Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

More evidence of rent declines in Portland

cityobservatory.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 46 posts

Re: More evidence of rent declines in Portland

#31

Post by newbear »

carlivar wrote: post #30
fapjacks wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Property management companies in the San Diego area are absolutely shit-awful and I've thought about starting a nation-wide property management company myself. There's just no way I could be any worse than what's out there.

I wonder what you'd need to charge? Lots of awful property mgmt companies out there because it cuts into property owner's profits to pay more for a better one. If demand is high, what's the motivation for the owner? I suspect they mostly go with the lowest bidder.

Is there away to make owners responsible? In my eyes they should be - they are the 'owners' afterall.

Re: More evidence of rent declines in Portland

#32

Post by gigatexal »

It’s a shitty time to be a landlord though, one without deep pockets anyway: I just have a home that I bought years ago that when I got married a year later thought I’d supplement my new family’s income with some rent. Nothing major since I have a mortgage and a high interest rate and all that. But it was fine. I treated my tenants well, came rushing in to fix anything, didn’t charge late fees, etc. then the Portland city council run by a woman who has never owned a home passes an ordinance that makes it nigh to impossible to raise rents (caps them at 10%) and even if someone is on a month to month lease they get 90 days notice (totally cool with that) and a stipend to pay for their next place between 1800 and almost 5 grand based on length of stay. (Not cool!).

Re: More evidence of rent declines in Portland

#33

Post by stevenwoo »

gigatexal wrote: post #32

It’s a shitty time to be a landlord though, one without deep pockets anyway: I just have a home that I bought years ago that when I got married a year later thought I’d supplement my new family’s income with some rent. Nothing major since I have a mortgage and a high interest rate and all that. But it was fine. I treated my tenants well, came rushing in to fix anything, didn’t charge late fees, etc. then the Portland…

This article says if you only rent one home, the new tenant protections don't apply. https://www.portlandmercury.com/news/2018/01/24/19626335/por...

Re: More evidence of rent declines in Portland

#34

Post by SwellJoe »

jmknoll wrote: post #13
coolspot wrote: post #2

I think controversy is not that building more has no effect on rent prices - of course more supply drives prices down. It is more about whether we want to live in over-populated ant-farms or want to pay premium for less dense living.

"Over-populated ant farms" is a pretty strong phrase, and is usually more the result of bad policy than density in and of itself. San Francisco has about 6000 people/square km, and feels crowded. Paris has about 20,000 people/square km, and to me feels less crowded. In Paris, they've taken the general development policy of building everything up to 6-8 stories, with commercial on the ground floor and residential abov…

The US is, by and large, absolutely insane in how it plans cities. "Mixed use" is a total novelty in most cities...only now being considered for a small percentage of development. Most cities still have city plans and zoning that enforce huge suburban neighborhoods with no commercial development within them. It leads to disastrously bad neighborhoods with disastrously bad traffic going into and out of the places where people are doing things like have jobs or shop. Even hip/progressive cities are this way. It's really a big deal when a development happens that steps out of it, and people in surrounding housing usually raise holy hell to keep it from happening.

Americans are mostly goddamned idiots who hate nice things, is what I'm trying to say. (And, have the nerve to complain about traffic in the same breath as demanding nothing other than single-family homes be allowed within miles of their single-family home.)

Re: More evidence of rent declines in Portland

#35

Post by gt_ »

telchar wrote: post #24
gt_ wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would do them some good to be be more homeless epidemic conscious. Any political gesture Portland could collectively be proud of is undermined by it’s failure to show concern for the members of it’s own society.

Something that would be worth considering in homelessness discussion re: Portland, SF, etc is how many of these people are city dwellers that became homeless versus already-homeless people who gravitated toward (or were shipped to) the city? The former is a reflection on the city, but in my opinion the latter is less a reflection on the city than it is of the nation. If I become homeless and move out to Portland, is…

I will elaborate:

I lived in Portland until approximately 2 years ago, close to the river. I volunteered on one occasion with some activists at this event: https://www.google.com/amp/s/articles.oregonlive.com/portlan...

