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

Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

strongtowns.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 256 posts

Re: Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

#161

Post by MiroF »

CPLX wrote: post #27
opportune wrote: post #13

I walked around downtown San Bruno recently and it's honestly pathetic how this city is squandering their potential. Even on el camino real itself a lot of the property is being wasted on auto repair shops and fast food places, 2-3 story buildings, etc. This place could be way, way better given its proximity to the airport and SF.

I mean, I don't know how to tell you guys, but from the perspective of an east coaster, the entire peninsula (including SF) looks like this. It feels like some kind of parallel universe where nothing makes sense. Like I hear about a housing crisis in SF but I go there and there are supermarkets surrounded by parking lots in the middle of the city. There are literal big-box stores like you'd see in the suburbs adjacen…

Thank you!!!

Re: Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

#162

Post by MiroF »

CPLX wrote: post #27
opportune wrote: post #13

I walked around downtown San Bruno recently and it's honestly pathetic how this city is squandering their potential. Even on el camino real itself a lot of the property is being wasted on auto repair shops and fast food places, 2-3 story buildings, etc. This place could be way, way better given its proximity to the airport and SF.

I mean, I don't know how to tell you guys, but from the perspective of an east coaster, the entire peninsula (including SF) looks like this. It feels like some kind of parallel universe where nothing makes sense. Like I hear about a housing crisis in SF but I go there and there are supermarkets surrounded by parking lots in the middle of the city. There are literal big-box stores like you'd see in the suburbs adjacen…

okay! so i'm not insane!!

Re: Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

#163

Post by MiroF »

nostrademons wrote: post #74
i_am_proteus wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There I was, thinking I was the only one. It's insane. When I first got here from the east coast, I thought maybe there was some reason involving earthquake codes. And then I learned. I used to live in NYC, a city that's had its own difficulties adding new housing, corruption in the permitting process, considering too many areas "historic." But the Bay Area is something completely different. It seems that everyone wh…

I moved here from Boston. It honestly didn't seem all that insane to me, because Boston is crazier in nearly every dimension. The peninsula at least has 3-lane boulevards with a reasonable road hierarchy and traffic light timings. Boston has cowpaths branching off in every direction, controlled by stop signs that can literally back up for miles. The peninsula has block after block of Eichlers on 1/4 acre lots. Boston…

I'm also coming from Boston and this take is silly.

Housing prices in Boston aren't Bay bad or even close to it.

Re: Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

#164

Post by MiroF »

ProblemFactory wrote: post #71
i_am_proteus wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There I was, thinking I was the only one. It's insane. When I first got here from the east coast, I thought maybe there was some reason involving earthquake codes. And then I learned. I used to live in NYC, a city that's had its own difficulties adding new housing, corruption in the permitting process, considering too many areas "historic." But the Bay Area is something completely different. It seems that everyone wh…

> If zoning restrictions were relaxed, could house prices collapse? I don't see how that could be the case. The property value of a plot of land on which a 50, or even 5 story building can be built is much higher than the property value of a single-family home.

It's just basic supply and demand

Re: Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

#165

Post by CPLX »

nostrademons wrote: post #84
ProblemFactory wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If zoning restrictions were relaxed, could house prices collapse? I don't see how that could be the case. The property value of a plot of land on which a 50, or even 5 story building can be built is much higher than the property value of a single-family home.

There's a substitution effect. If zoning restrictions are relaxed and developer turns an acre into a 50 unit condo complex, that developer reaps a huge windfall. But everyone else who owns an Eichler on a 1/4 acre has fewer buyers competing for their property. It's sorta like when labor unions go away. The company that hires non-unionized labor at half the price and double the productivity reaps an enormous windfall.…

That logic is literally ridiculous. Midtown Manhattan used to have single family homes too, now a half acre costs a hundred million dollars.

Re: Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

#166

Post by MiroF »

scrumbledober wrote: post #62
H8crilA wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just east coasters can subscribe to this thinking. A citizen of pretty much any other country can. Compare with Hong Kong. Right off the Victoria Peak there are 40+ story apartment buildings. There's forest to one side of them, and more 40+ story buildings to the other side.

