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

Lawsuits Block Thousands of Seattle Homes, $39M for Affordable Housing

theurbanist.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 165 posts

Re: Lawsuits Block Thousands of Seattle Homes, $39M for Affordable Housing

#51

Post by lbarrow »

lvl102 wrote: post #34

I am just curious why we are allowing foreigners to buy homes in the US when we have a housing crisis. Here in New England, Chinese/Russians came in and started buying homes in the past two decades. Not only that, we end up educating their children for free in our public schools. Why? They don’t even let our companies operate in their country. Edit: they should not be able to invest in real estate in the US if US cit…

I would simply avoid having a housing crisis by allowing people to build more housing. Seems pretty win-win to me.

Re: Lawsuits Block Thousands of Seattle Homes, $39M for Affordable Housing

#52

Post by noirbot »

hackerlight wrote: post #36
cwkoss wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea is that the margins are better on luxury houses/apts/condos (less plumbing per sq ft, etc), so developers are incentivized to build at lower-density than is optimal for alleviating housing supply issues.

The concept of a "luxury apartment" is an oxymoron. It's a rhetorical tool used by NIMBYs. Those apartments that get labelled this way are barely sufficient to fit a family and cost less than the median house, yet the median house would never be labelled a "luxury house".

How does that not make sense? It's totally possible to have an apartment that's luxurious. Luxury doesn't mean "large" - look at luxury cars, or watches. Most other major luxury products are almost defined by how expensive they are and how they're not meant for families. Luxury is defined by it being more expensive and presumably nicer to be in than the average thing it's competing with. A luxury apartment isn't trying to be a house, any more than a luxury house is trying to be a hotel.

That's not to say that most "luxury" apartments would actually qualify as "luxury" in the sense of most other luxury goods, but they are generally nicer than other apartments in the area, or at least newer.

Re: Lawsuits Block Thousands of Seattle Homes, $39M for Affordable Housing

#53

Post by gameman144 »

I'm a big fan of the work some cities have done in zoning "urban villages", and as a homeowner who's also aware of the need for more housing, these strike a pretty reasonable compromise in my mind.

Essentially, pick some areas that are in-demand, have reasonable transit amenities, and are underbuilt. Zone them to be able to build slightly more dense housing. Then as those villages grow more, expand the radius outward and allow more density in the core areas.

I think it's reasonable to not want a highrise next to your house, but a two-story apartment building is easier to digest. Likewise, if you buy a house in one of these urban villages, you're pricing in the reality that something big might be built right next to you.

The radius-outward approach lets buyers put their money where their mouth is: if they never want any increases in density near them, then they can pay to be far from these existing villages. If in the future different locations become desirable for density, the slow radial-out buildup of zoned villages lets homeowners adapt reasonably well.

Re: Lawsuits Block Thousands of Seattle Homes, $39M for Affordable Housing

#54

Post by lazyasciiart »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #5
rcpt wrote: post #3

Why don't the people who care about their view simply build a taller tower?

This is no different than people in HOAs who try to block solar on the rooftops of their neighbors, or those blocking utility scale solar in their community on land they don’t own, out of aesthetics or their feelings. You can’t negotiate with them, you can only persevere (and hopefully you’re resourced to do so).

Washington addressed this by passing a law that solar panels cannot be prevented by a HOA.

Re: Lawsuits Block Thousands of Seattle Homes, $39M for Affordable Housing

#55

Post by zip1234 »

jamestimmins wrote: post #21
jackmott42 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is amazing how one person can have a view that developers have all the power and can never be stopped. Others have the view that NIMBY's have all the power and nothing can get developed. Yet somehow everything ends up paved over with a high rise on it eventually, like it or not.

This is patently untrue. Cities like LA and SF should have high rises everywhere, but instead they have 1 story homes from 1955 selling for $2 million.

They don’t even need high rises—change the 1 story 800sq foot bungalow into a 2 story 4 plex and all the units can have more living space than the original and 4x more people can live somewhere—-but that is banned in most places even

Re: Lawsuits Block Thousands of Seattle Homes, $39M for Affordable Housing

#56

Post by WaxProlix »

nostromo wrote: post #39
yellow_postit wrote: post #4

Does any city have a well functioning design review process or are they all captured by incumbents to slow down development?

Despite the all complaining you'll see on the Urbanist, Seattle's process is pretty good for a big city -- which is probably why it's been one of the fastest growing prior to the Covid exodus from downtown. Seattle has recently had more cranes deployed than any other metro in the US, despite being a much smaller city -- not exactly the bane of the YIMBY. Design review can slow things down, sure, but they eventually d…

> like allowing duplexes or fourplexes in single-family neighborhoods

This is such a middle of the road, easy, low-drawback compromise that I can't believe it's not happened already.

Re: Lawsuits Block Thousands of Seattle Homes, $39M for Affordable Housing

#57

Post by lvl102 »

hackerlight wrote: post #41
lvl102 wrote: post #34

I am just curious why we are allowing foreigners to buy homes in the US when we have a housing crisis. Here in New England, Chinese/Russians came in and started buying homes in the past two decades. Not only that, we end up educating their children for free in our public schools. Why? They don’t even let our companies operate in their country. Edit: they should not be able to invest in real estate in the US if US cit…

You could just choose to not have a housing crisis, you know? It's not the foreigners fault that you insist on outlawing construction.

I would not say anything if they allowed US citizens to do the same in their country.

Re: Lawsuits Block Thousands of Seattle Homes, $39M for Affordable Housing

#58

Post by burnished »

lvl102 wrote: post #34

I am just curious why we are allowing foreigners to buy homes in the US when we have a housing crisis. Here in New England, Chinese/Russians came in and started buying homes in the past two decades. Not only that, we end up educating their children for free in our public schools. Why? They don’t even let our companies operate in their country. Edit: they should not be able to invest in real estate in the US if US cit…

You had me until you started complaining about educating children. Who cares where they come from? Feed 'em and learn 'em.

Re: Lawsuits Block Thousands of Seattle Homes, $39M for Affordable Housing

#59

Post by jamestimmins »

jandrese wrote: post #27
jamestimmins wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is patently untrue. Cities like LA and SF should have high rises everywhere, but instead they have 1 story homes from 1955 selling for $2 million.

LA and SF seem trapped by their design. Sure they need way higher density, but that would require transit that handles density better than cars on a road. But in order to build high capacity transit they want people to prove that it would be fully utilized and that won't be true if you're servicing areas that are currently all single family homes. So high density housing can't be build because there is no transit, an…

Yes and no. That's certainly a factor, but outside of work, people also tend to stay pretty close to their neighborhoods (I've been able to walk to my grocery store in the last 3 neighborhoods I've lived in). There's also been substantial work to build new mass transit, but housing hasn't increased substantially around the transit stops.

Edit: I'm referring to LA. My impression is SF is small enough that this isn't a big issue.

Post reply on HN