ymroddi.bsky.social
93 posts
5 followers
21 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
Also NYC is building a lot. Jersey City is building like crazy and neither place is getting any cheaper. It's getting more expensive faster.
nypost.com/2024/08/20/r...
comment in response to
post
That is not really what I am proposing. In other parts of this thread, what I am proposing is to build in cheaper to build areas. You can build an SFR just about anywhere outside of NYC cheaper per sqft than an apartment in NYC.
comment in response to
post
In my view, we have spent 20+ years concentrating economic opportunity in a hand full of big cities and we need to figure out a way to undo that. Doing so, will go a long way to solving our housing issues. I don't think there is solution to housing without doing it.
comment in response to
post
Both. Everything that can be done. Experiment with new ways to do it. We are mostly talking about desk jobs which are very easy to move. Several companies have moved their HQs in the past few years without problem. I would prefer that big companies open offices in more places.
comment in response to
post
Policies that move the good jobs to areas with cheaper building costs. Every level of gov't has spent decades influencing where the jobs have gone with hundreds of different policies. Biden did it with IRA policies.
Also, you can build denser in these small cities.
comment in response to
post
It is certainly not zoning.
comment in response to
post
I think you would be surprised how much it costs to build apt vs houses in different cities. Do you know how much it costs per sqft to build SFR/lowrise/midrise/highrise in your city?
comment in response to
post
Where is the happening? Building higher increases costs a lot with the biggest leap between 2-7 stories and about linear after that. I've seen an SFR torn down and replaced with 2 townhomes on the same lot each priced more than the SFR!
comment in response to
post
As you can see, the top rated cities are all smaller cities. All these cities have cheaper construction costs than the superstar cities.
www.governing.com/community/th...
comment in response to
post
also Amsterdam has a housing crisis despite being able to build apartments over shops.
www.theguardian.com/news/article...
comment in response to
post
Not talking about extremes. Medium sized cities deliver services more efficient than the biggest cities. Are you saying LA is well run and efficient service delivery????
To fix housing affordability without building a lot in smaller cities where it is cheap and easy to build.
comment in response to
post
Meanwhile, also in Japan. www.cnn.com/2024/05/07/a...
comment in response to
post
And the problem is that building with more density only increases land and construction costs. Developers are not going to build more than demand. They aren't going to lose money so people can live somewhere cool. You only get production at volume when prices are *rising*.
comment in response to
post
But they are inefficient. Public services are delivered more effectively and efficiently in small/medium cities than the biggest cities.
comment in response to
post
Ah yes, Tokyo. Tokyo had 30 years of a flatline economy. Now it is growing again, what's happening? Skyrocketing housing, especially in areas favored by young professionals - just like US big cities!
soranews24.com/2024/01/31/t...
comment in response to
post
My argument would be we need to new cities or focus on growing smaller cities where construction/land costs are low.
It is better for the country as a whole to increase the number of agglomeration cities than increase the size of the existing ones.
comment in response to
post
So your plan is for developers to make catastrophic misjudgments of their markets, overbuild, lose money and go out of business (and cause construction workers to lose their jobs and leave the industry).
comment in response to
post
Yes, we should have policies that address where the jobs are. After all, policies at all levels of gov't have greatly influenced where the jobs are for decades.
comment in response to
post
Even MattY admits upzoning is woefully insufficient.
Ask YIMBYs what else we should do, I just get 'I don't care, I just want to upzone SF.'
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
My argument is really about YIMBYs insisting on doing ineffective policy. It is really hard to bring down construction costs in the cities YIMBYs are most concerned with. Yet, almost all YIMBY don't want to talk about anything but upzoning the most expensive cities.
comment in response to
post
At the most basic level, my argument is that is more important to bring good jobs to areas with 400k housing than add 900k housing to an area with good jobs.
comment in response to
post
You are making a mistake that policies do not require prioritization. Policies the prioritize building in expensive markets look different than prioritizing building in areas with low construction costs. Prioritizing expensive areas can hinder growth in the cheap areas.
comment in response to
post
Portland after a city and state wave of YIMBY legislation is set to produce only 500 units 25% of the housing of 2023 (2000).
www.wweek.com/news/2024/04...
comment in response to
post
Austin is very interesting because all that building happened *before* YIMBY policies. Austin could have produced a building boom at any time in the past few decades with their pre-YIMBY regulations, but did not. Why? In my other message, experts expect undersupply in a few years (despite YIMBYism).
comment in response to
post
No we should be building it where it is cheap and easy to do so, instead the markets with high construction and land costs (the primary focus of YIMBYs).
comment in response to
post
My argument is not for NIMBY. It is to prioritize policies that get housing built where building is fast and cheap instead of doing ineffective YIMBYism.