I am no saint. It was a short walk from my office. But the whole thing was disgusting, heartbreaking. This was a bad situation on many fronts, and nothing like a solution on any side, but the idea was to get cyclists who enjoyed this nature path to stop complaining. This is the gist of how the city has dealt with the problem for many years. I was pleased to see someone else on HN mention it but I wasn’t surprised. It’s hard to miss on a visit. I lived there for 8 years. Of course some of the homeless come from other places but an enormous amount of them come from Portland. I have seen children sleeping on cardboard under Morrison bridge one night. 2 children with their parents. They were not there for long only because they were strategically camping in a very lit spot at a busy traffic light. But my point is the city is very irresponsible in their dealings with the problem. The city only cares about new development and bringing more wealthy folk to town. The loopholes they allow landlords to use for building-wide evictions are supposedly part of what has exacerbated the problem. I do not know all the specifics.

Re: More evidence of rent declines in Portland

#36

Post by usrusr »

com2kid wrote: post #9
coolspot wrote: post #2

I think controversy is not that building more has no effect on rent prices - of course more supply drives prices down. It is more about whether we want to live in over-populated ant-farms or want to pay premium for less dense living.

> It is more about whether we want to live in over-populated ant-farms or want to pay premium for less dense living. You are forgetting all the people, such as myself, who are willing to pay a premium for more dense living. I love being able to walk everywhere.

Density does not necessarily bring walkability. You can see aging "highrise suburbs" all over Europe, a well-intended experiment to make living close to nature accessible to the masses. They rarely have more than a badly serviced bus stop in walkable distance.

This is what many people think of when they hear density.

Re: More evidence of rent declines in Portland

#37

Post by s2g »

SwellJoe wrote: post #34
jmknoll wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Over-populated ant farms" is a pretty strong phrase, and is usually more the result of bad policy than density in and of itself. San Francisco has about 6000 people/square km, and feels crowded. Paris has about 20,000 people/square km, and to me feels less crowded. In Paris, they've taken the general development policy of building everything up to 6-8 stories, with commercial on the ground floor and residential abov…

The US is, by and large, absolutely insane in how it plans cities. "Mixed use" is a total novelty in most cities...only now being considered for a small percentage of development. Most cities still have city plans and zoning that enforce huge suburban neighborhoods with no commercial development within them. It leads to disastrously bad neighborhoods with disastrously bad traffic going into and out of the places wher…

> Americans are mostly goddamned idiots who hate nice things

> their single-family home

maybe they just like single family homes.

Re: More evidence of rent declines in Portland

#38

Post by gigatexal »

stevenwoo wrote: post #33
gigatexal wrote: post #32

It’s a shitty time to be a landlord though, one without deep pockets anyway: I just have a home that I bought years ago that when I got married a year later thought I’d supplement my new family’s income with some rent. Nothing major since I have a mortgage and a high interest rate and all that. But it was fine. I treated my tenants well, came rushing in to fix anything, didn’t charge late fees, etc. then the Portland…

This article says if you only rent one home, the new tenant protections don't apply. https://www.portlandmercury.com/news/2018/01/24/19626335/por...

Interesting. That’s not how I read the law but thanks. I’ll look more into it.

Re: More evidence of rent declines in Portland

#39

Post by TheAdamAndChe »

gigatexal wrote: post #32

It’s a shitty time to be a landlord though, one without deep pockets anyway: I just have a home that I bought years ago that when I got married a year later thought I’d supplement my new family’s income with some rent. Nothing major since I have a mortgage and a high interest rate and all that. But it was fine. I treated my tenants well, came rushing in to fix anything, didn’t charge late fees, etc. then the Portland…

10% annual rent increase is a lot, and is well above inflation for most areas. Is the stipend only required if you kick them out? If that's the case, then it makes sense IMO. Renters are people and need stable housing.

Re: More evidence of rent declines in Portland

#40

Post by ikeyany »

newbear wrote: post #23

Just spent a month looking for a studio or one bedroom below $1200. Plenty of ok options and a couple better than ok. All apartments came with the threat of a scary property management company. Finally we found an artsy owner with an attic and After waiting two weeks for our background check to pass for a studio we were approved but had already signed a lease for he attic. Pretty stressful process. Mostly because the…

The industry is based on making money off people who need a home...is there really any room for ethics?
Post reply on HN