Our Motto: “You have to hack your
way through a lot of lunchmeat in this world."
Quote of the Month: “The hysterical visual violence of
most metropolitan centers and deadly anemia of their surrounding
suburban sprawl don’t seem to be understood for what they are, namely,
outpourings of deranged human energies.” -- Leon Krier
Note to Readers: We have to
rebuild the e-mail list from top to bottom because so many addresses
on our old list are way out of date. If you get this issue, please
do two things. 1.) send us an e-mail confirming that you want to
continue getting it, and 2.) forward this issue of Civitas to your
friends and neighbors.
Advertisement
The
Atlantic Monthly Press Invites
You
to Celebrate the Publication of
The
Long Emergency
by James Howard Kunstler
Saratoga
Arts Center
(Broadway and Spring Street)
Wednesday
May 11
6:00 P.M.
Building Boom Veers Into Bubble-Land
—
and Other Raindrops on the Parade —
by Jim Kunstler
What started out as a bold renaissance
of rebuilding downtown Saratoga Springs is now lurching into a bloated
juggernaut of over-building that will most likely end in tears for
the developers and the people who lend them money.
Don't get us wrong. We have supported most of the downtown redevelopment
of the past five years. We think it's great that more people live
in the heart of town. The new buildings on Broadway have greatly
improved the city's Main Street. Many holes and wounds in the city's
fabric have been repaired and healed.
But there are many more proposed projects
coming through the approval pipeline, and the situation presents
ominous problems. One is the timing. Another is the increment or
scale of development. A third is how these things might relate to
the kind of economy we are heading into.
First, timing. If approved, these large, new projects will be completed
in the midst of the greatest real estate crash that the nation has
ever seen. The supernaturally low mortgage rates and low lending
standards of today are unlikely to continue. Rather, stupendous
debt levels will lead to higher interest rates and an orgy of default
on existing mortgages - meaning a lot of property is going to come
on the market and be sold at distress valuations. This does not
bode well for a large number of new condominiums selling for $300
per square foot.
Second, increment and scale. A project
like the Schuyler condos, proposed for the site of the Hi-Roc bowling
alley block, should not be built all at once as a single megastructure,
both for reasons of urban design and economics. The drawings submitted
show an ungainly hulk lacking in artistry. Building all 139 condos
at once virtually as a single united structure will multiply the
risk of financial failure. Civitas boldly predicts that this project,
as now planned, will end in bankruptcy (as Prestwick Chase on Denton
Road has). We urge the developers to adopt the strategy of building
this thing in much smaller incremental stages.
The same holds for the condo venture
associated with the proposed new Hampton Inn hotel at Lake Avenue
an Henry Street, the Lexington Club project at Marion Avenue (89
condos), Stewarts' mixed-use project on Excelsior Avenue, and the
large building proposed by Bonacio Construction over the Woodlawn
Avenue parking lots behind Broadway. All of these sites are currently
underutilized and even ugly, and would benefit from redevelopment.
But if done all at once, they will converge into a perfect storm
of real estate investment catastrophe.
Many of these condo projects have office space associated with them.
This brings up problem number three: we are entering a period of
economic contraction in which business and jobs will be shrinking,
not growing. We think this contraction will be associated with the
global oil supply crisis that is now underway and will continue
as far into the future as anyone can see.
The over-building of new hotel rooms
raises similar questions. Steeply increasing gas prices imply trouble
for tourism based on easy motoring. Large chains such as Marriot
are looking for places to park their cash. If their hotels fail,
they can always write off the loss on their corporate taxes. Meanwhile,
existing hotels will suffer and some of them may go out of business,
too.
Saratoga Springs has been the healthiest city in the Capital District,
but it's not immune to the ills of the national economy, which is
headed for deep trouble after years of reckless credit creation,
asset hyper-inflation, and a construction industry on steroids.
The Saratoga building boom has mutated into a classic business mania.
Many of the supposed customers for these new condos will not be
able to sell their homes into a deflating market, or will not realize
the kinds of capital gains they counted on, and the market for luxury
condos will quickly wither.
The planning board has no authority
to rule or even advise on a project's financial viability. Projects
will get approved if they meet zoning and design criteria. Whether
they are economically sound investments is completely up to the
developers. We see carnage on the horizon. If these projects all
get built, they will give new meaning to the phrase affordable housing.
Speaking of Which. . .
We consider the proposal for the
37-unit "affordable housing" megastructure proposed for
West Circular to be badly misconceived. The rule first established
by Joseph Riley, the mayor of Charleston, SC, has proven to be very
wise: build no more than eight units of subsidized housing in any
particular part of town. It should be distributed around the city.
Otherwise it tends to concentrate and amplify social problems.
The ambiguous "green space"
(it's not a public park) behind the Stonequist apartment tower should
be allowed to develop - especially the West Circular Street frontage
- but the current proposal will just ghettoize that block. Ideally,
the frontage ought to be subdivided into normal urban building lots,
coded for row-housing, and sold off one lot at a time, with select
lots reserved for eight or fewer subsidized apartments. This would
also allow for the eventual redevelopment of the block at an increment
and scale that the housing market could absorb: one building lot
at a time, with the financial risk distributed and reduced to smaller
individual investments.
While the intention of the Housing
Authority is good, there is no reason to believe that the outcome
of this proposal will really be any different from the notorious
housing projects of the late 20th century. They, too, got underway
with the wish to provide housing for working people, and eventually
standards had to be lowered to accommodate the non-working poor
on public assistance.
Finally, the drawings we saw of the
proposed building showed an awkward, ugly behemoth that would stigmatize
its residents and be a long-term eyesore in a part of town that
is still struggling against the urban renewal fiascos of past decades
- among which we count the Stonequist tower.
The city council could still improve the affordable housing situation
with a legislative act permitting accessory apartments in neighborhoods
where they are currently outlawed. This wouldn't require any public
outlay, either.
The New YMCA
It's bad enough that the new YMCA is designed
to be a suburban pod surrounded by parking lagoons. But the board
has selected a building site at the extreme southwest edge of town
which won't be convenient to people who don't drive, kids in particular.
The oversupply of free parking will occupy space originally planned
for playing fields. The decision to build a suburban-type facility
just as the nation enters a permanent oil crisis
is especially short-sighted, even just plain stupid.
YMCA board member Michael Toohey, a lawyer
specializing in real estate approvals, volunteered to draw up a
"planned unit development" bylaw that would allow the
Y to evade local zoning, and therefore put up a one-story building
in the middle of a parking lot. The project is so completely "wired"
that there is no hope of altering it at this point.
Just Wondering. . .
. . . why the environmental organization Saratoga Plan (formerly
the Open Space Project) has not taken a public position on the water
issue (county versus city plan). Who did they cut a deal with?
Back to Home (Kunstler.com)