My argument is mainly about policy priorities.
Also, Portland: www.wweek.com/news/2024/04...
comment in response to
post
At best, YIMBY policies possibly could 'bend the curve.' In cities with severe affordability issues (all the cities YIMBY focus on), you then have to wait until incomes slowly catch up to the bent curve. Absent demand shocks, this is a multi-decade proposition.
comment in response to
post
In summary, YIMBY proposition is you change land use. This increases sustainably and significantly increases production. The increase then delivers sustainable and significant increases in affordability. This just isn't happening.
comment in response to
post
I could go on and on, increasing rents/production collapse in Portland, failure of SB9 in CA, LA having transit oriented communities policy and ADUs since 2018, San Diego. Cities have done YIMBY policies and they haven't delivered.
comment in response to
post
Jersey City
comment in response to
post
More Minneapolis
comment in response to
post
Experts think Austin will resume the 2019 trend and Austin will end up with housing shortages in a few years.
www.housingwire.com/articles/aus...
comment in response to
post
The prices you see in Austin now have nothing to do with YIMBY policies. All the building happened before YIMBY policies. After YIMBY policies, building has collapsed.
comment in response to
post
'New apartment construction hasn’t lowered rents in many areas'
www.housingwire.com/articles/new...
comment in response to
post
Yes the problem is construction costs, not zoning. Which is why people who want to fix solving should focus on building in places where you can build cheap and fast instead of expensive to build places.
comment in response to
post
www.startribune.com/a-rental-rec...
comment in response to
post
Construction set to plummet despite years of YIMBY policies.
If YIMBY is supposed to delivery significant and sustained increases in supply and significant and sustained decreases in prices, it does not delivery that.
www.startribune.com/a-rental-rec...
comment in response to
post
Rents increasing faster than in the state or country.
rejournals.com/still-showin...
comment in response to
post
Will YIMBY's please check update to stats before they post something they've seen in the YIMBY echo chamber?
Rents rise to record highs, growing faster than last year, faster than the state and faster than the US.
rejournals.com/still-showin...
comment in response to
post
That wasn't the cause.
comment in response to
post
What you get from YIMBYs - 'well it needs for more time, you need to do more of it, you need to do this platonic ideal of YIMBY that will never be politically feasible...'
What I would like is for YIMBYs to provide some conditions that if true would force them to admit their policies do not work.
comment in response to
post
Most important part is evaluating whether the policy works. YIMBYs hate this. They set things up so YIMBY can never be disproved. It's always 'you're just not YIMBY enough...' We now have 4 years of data since a wave of YIMBY legislation and these policies have not produced the promised results.
comment in response to
post
SF housing prices down to 2019, condos 2015. No YIMBY required.
comment in response to
post
2bd rent still up 25% yoy in Jersey City. www.businessinsider.com/jersey-city-...
comment in response to
post
Doesn't even consider the crazy amount of building in Jersey City for several years (which has 2nd highest rents in the country).
jerseydigs.com/jersey-city-...
comment in response to
post
And yet. iT's JusT sUPply aND DeManD. nypost.com/2024/08/20/r...
comment in response to
post
When the charlatans get rich, there are always bag holders. Who are the bag holders in this situation?
comment in response to
post
Anytime anybody brings up efficiency, I ask 'Efficient for who?' One man's 'inefficiency' is another man's job.
comment in response to
post
Remember, the great promise of the internet was getting rid of the gatekeepers. Now we are desperate for gatekeepers.
People thought the 'gatekeepers' were keeping hidden gems from us. Today, the hidden gems (if they exist) are drowned in torrents of crap and we still don't get them.