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

A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 189 posts

Re: A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

#171

Post by patio11 »

platinumrad wrote: post #157
tptacek wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the question. Japan is intensely racist and xenophobic, probably significantly more so than the US.

Their point was that Japan is ethnically and culturally homogeneous enough that they don't feel the need to implement exclusionary zoning, regardless of how racist and xenophobic the general population is.

Japan is neither ethnically nor culturally homogenous despite an image at home or abroad regarding this; see Sugimoto’s Japanese Society if you want a book-length takedown of it.

For an example of how this affects who can live where and how where one lives affects non-residential opportunities, you can read up on burakumin (a disfavored heredity pseudo caste). Burakumin status still exposes one to highly non-trivial societal discrimination, and is primarily observable based on “Have you or yours ever lived in a burakumin neighborhood?” This makes e.g. historical maps which mark out burakumin neighborhoods into socially contentious informational hazards; Google Maps had to take them down after a (utterly well founded) fear that at least some employers and schools would cross-reference neighborhoods with current or historical applicant residential addresses and then go full Harvard University on them.

Similar observations can be made about ethnic Koreans, Japan’s rapidly growing population of long-term resident foreigners, etc.

Re: A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

#172

Post by lxmorj »

specialp wrote: post #85

I live on Long Island, and it is expensive. Schools are funded mostly through high property taxes. It is nearly impossible to get high density housing approved for working age people. The constituents want only 55+ for complexes so they can reap the school tax benefits without more students. So this in effect keeps affordable housing out as developers either build 3000+ sq foot "luxury homes" or 55+ communities.

Oh, smart move! Never thought of using that strategy to get advantaged school funding.

Re: A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

#173

Post by lhopki01 »

darksaints wrote: post #127
lhopki01 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't strictly true. A lot of the London underground was built first and then housing developed around it. Actually the tube getting to a place prompted massive development in the area. Similarly now if a new line gets created to an area in many cities you see development around it.

The tube was built outwards, not within. It was a reflection of demand for housing that already existed in quantities large enough to justify it, and was also growing at paces never seen before with no end in sight, and there was no possible way to build upward at the time . In other words, given the conditions of their time, they were building the infrastructure in response to already existing demand .

Isn't the massivly rising house prices a reflection of large demand for housing?

There were many ways to build upwards at the time but London favoured single family houses. Cities like Paris built upwards around that time. Even to this day Paris is more densly populated than New York because almost all buildings in Paris are around 7 stories rather than a very tall core surrounded by a lot of single family dwellings.

Re: A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

#174

Post by oliwarner »

maxsilver wrote: post #131
oliwarner wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Housing in Japan is culturally unique. The average house depreciates completely after just 22 years. People just don't buy used houses. It's folly to compare zoning rules when the spirit of the law is so different.

This is a big difference between the two. I'm totally ok with Japanese zoning, if we get Japanese depreciation and all housing is required to become worthless after 2 decades. However, YIMBYs only want half of that -- they want Japanese zoning, with American infinite appreciation. Which is disastrous to basically everyone who works for a living.

The property and land owners in areas like this want to flip everything for the highest possible amount of money. They have no long term interest in it remaining their back yard.

You might argue that it might become self-limiting based on what the market will bear... But looking at London, and the awful living conditions at the bottom end of the market only confirms that once you have critical mass, and people need to live somewhere, vendors and landlords can get away with murder and somebody will still chuck money at them.

Re: A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

#175

Post by oliwarner »

kcorbitt wrote: post #146
maxsilver wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a big difference between the two. I'm totally ok with Japanese zoning, if we get Japanese depreciation and all housing is required to become worthless after 2 decades. However, YIMBYs only want half of that -- they want Japanese zoning, with American infinite appreciation. Which is disastrous to basically everyone who works for a living.

