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

Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

ggwash.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 185 posts

Re: Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

#91

Post by bushbaba »

eptcyka wrote: post #38
zbrozek wrote: post #23

Let's say I'm a developer and there's unmet demand at all price points. Obviously I build the highest-margin product until I've satisfied that demand. Then I move on to the second-highest-margin product until I've satisfied that demand. Anywhere that demand across the spectrum dramatically outstrips production capacity (e.g., anywhere in the Bay Area, where NIMBYism has made it nigh-impossible to build anything) what…

It'd be perfectly reasonable to mandate that for one high value luxury house, a developer has to build a certain number of affordable homes. I guess it'd be the nimbys that would try and prohibit such legislation.

If there’s a shortage of luxury housing. The wealthier demographics will buy cheaper housing stock displacing middle and low income. This is what happened in California.

Re: Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

#92

Post by JamesBarney »

eptcyka wrote: post #38
zbrozek wrote: post #23

Let's say I'm a developer and there's unmet demand at all price points. Obviously I build the highest-margin product until I've satisfied that demand. Then I move on to the second-highest-margin product until I've satisfied that demand. Anywhere that demand across the spectrum dramatically outstrips production capacity (e.g., anywhere in the Bay Area, where NIMBYism has made it nigh-impossible to build anything) what…

It'd be perfectly reasonable to mandate that for one high value luxury house, a developer has to build a certain number of affordable homes. I guess it'd be the nimbys that would try and prohibit such legislation.

This is way more complicated than you think. How do you define what a luxury house is, how do you define an affordable house, can the affordable house be sold to anyone, where does the affordable house need to be built?

Or we could simply make it legal and cheaper to build denser housing.

Re: Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

#93

Post by w-j-w »

lol768 wrote: post #68
mooreds wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is this a thing in the United States? If not, why not? So local entities govern building in the USA. I know that where I live, Boulder, has a requirement for affordable housing to be built in any new development, but also allows for the developer to pay cash in lieu of building the affordable housing. The cash is then used by other entities (non-profits, the city) to build affordable housing. More here: https://bou…

Is there any appetite for something at the federal level, or would this be seen as an unwelcome intervention for something that should be devolved to state level? It's great that one city in Colorado has done something (and I'm sure it's not the only locality), but I can't help think that this sort of governance must lead to a ton of fragmentation in regulations.

No post body was provided.

Re: Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

#94

Post by zaptheimpaler »

How did this monster trashfire of zoning laws even come to life? At this point we could probably suspend every zoning law in existence at least for a few years and end up in a better situation.

In a sane market when a good (housing) is extremely scarce and valuable, people make more of it and naturally compete away the profits to bring the price comes down.

Re: Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

#95

Post by JamesBarney »

bushbaba wrote: post #91
eptcyka wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd be perfectly reasonable to mandate that for one high value luxury house, a developer has to build a certain number of affordable homes. I guess it'd be the nimbys that would try and prohibit such legislation.

If there’s a shortage of luxury housing. The wealthier demographics will buy cheaper housing stock displacing middle and low income. This is what happened in California.

Exactly, if you banned car companies from making more than 100,000 cars a year, you'd soon find that only rich people owned cars and all manufactured cars were luxury cars.

Then if you banned them from making luxury cars you'd still find that the rich bought all the new cars.

The fundamental fix is let car companies build more cars.

Re: Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

#96

Post by nopenopenopeno »

actionablefiber wrote: post #29
nopenopenopeno wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This make excellent sense, and the only solution would necessitate public transportation. Unsurprisingly, whether it’s public housing or public transportation, there really is no way around investing in public infrastructure if you want to have a healthy society.

Public transportation is one piece of the puzzle. Cities that are truly great for car-free living are also walkable and cyclable, and have dedicated infrastructure to this end. Public transit gets you part-way there, since unlike cars, public transit, even buses, do not really make the streets dangerous and hostile the way that individual transport vehicles do. Still, it's important to remember that public transit is…

It’s the politically difficult, or more often politically impossible, part of the puzzle.

Re: Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

#97

Post by caymanjim »

nemo44x wrote: post #50
eptcyka wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd be perfectly reasonable to mandate that for one high value luxury house, a developer has to build a certain number of affordable homes. I guess it'd be the nimbys that would try and prohibit such legislation.

You’re forcing private businesses to take on contracts that they may not want. Totally unreasonable. The only way to do this is to zone things certain ways. For instance, pass a law that says any building in a certain area needs to be a certain height and contain n% affordable units.

> You’re forcing private businesses to take on contracts that they may not want. Totally unreasonable.

Regardless of how you feel about this, it can and does happen all the time. New residential highrises in Manhattan don't get approved unless they have a percentage of low-income units.

Re: Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

#98

Post by [deleted] »

eptcyka wrote: post #38
zbrozek wrote: post #23

Let's say I'm a developer and there's unmet demand at all price points. Obviously I build the highest-margin product until I've satisfied that demand. Then I move on to the second-highest-margin product until I've satisfied that demand. Anywhere that demand across the spectrum dramatically outstrips production capacity (e.g., anywhere in the Bay Area, where NIMBYism has made it nigh-impossible to build anything) what…

It'd be perfectly reasonable to mandate that for one high value luxury house, a developer has to build a certain number of affordable homes. I guess it'd be the nimbys that would try and prohibit such legislation.

[deleted]

Re: Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

#99

Post by renewiltord »

lol768 wrote: post #37

Points #3 and #4 seem to be arguing that regulation is the problem here. In the UK, developers aren't allowed to build a new development (of >5 [some areas] or >10 dwellings [everywhere]) without providing sufficient affordable housing. This is usually a mixture of shared ownership properties and affordable rent properties (which must be no more than 80% of market rent, incl charges) which must be built alongside the…

Experts say that helmets will improve crash outcomes in passenger cars. Do you advocate for mandatory helmeting in passenger cars?

Re: Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018)

#100

Post by renewiltord »

jimmaswell wrote: post #14
CalRobert wrote: post #3

There's a great reddit thread exploring much the same issues at https://www.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/6lvwh4/im_an_ar... Turns out, requiring little houses for cars be added on to every house for people gets expensive.

Quality of life is expensive, doesn't mean it's not worth it. Not that there shouldn't be some allowances for denser apartment buildings.

Whether it's worth it or not should be decided by the people buying, not by some bureaucrat.
Post reply on HN