Comment on this story

Create an account now to start posting comments immediately.

If you have already created an account, log in to your existing account

By posting, you agree to abide by our Forum Rules.

“It’s not building with money-making motives,” he says. “Instead, you prevail upon an inner harmony that’s in tune with nature’s beauty to guide your design objectives.”

Mr. Driscoll is fortunate indeed to have been blessed with a trust fund which allows him such high ideals but then, beauty, after all, is truly in the eye of the beholder and the stereotypical Japanese aesthetic is not always found to be so appealing, "calming", or "in tune" with nature.  I, for one, find it rather insipid and boring on its own if not juxtraposed against something with more vitality and exhuberance.

The quote by Karen Heldmeyer in the actual hard copy of the paper today said this: "Santa Fe is not a tourism center."

Really?

If it's not a tourism center, then what is it?

A government center?

That's all we've got until we can urge some sort of clean industry here.

I don't think it's wise to cut off our noses to spite our faces.

We have been "short-term renters", and I think we have been good neighbors when we've been in Santa Fe. We treat the properties we rent as if they were our own, and we try to be very careful and respectful of the neighborhoods in which we rent. Rather than enforcing the ban on short-term rentals, perhaps a better solution would be to continue to allow short-term rentals, but fine those who litter, are loud, or park in the wrong places. And perhaps suspend an owner's right to rent for a period if he/she rents to a problem tenant. At the very least, before the city shuts the door on short-term rentals, it should, as the city manager suggests, get some facts. How many short term rentals are there in the course of a year? What is the economic impact of those rentals on stores, restaurants, taxes, etc.? Is the city prepared to give up some or most of that? What percentage of short term rentals cause problems? Is there an effective way to deal with those problems when they occur? The cost of administering different options as laid out in the story is only part of the economic picture. Santa Fe cannot thrive without a healthy tourist trade. I would bet that an examination of the facts would show that short term rentals have been an important part of this in the past. Are you really sure you want to eliminate this part of your tourism? Barry Smyth

no point in being an investment property owner in santa fe. i guess. since rents in long term rental agreements don't cover your mortgage. Just another way for an out of touch council to kill opportunity. I"m not too worried though since this council can't seem to get anything done anyway.

Maybe if our hotels were in better shape and not way overpriced, the home vacation rental market would dry up.

the mayor wants to cut out "illegal" rentals--where is he with all the illegals we are plagued with--that would really be helpful----for the most part the short termers come to put money in the city--not drain it

Construction is spelled wrong on the heading of this article.


Good eyes Ricky. Got it.
Henry M. Lopez
Web editor

The problem isn't necessarily just the mortgage industry or the real estate market.  A lot of the problem lies with Americans themselves.  We're the ones who are tapping out the equity in our homes so we can buy SUVs and ATVs and RVs or some other toy with which we escape from our mundane lives.  Ironically, the more toys we buy, the more mundane our lives ultimately become because we have to work harder to pay off all the junk we've just charged up. 

Americans have the lowest amount in savings at any point in recent history since the great depression.  That, coupled with a number of our jobs already overseas, the fact that China owns a lot of our debt, and the fact that the dollar has been devalued against almost all other international currency since last year, tells you is there is indeed a recession coming.  Exacerbated by the fact that thousands of American families will probably soon lose their homes when their interest rates on their ARMs reset again.  So, hopefully we've all put a little something away.  Because that rainy day we've all been warned about is just around the corner.

About a year ago, my wife and I wrote to all the Realtors who had empty, stagnant listings in SF and tried to get them to propose a lease with option to purchase to their sellers. If we could get them to call us back, they'd say things like, "That doesn't work here." Or, "None of my clients would ever be interested."

Sadly, I be there are A LOT of sellers who would entertain the idea today. And a year from now? Well, let's just say the days of "seller financing: take over payments, no money down" are coming back with a vengeance. And I'm going to be snapping up as many of those as I can.

http://www.safehaven.com/article-4759.htm

Interesting article that explains the part real estate loans play in the start of a recession. 

