501 North D Street Going Condo (24. April 2006, 22:46 by Derek Young) ~ The Things We See
These aren’t listed yet, but they’re working hard on them. The apartment building at 501 North D is getting converted and ready to go. I personally like the clean and simple lines of the building. My tipster called it “one of those ugly characterless 1970’s apartments…” To each his own. The view should be quite good. It’s a great neighborhood – it doesn’t get any better. On the other hand, what’s up with the Starbucks color palette? We really liked the building in white. Starbucks green is so 2002.
It appears that Metropolitan Development Group is doing the conversion. We look forward to seeing the finished product. Send us an invite….
Update Man, we sit on this story for a while and the morning we hit LIVE, the first listing hits MLS. Listed on Windermere. Given the condo prices we have in this town right now, $210k to $335k seems quite fair – possibly inexpensive even. Scary.
Commenting Is Closed
Comments are allowed for two weeks from the posted date. If you want to make a comment or reopen this discussion, please contact us with your request. Thank you for visiting.
Well, I do know that the Dorothy is starting to look more reasonable even to me…
But I do wonder how this is going to play out, with the price of condos seeming to outpace single family homes so quickly. I admit I’m really out of touch with the real estate market, but I always thought that a house with land was a safer investment than a condo. I would think the smaller houses in the up and coming transitional neighborhoods would be priced higher than the condos, not lower as appears to be happening.
2 | Posted by Zora | Apr 25, 09:59 AM
Re: condo conversions pro or con –
In my opinion, whenever you can increase the equity of your citizens, such as through home ownership, it is a good thing. Now if we can focus on building equity in the parts of Tacoma that really need it: Lincoln, Eastside, Hilltop, etc…
3 | Posted by morgan | Apr 25, 12:02 PM
“In my opinion, whenever you can increase the equity of your citizens, such as through home ownership”
Sounds like you endorse the “ownership society” concept.
You might have a point as I believe there are studies which show that owner occupied houses are better maintained.
4 | Posted by James | Apr 25, 12:11 PM
Not to say that all landlords are slumlords or apartments and apartment dwellers don’t have their place in society – they do.
There’s something about the phrase “ownership society” that gives me the creeps… can’t quite put my finger on it…
I do have serious concerns with the way housing prices have been escalating and banks seem more than willing to put home buyers deeper into debt.
While it is wonderful so many people are buying homes, I wonder what the larger ramifications might be from so many who are “house-rich, cash-poor.”
Are we really better off having a large percentage of home buyers who can afford house payments, but not have enough left over to eat out, see a movie, donate to charity, buy new clothing, buy a car, afford college for their children?
...these are all things that support growth in our community and local economy.
5 | Posted by morgan | Apr 25, 07:01 PM
Commenting is closed for this article.
