Sorry for the delay in responding, but I don’t manage this site; another Friend of UT does. Therefore, I don’t know when posts are made. Regardless, since this comment was more directed towards me, I will take the opportunity to respond.
First, Thank you for engaging this matter in debate, Steve.
To date, much of this process has been pushed through the neighborhood without any forum for opposition. The meetings that many of us attended did not provide us an opportunity to ask questions or really consider the issue until now.
The goal of this media is to provide a vehicle for all of us opposed to the NSO to "come out of the shadows" together and ultimately a forum allowing free and open discussions of the issues. Encourage all your friends and neighbors to read this blog. We have nothing to hide and welcome a democratic process rather than having this forced upon us. Please recognize that this is just that, an open debate regarding the issues and not a place to make personal attacks.
With that in mind, again let me stress that this is not a "Me vs. You" issue. This is a neighborhood issue. But since I have chosen to be more active in this matter, let me speak strictly on my behalf. I have nothing to hide and I have been fully open to all the residents that I have addressed on the subject matter. To clarify:
1. I, personally, am not a realtor, understood as a residential realtor. Rather I work in commercial real estate, whereby I help my clients negotiate fair and equitable contracts.
2. Individually, my house is for sale. We are moving to a larger home, as we have out-grown our current home. We have gone through the process and have come to the conclusion that it's not cost-effective to build onto our current home, so we are leaving. A factor that will be emphasized with the restrictions of the overlay.
3. While walking the neighborhood with our children, I have asked several neighbors whether they are in favor of the NSO. Many(too many for me to overlook) have said that they were misled into signing the petition. You quote 71% of the neighborhood support this, but that number has dwindled quite a bit when more facts were given. Keep an eye on the number of signs that are going up.
Yes, my career is founded on attempting to even the playing field, so I took offense to this situation and decided to see if there was enough opposition to further the debate. I personally feel more strongly about our neighborhood being directed by a small majority, than the overlay issue at hand. If it is the neighborhood's will to pass this, then fine. We are moving. However, if there is not an overwhelming ratio requesting this overlay, then the residents should not be forced to give up the property rights they had when they purchased their homes in the beginning.
Again, ask anyone that I personally have approached and you will likely be told that I prefaced all my comments with full disclosure. Also ask your neighbors with whom we have interacted, we believe that this neighborhood is a fun place. We participate in the Halloween and 4th of July parades and spend a considerable time at the Ridgewood Rec Center park. We have truly enjoyed our time here. It is not MY purpose to disrupt the enjoyment of the neighborhood.
You too state that "All experts agree, this type of ordinance is too new to provide any meaningful statistics.” Yet you seek to implement this overlay and bind all current and future residents to the ramifications of the proposed zoning.
Yes, I have spent much time speaking with developers, contractors, residential real estate agents, title and mortgage professionals AND people who are looking to purchase a home. Almost all of them have said they would not purchase a home that has an overlay and consider that a detraction.
I also appreciate that you have looked into the property values and break-downs, as many people have questioned that very issue.
Yes, the property values in that neighborhood have shifted from structure to site-value. That is a fact that cannot be denied. We have to understand that the city decides the taxable value of neighborhoods. We don't. We have some influence by appealing the process, but when the values are actually derived through valid comp's, we can't argue with facts.
However, keep in mind that a home only has value if it is purchased. If such a structure were to be built in our neighborhood, will it sell? I don't know, but personally, I value our backyard. As they have too little of one, I wouldn't buy it if it was in UT.
On the flip side, there are several "scraper" houses in our neighborhood, specifically two on Bucknell. I am thankful they aren't my neighbors, and hopefully no offense to those who do live next to them. These examples are in such disrepair/abandoned, that I worry about vermin infestations. Do you think that someone will be eager to come in and rehab those to current specifications? They haven’t done so yet! How many more are there that have more serious conditions which are not outwardly visible?
Thank you and to everyone that I personally have spoken with for engaging this debate. It truly is very important to all the residents of UT. If anyone has questions for me specifically, reach out to me. If there are other questions that you have, keep reading. My hope is that all the issues will be raised and a resource will be provided to everyone to make an informed decision.
