Seems like single family homes are going to skyrocket in value. Especially ones that are on bigger lots. The law removed the owner occupancy requirement, so the ones that will be making the most money is investors and developers, like always.
Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods
81–90 of 403 posts
Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods
#82As soon as you look at the zoning of LA, the housing problem there becomes clear as day, even for someone who doesn't visit very often. I don't know what you would call this system but LA's problem is that the folks that have the power to fix housing have zero interest in doing because it would hurt their self interest. Housing is only a "problem" if you haven't bought a house yet, once you purchase a house, all the…
Prop 13 needs to be repealed
Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods
#83As soon as you look at the zoning of LA, the housing problem there becomes clear as day, even for someone who doesn't visit very often. I don't know what you would call this system but LA's problem is that the folks that have the power to fix housing have zero interest in doing because it would hurt their self interest. Housing is only a "problem" if you haven't bought a house yet, once you purchase a house, all the…
Why is this a LA/California problem? New York City and all major cities have had high price housing that benefits owners for decades. What steps have Paris, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Seoul, Shanghai, etc done to take their housing prices down to their national average?
Tokyo is a notable exception to that list as housing prices have stayed steady even as population grew. It did this by building an enormous number homes over the years.
It's true that many cities face the same problem: by making it difficult to add new supply they make existing homes expensive. Even US cities that aren't famous for being expensive have the same problem (if at a lower scale). They lack the flood of new wealthy population but have the same lack of development.
Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods
#84(Stealing this argument from a friend who I discussed something similar with ...)
It's hard to see how allowing duplexes will do _anything_ to address housing issues. We have a similar law here in Minneapolis which allows triplexes on any property.
But what are the economics of this? Surely there's not a lot of vacant land in LA or Mpls just waiting for a new plex to be built. Instead, all the plots are already occupied. So that means either converting an existing house or tearing it down and building something new.
What would it cost to convert a single family home to a duplex? I'd say a _very_ conservative estimate is c. $200,000. And what does it rent for? A typical house might be converted into a 700-900 square foot rental. Looking at Zillow, it seems like you'd get maybe $2,000-2,500 for that. Let's be optimistic and say $2,500. So it's $30,000 per year. You'll make a profit in ... 7 years ... after the construction work is done, which could itself take 6+ months. And I suspect my cost estimate is way too low.
Seven years for a positive ROI doesn't seem like a very strong incentive. And if this is your own home that you live in, it'll be unliveable for much of the construction time. That means you'll have to live elsewhere and that cost further delays a positive ROI.
I can't imagine a developer seriously investing in duplexes or triplexes, or even quads. What they would want is to tear down several adjacent houses and build an apartment building in the same space, and to really make it worth it that building probably needs to be 3+ floors.
This plex stuff seems like political theater.
Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods
#85As soon as you look at the zoning of LA, the housing problem there becomes clear as day, even for someone who doesn't visit very often. I don't know what you would call this system but LA's problem is that the folks that have the power to fix housing have zero interest in doing because it would hurt their self interest. Housing is only a "problem" if you haven't bought a house yet, once you purchase a house, all the…
Speaking as someone who doesn't own a house in California, apartments are not enough and never will be. Housing is an investment, and if I am put in a position to perpetually rent then I am excluded from a very stable and viable long term investment that is not easily replaced. What complicates this more, is if you shove all the affordable houses to the outskirts of the city where most companies are not then you crea…
I think you can buy apartments?
Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods
#86Particularly in the era of remote work, I anticipate LA moving towards a denser downtown and West Side and relying on expanded suburbs in the inland empire and OC to provide the classic single family housing neighborhoods for those who want them.
It's already happening. In 2020, San Bernadio County had the largest growth in the entire country. 80% of the people who lived in California and moved in 2020 moved to somewhere else in California. LA and SF counties lost the most people, but in most cases they all went to neighboring counties.
Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods
#87As soon as you look at the zoning of LA, the housing problem there becomes clear as day, even for someone who doesn't visit very often. I don't know what you would call this system but LA's problem is that the folks that have the power to fix housing have zero interest in doing because it would hurt their self interest. Housing is only a "problem" if you haven't bought a house yet, once you purchase a house, all the…
I’m convinced that this is the reason behind SF housing problems as well. There’s just too much value for landlords.
I think anti-profiteering laws could be helpful. If you bought land and built a house and want to live in a quiet neighborhood until you die, fine. But maybe if you vote against expanded housing you don't get to sell your house for more than you paid for it, or maybe don't get to sell it at all while you're alive.
Separating the homesteaders from the investors would do a lot of good.
Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods
#88As soon as you look at the zoning of LA, the housing problem there becomes clear as day, even for someone who doesn't visit very often. I don't know what you would call this system but LA's problem is that the folks that have the power to fix housing have zero interest in doing because it would hurt their self interest. Housing is only a "problem" if you haven't bought a house yet, once you purchase a house, all the…
> In fact this whole situation is weirdly democratic but un-democratic. Un-democratic in the sense that it casts out folks that don't live there, but democratic in the sense that the voices of those who own homes are clearly heard. This isn't undemocratic at all. I know people hate this generally, but just to make a point: Democracy literally means "rule by the demos". The demos is (definitions from wiktionary becaus…
Yes, but the conflict comes from what "here" means. If you draw the boundary around a neighbourhood, sure - it's democratic. But it's just as rational to consider L.A. itself and suddenly it's undemocratic because decisions aren't being made by the "demos" but by a small subset of them - with implications for the whole city. Similarly one could expand the boundary to the entire state.
On the other extreme the residents of a single block could decide it's in their interest to build a skyscraper on their one block. Democracy, right? The residents of an area (that block) are doing what's in their own interest.
Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods
#89I find it interesting that the majority of democrats were in favor of the duplexes, republicans were split, and the LA city council (14/15 democrats) were all opposed to the new law. This matches my experiences in SF and other parts of the country. I’ll ignore the irony that republicans are voting against expanded property rights and transparently are voting simply for class interests… I am not sure why democratic el…
Yes, and a lot of Democrats want open borders but no housing for them or existing younger generations.
I understand some may not want to hear, but it is a direct aspect of the problem, and not unsubstantial. Nothing against immigrants of course, they'll surely need a place to live—just like everyone else. The "not in my backyard" strategy of (14/15) is not a solution.
Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods
#90As soon as you look at the zoning of LA, the housing problem there becomes clear as day, even for someone who doesn't visit very often. I don't know what you would call this system but LA's problem is that the folks that have the power to fix housing have zero interest in doing because it would hurt their self interest. Housing is only a "problem" if you haven't bought a house yet, once you purchase a house, all the…
Speaking as someone who doesn't own a house in California, apartments are not enough and never will be. Housing is an investment, and if I am put in a position to perpetually rent then I am excluded from a very stable and viable long term investment that is not easily replaced. What complicates this more, is if you shove all the affordable houses to the outskirts of the city where most companies are not then you crea…
Even if housing you own is not a significantly appreciating investment, there's a lot to be said for the stability of owning a place that shields you from rent increases/forced moves and which you probably own outright by the time you retire.