 

Imagine how much fun we're having up in Los Alamos... largely similar conditions to SF and then the company in our one-company town drops a 500-2500 job cut bomb. If only we could get some well-intentioned civil servant to set the town on fire again!

I love to read all of these "expert" opinions on the doom and gloom. You all can bunker up for the coming "recession" and I don't doubt there will be one, but this is the time in my opinion to start placing investments.

Recession?  Thank goodness SF is recession proof and has no jobs to lose.  NM will be ok with nat gas and oil revs going up.  No place I would rather be.

And it is going to get even worse...recession is around the corner!

Liar loans - hee-hee!

many think the problem is local, when it is mostly national, related to interest rates wrongly lowered for too long by greenspahn [after 9/11] who had before raised interest rates for too long also.   very odd folks still think him a genius?  probably some relation of interest rates also to war finance [or lack thereof]--hard to get other countries to accept US bonds/loans when interest rates approach zero.  also hard to get people to save, when banks pay close to nothing....but that means, very little money available to banks for investing.  well, maybe paying for two wars with a tax cut is NOT such a great idea after all?

The good news is Santa Fe did not go up double digits like the bubble cities and it did not build acres of ugly tract homes to compete with existign homes.  Houses and condos are still cheap here compared to other top destination cities.  I think a newish 3/2 home in Nava Ade is only $240k.  SF will probably be flat for 2 yrs, but if you paid too much for a bad house in 2005, you might see a big drop. Or if rates go up a lot higher. People will always pay more for good school districts, so place with great schools will hold tight.  Horrible places to live like PHX, Calif, and Las Vegas will crash as they over built and went up 20% a yr and it was all bought by dumb flippers from CA. 

I was just talking to a friend in Phoenix last night who is a Land Aquisition guy at a LARGE homebuilder. He says the market is flat and that even if they do get buyers, they are cancelling during the process as the loans are not easy to get.  No it is no longer the land of milk and honey and foreclosures are going to skyrocket because the loan packages people were using were junk.  3 year balloons, ARM's and more. 

He also says they are dumping land left and right.  Walking away from it and losing money.  NOw if a builder is doing that, sad for this flipper that is one house in and "won't cave in" 

Dupois will hold his house for many months with that attitude.  Good luck to him and I hope his pockets are deep. 

Any seller out there who is taking the stance of "I will not cave in" is in for many-many-many more months of mortgage payments and Open Houses. Just because you are stubborn and feel your home is worth XYZ does not mean you deserve that price for it. Prices are dictated not by stubbornness, they are dictated by availability of financing and demand. When there are a ton of homes on the market at once, guess what, the demand is lower, sellers. And when it's super difficult to get financing, (compared to how easy it was the past 5 years), you are not going to get nearly as many offers rolling in as use to come in when financing was handed out to anyone with a pulse.

Anyone who is trying to sell a home right now and does not know all of this already needs a major reality check or a new Real Estate Agent, or both. We're in a new era sellers, face it. Things were hog-wild in your favor for a few years there with those crazy no-qualifying loans available, but those are gone!! and now you will see how many people out there TRULY qualify for your home, not many, sadly.

That is why the higher-end homes are the only ones moving - the buyers of those homes do not rely on the kind of creative financing (liar loans) that have been yanked.

Prices need to come down to where the average person, making the average income in your area can qualify for a purchase loan, full doc, with a down-payment and good credit and everything...like the old days.

I love the "there is a problem every where but here" chant.  You hear it repeated all over the US.

Grover said there is a perception it is more difficult to get loans for homes under $350,000, but that is not the case. The loans are still available, she said, but they often require more documentation than in the past.

Yes, now you need income, money saved AND a job...I guess that is not more difficult.  doh!

Realtors are not the brightest bulbs.

Dupuis the flipper won't cave and he won't sell his house either.

"The policy of the American government is to leave its citizens free, neither restraining them nor aiding them in their pursuits. -- Thomas Jefferson"

Derek, do you not think that your freedom to enjoy your property and extract the highest economic value you can out of it would be severly constrained if I had the freedom to buy property all around you and turn it into a factory hog farm?

This is a pretty simple concept.  I'll put it another way.  I am free to make a fist and swing my arm around briskly all I want, until such time as my fist comes in contact with your chin.  Get it?