Warmest Regards,
Jack Ormberget
one Friend of University Terrace
While you're entitled to your ideas, and while the internet has given anyone with a keyboard the opportunity to project those ideas beyond their front yard, your ideas are just that; ideas. When you look at data, they don't stand up to the light of day.
ReplyDeleteFirst, you misquoted me. I didn't say "All experts agree, this type of ordinance is too new to provide any meaningful statistics." There were quotation marks around that part of my comment because I was quoting your blog post. The very next thing I wrote was that it isn't too early to tell.
The jury's in; when a neighborhood is targeted by builders, the value of the structures plummet. I can show you one house that has lost 89% of it's structure value since the builders moved in 3 years ago, and that house is less than 1/2 mile from your doorstep. Actually, just a few hundred yards as the crow flies.
But at the same time, our houses haven't lost anywhere near that much value. We have experienced typical devaluation for our structures; just a few percent.
If it was a level playing field, then as the lot values on those teardown streets increased, those people over there should have enjoyed a dollar for dollar appreciation in the value of their home and lot. But they don't. And the only people who benefit from that situation are the builders.
You're selling people this idea that builders won't be interested in our neighborhood if we don't keep things favorable enough to attract them. But if we do, the facts are that the aggregate value of our structure and lot won't be worth any more than they already are. No one's going to get some Big Payday if they just keep things the way they are and "save themselves" for the builders.
The only thing that lining up with you will guarantee that we're all going to eventually have to sell out to builders for pretty much what our homes are worth now.
There are so few neighborhoods with homes in our price range left this close in; almost In the Loop. And even better because of our proximity to White Rock Lake.
You're a realtor. Can you honestly tell me that a neighborhood like ours, so close to everything and within walking distance to the Dart Rail, isn't going to just become more and more desirable and valuable over time? That increase in value will drive interest and responsible redevelopment. Just like it did on the M Streets even though they had a much, much stricter Preservation Overlay.
You say that there are several "scrapers" and then, "specifically two". Which is it? Several or two? If it's just two, that's a pretty good number for a neighborhood of 416 homes. And as far as those homes on Bucknell, I can take you over to Lake Circle and show you vacant lots where there used to be homes, torn down with the best of intentions, that are overgrown with weeds and posted with violation signs. You look them up on the Dallas Central Appraisal District website, it turns out some of those vacant lots are now bank owned, the builders LLC gone under. So now you have $900,000 homes across the street from overgrown lots.
Like those houses on Bucknell, these situations are fallout from this economy, and these problems are all over town, not just on Bucknell or Lake Circle. When the economy improves, all of those situations will work themselves out.
But the reason I bring up what's happening on Lake Circle is to point out that, even though the intent was to transform the neighborhood, the result is that when the bottom line changed, the builders pulled up stakes and left. They're done making money down there and so the neighborhood is left to deal with their mess. And the reason is because those builders are not neighbors, their business people. That's not saying they're horrible. But they're driven simply by the bottom line and not what's good for a bunch of people who are not their neighbors.
You say that you're a friend of University Terrace, and I want to believe that. To us, this is where we live, and the majority of us want to protect it by enacting the NSO. You should reconsider your opposition. This isn't about winning. It's about taking care of our neighborhood.
Steve - the structures started decreasing in value in 2006. Check DCAD for the figures. An Overlay will not save them. Only people who actually purchase a permit from the city showing they are upgrading their property will have their values increase.
ReplyDelete86% of our neighborhood is listed with a condition/desireablity on Dallas Central Appraisal District as Fair or below - THAT IS BELOW AVERAGE. Why - probably (and this is my opinion) because people are trying to skirt taxes by saying I have tons of deferred maintenance. Hence - lower structure values on those Appraisals.
But you folks keep dodging the point. Show me a single structure in University Terrace that's lost anywhere near the value of the structures on Santa Barbara.
ReplyDeleteYou can't.
My point is that the idea that people are going to make a barrel of money by leaving their neighborhood open to the builders is a false idea. The values remain flat, except for average appreciation, with the value shifting from the structure to the lot. If they were really going to be making money because they're in a teardown neighborhood, then their overall value would increase substantially. Heck, on Santa Barbara the lots went from $30,000 to $200,000 in three years. But people's homes didn't appreciate $170,000.
