Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings • Hacker News Board

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#391

Post by eliasmacpherson » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:17 PM UTC

ProfessorLayton wrote: post #390

eliasmacpherson wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people sit on empty homes then, in the face of rising supply of luxury homes? The demand side of the equation is unable to finance a purchase. The wealthy can wait until they get the gains they want. There's nothing circular about it.

They're sitting on empty homes because there's not enough supply. Without solving the supply issue the wealthy will keep using residential real estate for investment purposes. The wealthy aren't waiting around to buy/sell houses per se, they're trying to get a maximum return on investment. Adding enough supply so that housing isn't an investment vehicle removes those incentives.

The wealthy will not solve the supply issue of luxury apartments as they do not want to flood the market, the parent I responded to initially mentions this.

Who will add luxury apartments or affordable apartments except for the already wealthy? Who has the incentive to build enough luxury apartments, to stop housing behaving as an investment vehicle?

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#392

Post by SantalBlush » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:40 PM UTC

loco5niner wrote: post #368

SantalBlush wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll take correctness over thoughtful or interesting. Maybe I don't fit in here.

Oh, I like correctness too. Are you correct? I don't know; you just said something rude and didn't back up your assertion. As far as fitting in here, have you read the guidelines? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html >In Comments >Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. >Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive…

Yes, I've read them. You should probably calm down and maybe take a break from social media.

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#393

Post by ProfessorLayton » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:43 PM UTC

eliasmacpherson wrote: post #391

ProfessorLayton wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're sitting on empty homes because there's not enough supply. Without solving the supply issue the wealthy will keep using residential real estate for investment purposes. The wealthy aren't waiting around to buy/sell houses per se, they're trying to get a maximum return on investment. Adding enough supply so that housing isn't an investment vehicle removes those incentives.

The wealthy will not solve the supply issue of luxury apartments as they do not want to flood the market, the parent I responded to initially mentions this. Who will add luxury apartments or affordable apartments except for the already wealthy? Who has the incentive to build enough luxury apartments, to stop housing behaving as an investment vehicle?

"The wealthy" are only partially contributing to the housing crunch. The majority of home purchases are not made strictly for investment purposes even if it does happen. All types of housing stock is needed, not just luxury — The reason luxury is what's getting built is because those are the projects that "pencil out" due to high costs.

There are many many factors that are contributing to high costs like euclidean zoning that took off when the US had less than half of its current population. It's literally illegal to build multifamily housing in vast swaths of the US.

It's very clear that some sort of housing reform is going to be needed, as overly restrictive zoning, suburban sprawl, and it's associated housing costs have become unsustainable.

This isn't some fantasy either, Japan has very reasonable zoning and housing is generally not an investment vehicle there. Sure there's other contributing factors like a declining population, but it all leads back to supply and demand!

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#394

Post by rr808 » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 10:21 PM UTC

fader wrote: post #329

rr808 wrote: post #305

Why would you want to live downtown though? Previously downtown living was attractive because of the short walk to the office. If you're WFH you might as well live somewhere nice.

I don't understand the extremely vocal hate for cities that comes up constantly on HN. I love living in the city. I can walk to two different movie theaters, two grocery stores, a huge number of restaurants and stores, and a number of my friends' houses within 15 minutes. I can hop on a bus or the subway and expand that even more. I don't have to waste half a day every weekend mowing a pointless lawn or trimming tree…

I love living in the city too, but I work in the office 5 days a week. If I didn't have an office I would be in a smaller city in a nicer part of the world.

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#395

Post by ghaff » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 10:52 PM UTC

xyzelement wrote: post #389

lovich wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s the place where shit is though, even beyond work. My wife and I moved out of Boston due to the pricing, but if we could afford it while maintaining our current savings rate we’d move back in a heartbeat even though we both have remote jobs. The density allows for so many choices in food and entertainment that you can’t get in the suburbs or countryside. And that’s without even accounting for the lack of needing…

Sure, but it doesn't sound like you have kids (yet) based on how you are describing it. Sorry if that's a wrong assumption. I totally get how at the period of life before you have kids, the city has advantages but once you have kids that formula flips quite a bit (eg: you care about access to Thai food less, while the backyard starts to matter a lot.) To put it in the terms of my up-thread post - that still sounds li…

I don't have kids. But still appreciate the quiet/space of the exurb and going into town for the theater is still not that big a deal. And I don't really eat out a lot if I'm not traveling. So, yeah, not a lot of interest in living in the city and would probably need a car for weekend activities, etc. anyway (which most of my urban friends have anyway).

I could afford to live in the city if I wanted to but I choose not to.