You don't need to live outside of the bay area to think this way. I've grown up on the peninsula and think it's absurd. I'm a software engineer and if I ever want to buy a house I feel like I'll be forced to relocate away from family and hometown. My friend's 90 year old grandmother constantly complains about new housing development in the town we live in, but then also questions why my friend has to live with her an…

Every single homeowner I've talked to here has complained about the housing crisis, yet has been opposing development near their house.

Incredible that people can be so willfully blind that they don't see how their own actions are contributing to the crisis. It's a real tragedy of the commons

Re: Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

#167

Post by bobthepanda »

markdown wrote: post #131
btilly wrote: post #51

I have suggested this before, and I'll suggest this again. The whole problem could be solved if we gave people the choice of voting where they work rather than where they live. Currently every city wants all the businesses that they can get because businesses generate lots of tax revenues. Cities do not want apartments because that doesn't generate revenue, and locals object on the basis of NIMBYism. But when everyon…

> Cities do not want apartments because that doesn't generate revenue Solved: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/land-value-tax.asp

For this to even be remotely viable you also probably want to touch the third rail of Prop 13.

Re: Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

#168

Post by wahern »

cwp wrote: post #160
wahern wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expenditures correlate very poorly with school performance. The evidence seems quite overwhelming. Which isn't to say funding doesn't matter. Just that it's clear that "investing in our children" through school funding was a dead-end, sort of like expecting increased traffic light expenditures to improve school performance. The primary determinants are economic and sociologic factors in the home. We need decent schoo…

I'd settle for the same performance without constant hysterical fundraising by the PTA, parents being asked to buy and donate basic classroom supplies and teachers buying stuff out of their own pockets just to be able to do their job. But really, I just mean "neighborhoods more friendly to kids and parents." School quality is a big part of that, but it's also a matter of finding a good school near your home, public s…

When I was growing up in the 80s and 90s (Illinois, Florida, Alabama) I remember teachers buying supplies out of their own pocket. I suspect it's a perennial issue. Expenditure increases usually go straight to salaries--ideally to teachers but these days increasingly to administrative staff.

Living in California and observing (but soon to be participant) in how parent participation works here it seems to me, pretense and motivations notwithstanding, that the sociologic function is really about keeping parents engaged with their children's school. Private schools are even worse in this regard, both the cheaper Catholic ones and the expensive ones drowning in cash.

My point is that we should stop looking to these things as agents of change. Among other things, it causes us to cyclically attempt to disrupt and revolutionize the system, when what such systems need most are stability and consistency. But education in particular sits at this wierd nexus of public policy where everybody thinks they're an expert, everybody has direct experience with the system, everybody thinks it can do more than it can, and it's a politically neutral subject. And for all our supposed expertise and concern, we invariably have the same ideas--more money, more accountability, etc. Given what we know empirically, the feverish focus seems very counter productive.

Re: Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

#169

Post by cwp »

wahern wrote: post #168
cwp wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd settle for the same performance without constant hysterical fundraising by the PTA, parents being asked to buy and donate basic classroom supplies and teachers buying stuff out of their own pockets just to be able to do their job. But really, I just mean "neighborhoods more friendly to kids and parents." School quality is a big part of that, but it's also a matter of finding a good school near your home, public s…

When I was growing up in the 80s and 90s (Illinois, Florida, Alabama) I remember teachers buying supplies out of their own pocket. I suspect it's a perennial issue. Expenditure increases usually go straight to salaries--ideally to teachers but these days increasingly to administrative staff. Living in California and observing (but soon to be participant) in how parent participation works here it seems to me, pretense…

I'm not suggesting that we should fund schools because better education will create a better society. I'm suggesting we should fund schools so that people don't have to live far from their jobs in order to send their kids to public school. Fixing the housing crisis implies higher density and higher population in the city, which implies more need for public infrastructure including schools and transit.

Re: Approaching Peak Housing Dysfunction in California

#170

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

bobthepanda wrote: post #167
markdown wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cities do not want apartments because that doesn't generate revenue Solved: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/land-value-tax.asp

For this to even be remotely viable you also probably want to touch the third rail of Prop 13.

One day, Prop 13 will not be third rail of politics mostly because home ownership has plummeted among young people, and the older generation is dying off. Younger people are more likely to be renters and get 0 benefit from Prop 13.
Post reply on HN