and concrete, with post-tension slabs, you should end up with between 8" or 9" of concrete between floors. That is pretty significant sound barrier, especially if they are floating drywall ceilings and not doing exposed concrete.