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#396

Post by FooBarBizBazz » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 11:41 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #339

FooBarBizBazz wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven't you seen all those hip buildings with high ceilings and exposed brick? They used to be factories and warehouses. Many of them are from a time of much sturdier construction. If the alternative is balloon-frame Mc-residential, then you want to renovate the old brick mill.

Those buildings look like crap. Hardly the kind of place where I would want to live or work if I had any choice.

Weird. I mean, when you criticized concrete I could see that as a complaint about brutalism, and I'd have agreed.

But if you're talking about buildings from the 19th or the first half of the 20th century, normally there's something good about them, IMO.

"De gustibus non est disputandum", of course.

Now I'm wondering what the better alternative is, though. Naturally good things can be done in many styles (there are also good modern contemporary and minimalist buildings).

I just am not a huge fan of this mixture of balloon framing, sheet rock, and cladding, that you see a lot of. It's probably better than brick or masonry for earthquakes, but apart from that it just seems flimsy. Or, consider your typical strip mall or big box store. What's to recommend them? It'd be a shame to knock something down if that's what's going to get built in its place.

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#397

Post by xyzelement » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 2:09 AM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #395

xyzelement wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but it doesn't sound like you have kids (yet) based on how you are describing it. Sorry if that's a wrong assumption. I totally get how at the period of life before you have kids, the city has advantages but once you have kids that formula flips quite a bit (eg: you care about access to Thai food less, while the backyard starts to matter a lot.) To put it in the terms of my up-thread post - that still sounds li…

I don't have kids. But still appreciate the quiet/space of the exurb and going into town for the theater is still not that big a deal. And I don't really eat out a lot if I'm not traveling. So, yeah, not a lot of interest in living in the city and would probably need a car for weekend activities, etc. anyway (which most of my urban friends have anyway). I could afford to live in the city if I wanted to but I choose n…

Now you are all set to have a buncha kids :)

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#398

Post by lovich » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 2:32 AM UTC

xyzelement wrote: post #389

lovich wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s the place where shit is though, even beyond work. My wife and I moved out of Boston due to the pricing, but if we could afford it while maintaining our current savings rate we’d move back in a heartbeat even though we both have remote jobs. The density allows for so many choices in food and entertainment that you can’t get in the suburbs or countryside. And that’s without even accounting for the lack of needing…

Sure, but it doesn't sound like you have kids (yet) based on how you are describing it. Sorry if that's a wrong assumption. I totally get how at the period of life before you have kids, the city has advantages but once you have kids that formula flips quite a bit (eg: you care about access to Thai food less, while the backyard starts to matter a lot.) To put it in the terms of my up-thread post - that still sounds li…

I’m late 30s. You’re right about not having kids but that’s because I don’t want any. Even if I did though, I’d be looking at moving to an area with a good school system, and those areas are just as expensive as living in a city with multiple school options, ex: brookline

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#399

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 6:15 AM UTC

fader wrote: post #329

rr808 wrote: post #305

Why would you want to live downtown though? Previously downtown living was attractive because of the short walk to the office. If you're WFH you might as well live somewhere nice.

I don't understand the extremely vocal hate for cities that comes up constantly on HN. I love living in the city. I can walk to two different movie theaters, two grocery stores, a huge number of restaurants and stores, and a number of my friends' houses within 15 minutes. I can hop on a bus or the subway and expand that even more. I don't have to waste half a day every weekend mowing a pointless lawn or trimming tree…

[deleted]

Re: Boston mayor announces residential conversion program for office buildings

#400

Post by eliasmacpherson » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 6:53 AM UTC

ProfessorLayton wrote: post #393

eliasmacpherson wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The wealthy will not solve the supply issue of luxury apartments as they do not want to flood the market, the parent I responded to initially mentions this. Who will add luxury apartments or affordable apartments except for the already wealthy? Who has the incentive to build enough luxury apartments, to stop housing behaving as an investment vehicle?

"The wealthy" are only partially contributing to the housing crunch. The majority of home purchases are not made strictly for investment purposes even if it does happen. All types of housing stock is needed, not just luxury — The reason luxury is what's getting built is because those are the projects that "pencil out" due to high costs. There are many many factors that are contributing to high costs like euclidean zo…

> The majority of home purchases are not made strictly for investment purposes even if it does happen.

how sure are you about the validity of the claim you just made? Note the link below does not include cash buyers.

https://old.reddit.com/r/toronto/comments/14zdsia/housing_pr...

The point I've made, is that demand is not just people wanting houses, it's also their ability to pay. There's some magical thinking out there that if investors build 'enough' luxury homes the poor will be able to afford homes. This is a falsehood.

I can't speak to Japan, however I don't think it ever accepted the level of homelessness that the west takes for granted. I would wager that the Japanese government builds more housing projects for the poor than the west.