121–130 of 299 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s $2M for the land, not the house.
Are you actually able to demolish the house?
Otherwise, if it's still zoned for a single family home, then the owner of the land has the right to deconstruct and construct a single family home, per the updated building codes and whatnot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“immiserate other people who want to live there“ Perhaps true, but what right do the people who don’t live in his neighborhood but want to have the right to immiserate the people who already live there by building high density blocks? Why do you not recommend those people to look for acreage in remote areas?
Building apartments is not a pox on a community. In fact, the most valuable real estate on the planet has lots of apartments. And are you seriously asking why people may want to live someplace for reasons other than it being an undistinguished suburb? School, weather, jobs, community?
This is an opinion which is not universally agreed with.
> are you seriously asking why people may want to live someplace for reasons other than it being an undistinguished suburb? School, weather, jobs, community?
No. If you look at the comment you are replying to, you’ll see that the question I asked was:
> what right do the people who don’t live in his neighborhood but want to have the right to immiserate the people who already live there by building high density blocks?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're being very unfair here. When you choose a place to live you are not only choosing the structure in which you reside, you are choosing the surrounding environment as well. People's desire to keep the environment from changing too much extends beyond financial interests. I live in a quiet suburban neighborhood, and I want it to remain a quiet suburban neighborhood even if the value of my house drops. In fact, I…
Unfortunately (for you), your desire for a quiet suburban neighborhood should not give you the ability to immiserate other people who want to live there by prohibiting the construction of homes for them. Do you value your quiet suburban neighborhood enough to buy and pay property taxes on the whole block or subdivision? If not, I recommend you look for estates on acreage in remote areas.
People focus on the supply side, which is important, but has anyone looked at the demand side? How do people have so much money to drive up these prices? I grew up in an 1,100 square foot house, built in 1950, my parents bought for $175,000 in 1989. Today Redfin has it at $660,000. Its a drab house in a drab suburb of DC. It's no boom town--the population of the town has grown just 10% in 30 years. But everyone just…
The access to cheap credit drives up the price of the underlying asset. You can see it in auto loans, where the average price of a new vehicle has ballooned to over $40,000 in recent years while loan payment periods stretch to 5, 6 and even 7 years. Part of the increase is no doubt because new cars are getting larger, safer, and more technologically complex — but I think that part of it is that auto-makers have less…
easy access to credit may have increased the average price paid for a new vehicle (by shifting buyers up-market), but unlike in the case of housing, this does not deprive buyers of the chance to buy a cheap car. people buying bmws on 84 month loans doesn't mean you can't get a brand new versa for $15k OTD.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you actually able to demolish the house?
The only reason one wouldn't be able to demolish the house in the US is if it was designated a historical landmark, that I know of. Otherwise, if it's still zoned for a single family home, then the owner of the land has the right to deconstruct and construct a single family home, per the updated building codes and whatnot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's handy to say "nowhere is building" but it's not really supported by the data. Look at Dallas and Houston compared to San Francisco. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=B6Tc
Texas is also a good example of that density only matters if there is a land scarcity problem. There are areas in Canada where building massive towers has been premature and also led to increase in costs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only reason one wouldn't be able to demolish the house in the US is if it was designated a historical landmark, that I know of. Otherwise, if it's still zoned for a single family home, then the owner of the land has the right to deconstruct and construct a single family home, per the updated building codes and whatnot.
It doesn't sound like you've ever been to California at all.
I’ve been looking at housing prices periodically and it’s discouraging to find people wanting 200k-300k for mid-century houses in places you’d never find another job if the telecommuting trend ever reversed and so far it is just a trend driven by forced circumstances. Companies may be all for remote working while the alternative is shutting down, but what happens after the pandemic? Does everyone get recalled to the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really don't understand your both sides argument. One side takes advantage of the fact that zoning is a local matter to advantage incumbents at huge expense to society at large. It also creates the bureaucratic infrastructure that favors large developers who can pay bribes informally (literal bribes) or formally (impact fees). The other side is all future residents who might want to live in a quadplex where a SFH e…
> huge expense to society at large. I'm not aware of this. I thought it was a huge expense to people who wanted to move to an area at any price, and the absence of a huge windfall to people who want to build massive apartment buildings in neighborhoods where the vast majority of the residents don't want them.