As a real estate professional, I just don’t understand why some people hate apartments. Frankly, any argument you can make against apartment life can just as easily be leveled at condominium life. Complaints about “noisy neighbors on the other side of the wall” and “lousy parking” come to mind.
Furthermore, the management team of a large apartment community has a vested interest in the continued good condition and good reputation of their property even more than the typical small-scale landlord does. Do you know who owns the rent house on the next block from you? No? But I bet if you look carefully at the sign in front of the apartment complex down the street, the management company’s name is on it.
Many of the “problems” associated with apartments are actually caused by zoning too many units in relatively small acreage: notably traffic issues and neighborhood decline. The impact of putting thousands of families in a couple dozen acres on traffic may be obvious. The impact on the neighborhood at large, less so. What happens is that no matter how many families actually need rental housing in a major city, the odds of them actually having jobs or another need to be in or near the “zoned apartment ghetto” is actually pretty small. The obvious result is too much supply and for existing demand. This drives occupancy and landlord revenues down from what the investors were promised, and nobody wants the investors to be angry. As a result, Jane Manager gets orders from her supervisor at the management company to fill those units at any cost! And so Jane rents to people she maybe shouldn’t, who in turn run off her “good” residents. Maybe she reduces rent, which in turn reduces the amount of money she has for repairs (and make-ready of vacant units), eventually meaning her property is skimping on maintenance. The cycle continues around the neighboring apartment communities, because Mary Manager and Suzie Manager and Joe Manager are all getting the same orders to fill those units.
While cities that do not have “zoned apartment ghettoes” may have a bad complex with bad management somewhere, they don’t have a dozen of them all crammed next to one another, feeding on the toxic feedback loop of their neighborhood. Apartments spread strategically through a city creates an environment where people who want or need rental housing can find it in a variety of neighborhoods near the places they want or need to be. In short, cities that zone intelligently have a chance at having good, well-managed apartment complexes filled with decent, hard-working people who for whatever reason choose not to own real estate. Such complexes can and do co-exist well with quality housing and a vibrant business community.
And that brings me to today’s City Council meeting in the City of North Las Vegas. Way back in 1988, the city agreed to let Pardee Homes build a mixed development including single family homes and an apartment complex in what was then the middle of nowhere. Now, they are being held to that agreement and forced to sign off on allowing a 340 unit apartment complex to be built on a 15 acre site in the middle of a neighborhood dominated by single family homes.
And the neighbors are spitting mad.
I don’t get it.
Granted, that’s 23 units per acre. According to the Clark County website, “Maximum densities allowed in most districts range from 18 to 50 dwelling units per acre, though more density is allowed in the district that includes the Strip.” So by Vegas standards, 23 units per acre isn’t such a big deal. I know from experience you can have a very nice 200 unit complex of 2 story buildings on roughly 6 acres, so theoretically a clever planner could fit 500 units on 15 acres and never have a third floor unit! We aren’t talking about a “zoned apartment ghetto” here; we are talking about one complex on more than enough land, in a rapidly growing area minutes away from a retail hub and a brand new hospital.
This area needs rental housing, badly, and somebody realized that back in 1988, even if they can’t see it now.