How Seattle Killed Micro-Housing

Re:How Seattle Killed Micro-Housing by sokoloff on Friday September 09, 2016 @10:46AM (#12462690)

It seems to be an issue only in that people seem to want in a certain place but not pay the prevailing rent to do so. If they're willing to pay the prevailing rent, there is no issue.

In a neighborhood like mine (75% SFR, 25% MFR free-standing homes in West Cambridge), you can bet that I'll object to zoning changes that would allow "just building up". I don't need the noise, traffic, additional pressures on the school system, nor do I want to live in a mid-rise and high-rise district. If I did, I'd have bought in one...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Seattle Killed Micro-Housing by guard-of-terra on Friday September 09, 2016 @02:23PM (#12464797)

First of all, what's "prevailing rent" now would be "ridiculously expensive" few years back. That's lack of supply skewing market.

There should be other options than building in your backyard. Find underused places and build up there. The biggest problem is what to build and how: it's amazingly easy to screw this one up (too sparse? too dense? too high? too low?)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Seattle Killed Micro-Housing by sokoloff on Friday September 09, 2016 @07:18PM (#12466719)

One man's "lack of supply" is another man's "uptick in demand" skewing the market.

You can't simply conclude it's one xor the other.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Seattle Killed Micro-Housing by guard-of-terra on Saturday September 10, 2016 @07:10AM (#12468676)

uptick in demand should be met with uptick in supply.

[ Parent | on HN ]