Niet comrad.  "We the People" is the Government, and the Government is "We the people".    This IS the community taking care of the community.

Niet comrad.  As our founding fathers understood clearly, if the rights of the individual are respected and not infringed upon, the community will take care of itself!  Power and responsibility rest with "We The People"  NOT with government.

Hey Derek,  is there any property available in your neighborhood?  I hear LANL needs a place to store nuclear waste.  I agree with your view that we should be free to do what we want with our property,  what is in the best interest for the community as a whole needs to be taken into account as well.  In this case they are trying to skirt the rules......plain and simple.  If the rules are overbearing then it is the authority of the community as a whole to decide that.  Not individuals.  It's call representative government. 

Perhaps Steve, you have heard of Thomas Jefferson, Clarence Darrow, and Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis?  I think they would have something to say about zoning laws and restrictions placed on personal, private property.  Rules laid down by petty bureaucrats and politicians for "the public good" are a direct and vicious attack on our freedoms and there are many who would agree with me.

You can protect your liberties in this world only by protecting the other man's freedom. You can be free only if I am free. -- Clarence Darrow


The policy of the American government is to leave its citizens free, neither restraining them nor aiding them in their pursuits. -- Thomas Jefferson


The makers of the Constitution conferred, as against the government, the Right to be let alone; the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by civilized men. -- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis: Olmstead v. United States (1928)

I would bet that many of the neighbors living in this area either bought houses that do not conform to current zoning or may have sought a variance themselves. Typical newcomer close the pearly gates behind them attitude. I would love to see this woman from California's house to see if it might be tooooo big or maybe even have grades and slopes that are not in compliance.

Has anyone noticed that the complainers of this type of development are typically anglo and fairly new to the community. Has anyone noticed also that very few long time local hispanics complain about this type of nonsense? Man this town has something in the water that just makes people angry and jealous and resentful.

In that case, I respect your consistency, Derek.  I doubt you will find many who agree with that posture though, liberal, conservative or libertarian.  I think most people believe that the government does have an obligation to maintain some rules for "the public good" which outweigh private property rights.

The people who really annoy me Steve are the ones who want to build whatever they want on their own property but want rectrictions placed on everyone else around them.  A very modern-Liberal point of view I find.

Steve.  In all honesty, I feel that it is none of my business what someone else does on his own property.  If my neighbor decided to build a Wal-Mart next door to me, I'd be right there doing my shopping.  If my neighbor across the road put in a full size Conoco station and convenience store, I'd be there to buy my gas, milk, and coffee.  If another neighbor put in a bar and strip club, I'd be right there for a beer now and then.  I truly believe in what I say Steve.  I have designed and built my new house on my own property in such a way that I have provided for my own privacy and security and whatever anyone else does on his property is of little concern and none of my business.

Since you seem to believe that there is no place for zoning regulations that might limit a land owners right to build whatever he wants on his own property, does that mean that you would have no objection to someone in your neighborhood deciding to put a trailer park in his front yard next to your driveway?  I didn't think so.

Classical Liberal and Libertarian are the same thing Karla.  Modern "Liberals" have twisted this once good word and made it mean something else.  What you call doing something "for the community" is just modern Lib-speak for wanting to selfishly control what everyone else does so as to be sure it isn't a lot bigger or a lot better or a lot different from what you have, everything must "conform".   Everything must blend.  Everything must suit your specific standards.  Everything that everyone else does must follow your rules.  What kind of selfish BS is that?

I can't believe the idiots in Santa Fe that oppose this house.  This house will only increas the property values of the neighboring homes and it will be very nice and not an eyesore.  People will drive by and say, "wow, check out that pad!".

This house is a lot better than 100 12x80 trailers going in.  Let Santa Fe be a prosperous and wealthy, healthy community.  Putting restrictions on a house size is ridiculous.

Remember, for a community, more mun means more fun!

Yes, got it.  

Libertarian, not liberal. 

Me first, not part of a community. 

Damn the engineering, site suitability, slope, land use, aesthetics, law and anything else that might be a concern in the long term .  

