Opinion
Large apartments threaten Langdon
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Ben Patterson:
- Liberal arts must not be forgotten in deficit shuffle (February 12, 2009)
- Large apartments threaten Langdon (January 30, 2009)
- Why college debt hurts generation (December 5, 2008)
- Local solutions for energy crucial (November 21, 2008)
- GOP needs to reinvent itself to survive (November 3, 2008)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
Upon arriving to the
Imagine walking to the lake on a warm night in August and instead of appreciating the old-time appeal of the fraternities and sororities that date back to the early 1900s, you find yourself gazing at the brand-new Vesta Apartments — how swanky. The ugly irony of the situation is the best part.
The Acacia fraternity, in partnership with the Alexander Co., would be allowed to use state and federal tax credits to lessen the tax burden of the $6.5 million project. The Acacia house was built in 1927 and therefore qualifies for tax credits for the preservation and renovation of historic buildings. Forgive me if I’m wrong, but once you add two additional stories and install stainless steel appliances, there’s not much being preserved. The only real preservation occurring is in the pocketbooks of the owners so as not lose an investment.
If the city council allows for developers to infiltrate Langdon, the face of campus is going to continue to change in favor of commercialization. The plan is being presented to the public as if it is beneficial to everyone. According to the developers, the building is simply in need of repairs and the best way to accomplish that is to give the neighborhood a black eye, cheat taxes and make some profits all at the same time.
Capitol Neighborhoods Inc. is voicing direct opposition to the proposal for good reason. According to Ledell Zellers, the president of CNI, the new building would be too large for the size of the lot and would disturb the charm of the street as a whole.
Ignorant greed will prove to be the downfall of the area. Our campus already has numerous housing options in the flooded and beaten housing market, an additional option will do nothing to benefit the community in the long run. Developers seem to be under the notion that every student is looking to live in a high rise or luxury apartment complex. Personally, I choose to avoid these housing options — I don’t like living like a small animal in an overpriced cage.
Take the apartments at Lucky for example. The exorbitant price tag for a closet marketed as an apartment is a trend that is only going to grow if the city council allows for more commercialized apartment complexes to be built. The focus has, in recent time, been on the needs of developers and not on the needs of the residents living in the area. These changes to our campus need to be stopped before we’re all paying $1000 for a bedroom.
Ben Patterson (bpatterson@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in political science.
5 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Muckrakers
President’s Visit Marked a Speech to One of the Last Groups Not Critical of Him
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
HOUSES FOR Fall 2010. All houses are on W Dayton or N Bassett. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 bedrooms. All have parking. madisoncampusrentals.com
This is just awful.
“Madison is losing that “college town” feel”…I don’t understand, so we want everyone to live in old, falling apart houses that neither residents nor landlords take care of?
and maybe they build apartment highrises because people want to live in them, and are willing to pay for them? you don’t have to if you don’t want to, nobody will make you. And if do they build way too many apartments, that would depress rents not make you pay $1000 for a room.
And where they’re planning on building behind Acacia, it’s just a trashy, gravel parking lot. it’s really not that charming.
As cities grow, they change, they become more dense. it serves no one to halt city development to appease your nostalgia, whatever it is you’re nostalgic for (I don’t know, you never told us). So, I’d like to know what exactly you want instead of new apartment buildings to house new residents. You can’t just say you want to city to stay charming and claasic.
Yeah, it’s terrible! Where’s the next step, the good ‘ol student getto of chopped up old houses?
An abundance of sought-after “premium” housing options (or any housing options, for that matter) will likely reduce consumer competition to rent the sorts of housing that you seem to be looking for. Some even theorize that these sorts of developments will reduce student property demands east of the capitol building — an area that may then begin to offer housing for more young single families. This is an attractive cultural alternative to suburban and commuter lifestyles and a key component of urban revitalization.
Because of these new developments your rent will be lower, there will be downward pressure on prices for those who choose to live in these “closets”, and the urban character of downtown and the campus area will likely develop nicely. If anything were to force up rent prices as you fear, it would be restricting dense development. Consider this a process of creative destruction.
Yeah, we should go back to the good ol’ days of tenements, housing projects, and rows and rows of tiny identical bungalows. If only we could build more housing structures like Sellery and Witte. That would show those corporate snobs!! And think, the more housing space available the lower housing prices would be, we must stop this! We could even start a new student group: Students Against Available and Affordable Housing.
Get Real.
Hey Ben! Ledell Zellers is not the president of CNI, Bob Holloway is. Do your research. Pffft!