> YIMBYs want [...] American infinite appreciation. I'd appreciate a source on this. Most self-identified YIMBYs I've met in San Francisco would be ecstatic if housing prices stabilized or fell – in fact that's one of their primary objectives. Vocal YIMBYs I've met are either (1) young people who don't own property, for whom the current stratospheric prices are out of reach, or (2) employers who have to convince thos…

Are these really YIMBYs? Do they own the property they want to live in (ie is it their back yard?), or are they renting nearby and want to own a nicer property?

I'm certainly not arguing that some markets need resetting, but as parent says, this isn't what the people who want this want. They'll sell progressively crappier and crappier property because that's what property markets will bear when unregulated.

The only way to depreciate without lowering quality is area decline. Sounds awful but I honestly think some places need this. If they keep growing, keep sucking in high paid jobs, the lower classes (that the upper classes need) won't be able to afford to live where they need to.

Re: A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

#176

Post by corey_moncure »

tptacek wrote: post #77
kazinator wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's right; so why would Japan have developed exclusionary zoning, when the question doesn't even arise that the vast majority your neighbors will be other than Japanese wherever you go, with the help of national policies that help keep it that way.

I don't understand the question. Japan is intensely racist and xenophobic, probably significantly more so than the US.

>Japan is intensely racist

Would you care to provide some substance to this claim? You're tarring over a hundred million people with a very nasty brush.

Re: A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

#177

Post by tptacek »

corey_moncure wrote: post #176
tptacek wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the question. Japan is intensely racist and xenophobic, probably significantly more so than the US.

>Japan is intensely racist Would you care to provide some substance to this claim? You're tarring over a hundred million people with a very nasty brush.

See below, written 10 hours before your question. There is still overt, broadly-recognized and tolerated ethnic and hereditary discrimination in Japan, not just in hiring and school admissions but in stuff as basic as housing. Japan appears to be stuck in the 1960s in terms of public policy on this issue.

Re: A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

#178

Post by MichaelSalib »

corey_moncure wrote: post #176
tptacek wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the question. Japan is intensely racist and xenophobic, probably significantly more so than the US.

>Japan is intensely racist Would you care to provide some substance to this claim? You're tarring over a hundred million people with a very nasty brush.

Japan is intensely racist. My spouse lived there for a year. When she went about her business outside, small children who saw her would literally burst into tears screaming to their parents about gaijin.

Re: A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

#179

Post by burlesona »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #90
pcwalton wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AB 2923, which overrides local zoning in order to allow BART to develop on its parking lots, recently passed both houses in California, despite NIMBY objections. And the Housing Accountability Act, which NIMBYs loathe, has long been law (and was even strengthened relatively recently). Renters are a growing political force.

> Renters are a growing political force. Renters (often under rent control) are NIMBYs as well, don't understand or are convinced that supply and demand don't apply to housing.

Rent control is almost exclusive to California and New York. Ref: http://www.landlord.com/rent_control_laws_by_state.htm

Re: A proposal to roll back exclusionary zoning would make housing more affordable

#180

Post by burlesona »

TomMckenny wrote: post #137
burlesona wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Federal zoning would be really difficult to get done constitutionally, but state level zoning wouldn’t be as hard and would have most of the same benefits, ie. reducing the power the nimbys. However there’s no reason to think that would fix it all, transportation planning, design, and funding is almost entirely a state and federal affair, and the nimbys still torpedo all sorts of things that would be great for the re…

>To some extent though, that’s a feature of democracy, not a bug Because of strategic (cynical?) choices over how voter registration is implement, tenants have far less power at the polls.

Yeah I know, it’s far from perfect. This is the fundamental problem with democracy, you get power blocs that can turn out 51% of a vote and then legislate things that aren’t good for everyone else.

But my point is that, suppose you are a low income neighborhood and the state naturally wants to blow up your houses to put in a freeway — because they know they can’t get it put through the rich neighborhoods. Shouldn’t you still have the right to fight that?

Ex: https://www.strongtowns.org/shreveport/

Post reply on HN