And you're dead on right about Santa Barbara structures beginning to devalue in 2006. That's when the building boom on Santa Barbara got into high gear. When you look at Vanderbilt and Sondra and Lake Circle, you see the same thing; as building went into high gear - in their case in 2004 & 5 - the structures began to devalue and the lots became more valuable, with overall value not much changed.
As far as your statistic of 86% of our homes in UT being below AVERAGE, I don't know. I'll have to check that out. I did notice that, for example, the Ormberget's, the folks who are leading the opposition, that their home is listed in FAIR condition. It sure doesn't look like a FAIR home from the curb. Looks pretty nice, pretty well updated and very well maintained. And the asking price in the MLS is $289,500.
So, l'm not sure I'm ready to say that we ought to rev up the wrecking ball based on DCAD property condition listings. I mean, the next category down from what that house is supposed to be right now is POOR.
But it is clearly not POOR, or FAIR. And I'm sure the Ormbergets aren't trying to skirt taxes, as you say you think everyone else is.
Steve, do you know the difference between taxable value and market value? Its two completely different things. I would suggest you speak to a Realtor who knows the difference - one that is practicing and a multi-million dollar producer. I doubt that you would listen to my opinion on the subject.
ReplyDeleteDijea - I find your condescension saddening. But may I remind you that YOU'RE the one who was just using the DCAD data to try to prove some point about how badly our neighborhood needed redevelopment because, to quote you, "86% of our neighborhood is listed with a condition/desireablity on Dallas Central Appraisal District as Fair or below - THAT IS BELOW AVERAGE."
ReplyDeleteSo, if all that tax data is hooey, does that mean we can discount your comments, too?
We all know the game thats played with taxable values and how they differ from market values, but as the Appraisal District likes their tax money, taxable value of residential real estate more closely follows actual market value than, say, commercial real estate. So, while a house that is currently listed for sale at $289,500 in our neighborhood, if it hasn't changed hands for several years, it might have a taxable value of somewhere around $200,000. But I guarantee you this; if that house sells for $289,500, the new owners will pay taxes based on that resale value. That is why the taxable value of many of the houses in UT reflect higher Market Value than others, because they recently changed hands. So, you CAN look at the data and gather information from it.
As you can see, I can add, subtract, and read, just like a realtor, even a multi-million dollar producer, which in this market can mean as few as 6 or 7 very modest homes, or one or two Park Cities homes, a year.
But the main reason I use DCAD data is because the real estate industry that you serve keeps the actual sales data hidden from the public. We don't get to see sale price information, and each legislative session your industry lobbies hard to keep it that way.
So, puuleeeeez park your high horse and answer the questions:
1. Where's the data that proves that the NSO is going to wreck our property values? There are several NSO neighborhoods in Dallas, some more than a few years old. So, there is plenty of recent sales data available for those neighborhoods. And all you folks on the Opposition side do work in real estate. So why don't you prove what you're saying with some hard data?
2. Where have you folks been the last 18 months? Why did you folks wait until such a late date to start your Opposition campaign? You like to claim that you weren't allowed to participate in the process and that this whole thing is being ramroded by "a minority". But did any of you ask for equal time to speak at the neighborhood meetings? No. You didn't. You have waited until the last minute here to start this blog and to post a few yard signs and claim that you were shut out of the process. It's a false argument and most everybody sees right through it.
We did try to attend the meetings - we were told this was an informational session and not a forum for discussion.
ReplyDeleteMy point was that you are arguing that your property won't be worth anything & I'm arguing that your property won't be marketable. Its apples and oranges. You will never convince me to train of thought because you won't even listen to my argument. I suggest you start actually posting true facts and understand what your posting, because DCAD figures are really only valueable to the people who tax you. The true value of your home is what you can sell it for not what the government taxes you on.
