CONSTRUCTING A 20 STORY CONDOMINIUM TOWER

Constructing a 20 story Condominium Tower

Constructing a 20 story Condominium Tower

Introduction

Despite waning popularity in the 20th century, this venerable dwelling form has selectively persisted in the United States in various guises. Apartment and condominium developers nationwide have sometimes adopted the two-story row house type, among others, as feasible for market-rate housing. Most recently, public housing agencies have lauded it as a desirable model for newer developments, replacing the roundly criticized high-rise tower. And planning agencies in cities like Los Angeles are investigating ways in which zoning and building codes may be modified to allow and even encourage the large-scale development of new row houses for sale. At the core of these newer cases is the desire to provide more private dwellings at an increased density; the origins of the row house centuries ago still drive its popularity and utility.

Data and explanatory variables

This study focuses on the condominium market, which is comprised of the largest type of residential properties in Miami[1]. Transaction facts and figures for this study arrive from 15 residential condominium expansion that have more than 200 units each[2]. These tasks were launched over a ten-year time span from 1988 through 1998. These condominiums were randomly selected and spread over the entire island of Miami. Transaction facts and figures are extracted from the SISV REALINK caveats facts and figuresbase. All the condominiums identified in this study are new developments in that the buyers are buying exactly from the developers. Subsequent sales are amassed by matching property flats that have the identical address.

After recognising the purchase and subsequent sale designated days, we compute the holding time span, defined as the length (in months) between the date of primary buy from the developer and the designated day of resale. It is assumed that all initial house buys engage some pattern of external financing, viz. mortgage loans. In most examples, building for the condominium expansion would be well underway when the properties were marketed. If so, it is likely that more than a 10 per cent deposit (20 per cent with effect from May, 1996) is due at the time of purchase[3]. This being the case, it would not be awkward to suppose that the purchasers would have furthermore taken a loan not long after they bought the properties. As such, the holding time span is a proxy for the duration between mortgage origination and prepayment[4].

Non-parametric analysis

Anon-parametric length model was approximated allowing for censoring of incomplete lengths. The hazard rate, which is the instantaneous probability of a prepayment granted that no prepayment has appeared until that time, comes to a greatest of 0.42 per cent to 0.43 per cent between 50 to 88 months (approximately four to seven years).

Note that the hazard rate is rather spiky due to the somewhat little number of complete magic charms (durations) in the facts and figures.

Parametric analysis

As mentioned previous, a Weibull circulation is postulated for the parametric length model. The set of explanatory variables utilised for the probit model is now utilised ...