Or, as they say (today) at The Automatic Earth, “sold to greater fools”: [link].

This downtown development scenario has much in common with the shale gas/oil boom (and coming bust) described in that article.

The three priority areas (height/bulk, premiums, D1/D2 boundaries) are all essentially moot as of now. (Thanks, Sabra, for advocating for addressing lot combinations, which are probably the real source of what are now seen as problematic buildings, though it’s probably too late for that as well.) The current construction is the ‘overthrow’ at the top – the last spurt of growth that began a little over a hundred years ago with the discovery of oil.

The next trend will definitely not be offices, and probably not even (new) 1-2 bedroom apartments. The primary trend will be the refilling of empty nests. The planning commission could get out ahead of things by revisiting the granny flat regulations. The city could also begin the discussion of how to address an even greater number of foreclosures than in 2008-9. Will there be an appropriate use of eminent domain for foreclosed structures in the floodplain, for example?

I think at least one of them will become an SRO-type place and city council will regret having approved of it being built. Likely candidates is the place at State/Washington or the cheap looking new one on Fifth, south of William.

There’s also a possibility that one of these could be marketed as co-housing for retirees, but only if most of the students aren’t living there or really are studious students.

Our hometown developers like Bill Martin and Ed Shaffran generally retain ownership of their developments. They are in it for the long haul and are too savvy to build something with a dubious future.