Steve says the majority of the UT residents want to "protect" the neighborhood with the NSO. First off, I was one of the ones who went to a meeting on the NSO thinking it was going to be an objective presentation of options. Wrong! It was a dog and pony show for the pro NSO lobby. I knew nothing about the NSO at the time, but I recognized the railroad job afoot. There were pictures in the lobby with zero lot lines as a (totally false) example of what would happen if the NSO wasn't enacted. That was the most obvious propaganda there, but not the only. Had it been a fair meeting, I might have considered the NSO in a better light. As it was, it had the appearance of cronyism politics.
ReplyDeleteConsequently, I started talking to neighbors and discovered that there are a lot of us who are disgruntled with how the pro NSO group has handled this. I am not a realtor so I don't have a particular hat in the economic ring here. One thing I want is to NOT lock the neighborhood into a late 50s/early 60s era. This is not a neighborhood with any historical value like Lakewood and others. It's a wonderful neighborhood, but not historical.
We who are against the NSO may well not be in the majority as Steve believes and I don't. Regardless the tyranny of the majority has no place in UT. I do not want the government to have any more control of my property that it already has and I know I speak for a lot of UT residents when I say that.
I do not believe the NSO is good for University Terrace.
Oh, by the way. Who are you? What is your name? Where do you live? In UT, I hope?
ReplyDeleteAs much as I know you want me to say that it's just about the property values, it's so much more than that. I want to avoid living in a neighborhood that is constantly under construction for the three to five years it takes to tear it down, where my neighbors sell out one by one and move away, and where I'm forced to eventually give in and sell my house to someone who wants to scrape it and build something that THEY will profit handsomely from, while I scramble to find a safe, affordable neighborhood near all the amenities that I've grown accustomed to since moving here. I like living here, and living here is about so much more than what I can get when I sell my house. Because, you see, that's the point; I don't want to sell my house. I want to live here for a long time. And most of us - about 71% of us - want the same thing.
But getting back to your point; you say our neighborhood won't be marketable and you mentioned in another post that you have 17 years experience in Dallas real estate. Then, as I've said elsewhere, why don't you post the startling facts about how all the homes in all the other NSO's in Dallas are suffering this loss of property value.
You're a realtor. It seems that if what you're saying is true, it would be the easiest thing in the world to prove. Don't just say it. Show us the data.
Prove it.
Its really amazing Mr. Riley that you accuse every single person here to be a realtor. I am photographer and writer - yes I hold a Real Estate license, but I work as a secretary and refer my business to a colleague. So far on our site we have a secretary and XRay Technician, a lawyer, a Commercial Real Estate Leasing Agent, a graphic designer. Where are you getting the whole big YOU ARE A REALTOR IDEA.
ReplyDeleteYou have a one track mind and again I DON'T WANT MY PROPERTY RIGHTS TAKEN AWAY FROM ME. That is all. Why, because they are my rights - not yours, not some guy down the street, not the governement's. The are mine.
Oh and yes, I know your come back because you must have always have the last word even if you don't know what the conversation is about. Property Rights - not value - Rights.
Mr. Riley, a lot of what you're missing here is we who oppose the NSO simply do not want anyone telling us what we can or can't do with our property. It's not a money thing for a lot of us. It goes back to the rugged individualism that once defined our nation - that's before Peter Pan became the male paradigm.
ReplyDeleteThe pro NSOers tried to ram this through from the beginning and a lot of us resent it. Your attitude reeks of that. This is an open forum as you say. Just don't go to the enemy camp, hurl insults and expect warmth.
Enemy camp... Geez. I can go back through this blog of yours and cut and paste the insults and profane language if you want. They're coming from your "camp", Concerned.
ReplyDeleteI don't expect you to like what I'm saying, but it bowls me over that you are all getting so upset over this debate. For that is what it is; a debate. These are my opinions, backed up by what I see in the public record. You've sated your opinions as well. If you don't want comments from your opponents then you ought to go into your administrator function and set your blog up differently. But as long as your blog has open comments, I get to comment. If you don't like what I say, then skip down, or don't read it.
I don't expect warmth. I expect debate. I expect when you make a claim, like my property value will suffer because of the NSO, that you back it up with sales data. Like I've said, there are NSO's that go back as far as December 2006. That's 2 and a half years of sales data for that neighborhood and surrounding areas. Conclusions can be drawn.