Why developers seem to only build luxury housing (2018) • Hacker News Board

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

#71

Post by lotsofpulp » Sat, May 28, 2022, 4:03 PM UTC

dazc wrote: post #40

h2odragon wrote: post #24

why don't more people act as their own architect / build more of their housing themselves? I'm coming from an attitude of "a house is a home , a machine to make the lives of my family easier and more comfortable", not "houses are an investment with incidental utility as shelter." Is it that many don't care about their house as a home?

People seem to want to move in with everything aready done, shiny kitchen, fitted carpets, etc, etc. This would be great if houses were built like Toyotas - but they're not.

They basically are. The various tract builders in the US (DR Horton, Lennnar, etc) even have the same offerings of budget and luxury models. You can get a Toyota which meets minimum code requirements (e.g. dr Horton express) or a Lexus (e.g. dr Horton emerald) which comes with nicer finishes.

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

#72

Post by coryrc » Sat, May 28, 2022, 4:03 PM UTC

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…

The UK is well known for unaffordable, poor-quality housing. I'm not sure why you're holding it up as a good example.

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

#73

Post by kitten_mittens_ » Sat, May 28, 2022, 4:04 PM UTC

foobarian wrote: post #22

Something I noticed happening around Boston metro starting with the pandemic is there is a lot more new builds than additions and remodels. The remodel we tried to do ended up significantly delayed due to labor and other shortages, and shopping around was very difficult. It made me wonder whether the developers prefer the hassle-free experience of unoccupied or new builds where you don't have constant headaches of fi…

At least in the city proper, I think I only see two-three new towers of housing Downtown. There looks like there's a retrofit of an office building by Post Office square, but I'm not sure if that's housing or not.

http://www.bostonplans.org/projects/development-projects?sor...

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

#74

Post by ghaff » Sat, May 28, 2022, 4:06 PM UTC

routerl wrote: post #16

jimmaswell wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Car-centric living is absolutely not quality-of-life focused...

Are you suggesting that a pleasant rural/exurban environment, perhaps within a reasonable driving distance of an urban downtown is not quality of life focused? It may not be your preference but it is for many people. Others even like suburbs though that's mostly not my thing.

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

#75

Post by lotsofpulp » Sat, May 28, 2022, 4:07 PM UTC

bombcar wrote: post #21

chrisseaton wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK new-builds are seen as the worst option. Most people want a house from the 20s or 30s if they can. Every decade beyond that the quality of housing got worse and worse and worse. These days buying a new house is a desperate option for people who can’t afford anything else.

There’s some of that in the US but the reality is that modern home construction is way ahead on energy usage, even if the homes aren’t built from solid timbers and boards.

It is only on this forum that I have encountered this bizarre “all new construction is lower quality than all old construction” opinion.

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

#76

Post by HarryHirsch » Sat, May 28, 2022, 4:07 PM UTC

dcolkitt wrote: post #64

Never in the history of modern housing has new housing never not been an overwhelmingly consumed by the people at the top of the income/wealth distribution. Even in the home building explosion of the 50s and 60s, new homes were purchased by the upper middle class. But the point is that todays new luxury homes become tomorrow’s working class bargains. The analogies to the car market are instructive. Wealthy people, by…

5000 sqft doctor's palaces are working class bargains 30 years hence? Only if you live in Doctor Zhivago's world.

We don't need hand-down/trickle-down, we need 1200 sqft entry-level housing built in line with demand. In large tracts of the nation this is not happening.

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

#77

Post by waylandsmithers » Sat, May 28, 2022, 4:07 PM UTC

dcolkitt wrote: post #64

Never in the history of modern housing has new housing never not been an overwhelmingly consumed by the people at the top of the income/wealth distribution. Even in the home building explosion of the 50s and 60s, new homes were purchased by the upper middle class. But the point is that todays new luxury homes become tomorrow’s working class bargains. The analogies to the car market are instructive. Wealthy people, by…

My problem with the car analogy though is that there is no "car developer" who can buy a 2002 Lexus and make it new again. In my hometown the "working class bargain" doesn't exist because those 50s and 60s homes are bought by developers before they hit the market (in many cases being sold by estate beneficiaries who don't care what happens to grandma's house anyway and just want the cash) and turned into luxury homes again.

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

#78

Post by chrisseaton » Sat, May 28, 2022, 4:08 PM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #63

chrisseaton wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But older houses are better (nicer architecture, better materials, more space, more mature trees) than newer houses.

Nicer architecture: Only sometimes. Sometimes, old is just old and plain. Not to mention that things change over the years: I'm guessing by 'old house' you refer to something built pre-1940 and not the ranch style house built in the 60's: Those houses from the 60's are over 50 years old, though. Better materials? I'm not convinced. Drafty doors and windows, little insulation, lead paint, outdated plumbing parts, and…

> Maybe using more mature trees really isn't something we should be doing right now?

The trees are more mature because they were planted longer ago. Planting trees in suburbia is the opposite of deforestation.

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

#79

Post by returningfory2 » Sat, May 28, 2022, 4:08 PM UTC

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…

In the book The Affordable City [0], this is illustrated with a really powerful analogy:

Every year in the United States, the Toyota motor company sells about 2 million regular Toyota cars and 300,000 expensive luxury Lexus cars. Suppose that we introduced a law that each motor company can only sell 300,000 cars a year. Which cars would Toyota continue to make?

[0] https://islandpress.org/books/affordable-city [1] https://pressroom.toyota.com/toyota-motor-north-america-repo...

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

#80

Post by ghaff » Sat, May 28, 2022, 4:10 PM UTC

greenonions wrote: post #32

foobarian wrote: post #22

Something I noticed happening around Boston metro starting with the pandemic is there is a lot more new builds than additions and remodels. The remodel we tried to do ended up significantly delayed due to labor and other shortages, and shopping around was very difficult. It made me wonder whether the developers prefer the hassle-free experience of unoccupied or new builds where you don't have constant headaches of fi…

Also capital efficiency. If you have limited labor anyway, why bother with lower margin additions and remodels?

Small remodels are tougher in general especially if you still need a bunch of different trades. I've been putting off investigating for a kitchen update. Probably need to start that ball rolling.