Oakland shows how to expand housing supply: tell developers they can build homes
1–10 of 326 posts
Re: Oakland shows how to expand housing supply: tell developers they can build homes
#2They forget the human cost. Increasing density decreases quality of life. The people are the product of the cities in the commercial sense. The well being of the people is lost in the drive for infinite growth.
Re: Oakland shows how to expand housing supply: tell developers they can build homes
#3They forget the human cost. Increasing density decreases quality of life. The people are the product of the cities in the commercial sense. The well being of the people is lost in the drive for infinite growth.
Not being able to afford a house decreases quality of life infinitely more than some increased density.
Re: Oakland shows how to expand housing supply: tell developers they can build homes
#4They forget the human cost. Increasing density decreases quality of life. The people are the product of the cities in the commercial sense. The well being of the people is lost in the drive for infinite growth.
You’re tone deaf. CA is in the midst of their worst homeless crisis ever. Density is a long ways behind my concerns for the middle-class homeless whom have been priced out of any meaningful housing options.
Re: Oakland shows how to expand housing supply: tell developers they can build homes
#5The whole topic of conversation around housing affordability is backwards. Specifically, housing affordability is 100%, entirely, a problem of artificial constraints on supply by city councils.
(1) Americans consider housing to be an investment. An investment is only an investment if you expect a positive return over time. We generally want that investment to match or exceed inflation.
(2) That's antithetical to the idea of affordable housing. It's either affordable or an expensive, appreciating asset. It literally cannot be both at the same time. The only reason it's worked thus far is the broad-based expansion of the US economy and of specific population centers like SF has masked the problem for many, many years. Especially in conjunction with 30-year mortgages requiring 2% down. That's some serious leverage.
We don't talk about the lack of affordable AAPL shares do we? That's insane, it's an investment, we want it to go up. The less affordable, the better!
(3) Renters tend to be younger, transient and not vote. Owners tend to be older, wealthier, have deep roots in the community, and vote their asses off. They also aren't huge fans of change. They vote their interests: whatever keeps their, on average, largest investment performing well.
If you want cheap housing forget rent control. Allow developers to build up as high as the infrastructure can sustain. Allow smaller units, too, micro-apartments like whatever that place is on Mission, Panoramic. It's time to re-think the idea of housing as an "investment." We need to re-focus the narrative to make housing much more utilitarian.
This is reflected in major housing markets around the world, like Tokyo. They don't consider housing an investment, and they have some of the most affordable housing in any major metro in the world. [1]
[1] https://www.vox.com/2016/8/8/12390048/san-francisco-housing-...
Re: Oakland shows how to expand housing supply: tell developers they can build homes
#6They forget the human cost. Increasing density decreases quality of life. The people are the product of the cities in the commercial sense. The well being of the people is lost in the drive for infinite growth.
Don’t many people love cities specifically because of density and the diversity of opportunities that usually follows?
Re: Oakland shows how to expand housing supply: tell developers they can build homes
#7They forget the human cost. Increasing density decreases quality of life. The people are the product of the cities in the commercial sense. The well being of the people is lost in the drive for infinite growth.
Not being able to afford a house decreases quality of life infinitely more than some increased density.
If you can't afford a house there maybe you should consider moving somewhere more affordable.
Re: Oakland shows how to expand housing supply: tell developers they can build homes
#8See also: Friday's “Don’t Blame Tech Bros for the Housing Crisis” column:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/30/opinion/sunday/housing-cr...
Re: Oakland shows how to expand housing supply: tell developers they can build homes
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not being able to afford a house decreases quality of life infinitely more than some increased density.
If you can't afford a house there maybe you should consider moving somewhere more affordable.
Different strokes for different folks. Some people like living in dense cities. No reason not to build for them if they apparently enjoy it.
Re: Oakland shows how to expand housing supply: tell developers they can build homes
#10They forget the human cost. Increasing density decreases quality of life. The people are the product of the cities in the commercial sense. The well being of the people is lost in the drive for infinite growth.
Don’t many people love cities specifically because of density and the diversity of opportunities that usually follows?
There's a trade-off though, if it comes at the cost of smaller and worse living accomodation for themselves. And you have to be careful that the transport and other infrastructure can keep up. Transport in particular always seems to get ignored.