| While man can forego many items, the need for shelter has roots from biblical times. Every man's home was considered his castle, and each castle was treated with a special sense of pride.;While individuals were able to better their lot by relocating to suburban areas, the synergistic features of a mass middle class exodus create problems for large urban areas. Robbed of their middle class base, urban areas have become plagued by urban decay. Without middle class incomes, central cities are not properly able to balance their budgets, or grow without substantial debt financing. Funds once spent by resident middle income households inside central cities, are now spent by these households in suburban areas.;In order to remedy the above scenario, individual middle class owner property must be constructed inside central cities. By constructing such shelter, equitable opportunity will be presented, wherein middle class households can live inside central cities, at affordable costs, and obtain ownership potential. Shelter devices incorporating all of these features do exist and is known as cooperative or condominium housing. This housing, like single family housing, is individually owned and all the favorable attributes that accrue to single family dwellings, such as deductible tax features, and asset profitability apply. The only substantial difference is that cooperative/condominium housing is built vertically on small tracts of inner city land. In this manner, the best of both worlds can be developed. Households by owning, in urban areas, can obtain the benefits of ownership, and the urban areas can obtain the benefits of having middle class households as residents.;This dissertation traces the supply and demand of shelter for America's middle class since the late 1950's. The paper explains the cooperative/condominium housing concepts, offers proof that such housing can be owned and maintained for middle class households, and concludes with some suggestions and a master plan to implement the document's hypothesis. The document realizes that mass construction of urban coops and condos could have a negative blacklash effect, if their construction should eliminate additions to the rental housing market. Also, of recent date, many investors have purchased rental structures and converted them to condos or coops. To properly blend both rental and ownership of urban property, the master plan outlines suggestions for growth and development of both property types.;In recent decades, the cost of obtaining adequate individual shelter, especially for the American middle class, has become an increasing problem. This household group is too wealthy to obtain governmental assistance, and their personal disposable income base does not allow indiscriminate shelter consumption. In order for each to realize their individual shelter goals, and remain within reasonable budgetary constraints, the American middle class has commenced a slow, but mass exodus from established central (urban) cities, to the suburbs. There, they are able to obtain less expensive shelter with ownership benefits. These ownership aspects foster neighborhood pride, and this pride allows communities to maintain themselves on a sound financial basis. On an individual basis, home ownership, under the present financial/tax structures lowers true shelter costs. Households are able to deduct real estate taxes and interest from their yearly federal tax returns, and over the years, the market value of their shelter usually increases.;The basic conclusion is America's urban middle class would like to remain in urban areas. However, unless they are offered proper shelter incentives, they will relocate elsewhere. While no one item is a panacea for urban decay, providing middle class ownership shelter is probably the largest step, and the first in any logical progression. |