What the Grabowskis decide to do on their own land is nobody else's damn business regardless of how jealous they are.  If somebody wanted to build an 8000 sq. ft. house across the road from me, you know what I would do?  I would walk right over there, look them right in the eye, put my hand out, and say, "welcome to the neighborhood friend" but then, I'm a true Liberal and not one of these stuck-up, selfish, control oriented, socialist, pretend Liberals so prolific in the SF area.  Liberalism is about freedom, not about "rules".  "Pro-choice" does NOT just apply to abortions, it applies to our right to make choices about all aspects of our own lives, our own property, our own money, our own homes.  Get it?

Santiago, I moved to Santa Fe from Colorado and bought an existing home here. I pay prpoerty taxes, support the local economy and am a small business owner. As such, I consider myself a local. Just as I had the right to leave a community in Colorado which I did not care for, so do you. Stay on track with the story. This is not about NIMBY, but about rules that were made and now people are trying to skirt them. I believe Scott and Karla have a good grasp of the real issue here, although Scott hit the nail on the head. . .8,000 sq. ft is excessive. I'm still confused why anybody would want to build a house that would cause them to be disliked by their neighbors, yet it happens all the time here?

Isn't an 8,000 + square foot home just a tad excessive? I'm curious to know how many people will be living in this house. Even a 2,000 square foot home can pretty comfortably fit four people with average needs.

It is a zoning issue, Santiago - nothing unusual and no reason for hateful comments about your neighbors.  The plan does not comply  with the land-use codes and a variance was granted that negates the rules that the rest of us must comply with. 

I have gone to court, many times, trying to overturn lousy decisions against the public welfare and common sense. An exercise in frustration and rage. Our local governments are owned by the development coalition and will always approve such applications. Sometimes, the courts actually see it our way, but it still costs a lot of time and money. Such a pity, that we pay these jerks to approve all this stuff, and then pay the lawyers to try and make things right. Someday the public will wake up and not vote for those that ripoff their government from them-or we will build cities that will fail and fall.

The massive number of foreign, non-native, non-contributing NIMBYers in this town is UNconscionable!!! how about we pass an ordinance saying "we local sfeans are sick of NIMBYers yapping about what i can do on MY land?"

besides, it'll take another 10 years for the rail park project to be ready.

Good grief....

The Historic Design Review Board seems to have been guilty of monumental ineptitude in this case. Who would believe that two licensed architects did not set out to deliberately subvert the rulings of the Board? It is not they, but the Board members who are guilty of stupidity. By allowing this unapproved construction the Board has given license to any homeowner to go ahead and do whatever they wish. If they then excuse themselves later by humbly pleading "stupidity" they will then get away with whatever transgressions they committed. This case also illustrates the inadvisability of having Realtors and builders on the Board. While their expertise might be helpful, they could be used as consultants rather than voting members of the Board. I feel very sorry for Mr. Mayer and hope he will challenge this foolish Board decision and appeal it to the City Council.

Next week on Desperate Rich Folks:  Neighbors hire a private investigator to catch dog walkers that don't pick up the poopies.

Aieeee, Miguel....you got me on that one. 

Al, "Psychology:  The science that deals with mental processes and behaviour. "  Notice "science" and not "or study" that is a key distinction.  Perhaps you should read this:

http://www.jakeg.co.uk/essays/science.htm

You will note sociology has far too many "opinions" and far too few facts and laws and of course the scientific method is totally missing in sociology, a dead give-away that it isn't a science as usually practiced.

You are a very funny guy too,  Ha Ha.

Sociology.........the science or study of the origin, development, organization, and functioning of human society; the science of the fundamental laws of social relations, institutions, etc.

Miguel...you are funnier than Kate! 

Al, I took it as humor, just didn't find it as funny as you do, different strokes you know amigo.  And Kate, I think the environment influencing your attitudes and values is more psychology than sociology, I always hated sociology in school, too fuzzy, soft, and nondescript, but psychology is an actual science.

Lee and Miguel, you just don't appreciate humor when it is over your heads, ha ha...  Kate is a humorist and satirist.  She cracks me up half the time.