Re:The end of the housing supply debate (maybe)
by davidw on Thursday November 09, 2017 @06:23PM
(#15666620)
Part of the "degradation" happens because we forgot that we can build up, as well as out, in much of the US
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2015/1/7/americas-suburb...
Re:The end of the housing supply debate (maybe)
by sliverstorm on Thursday November 09, 2017 @06:35PM
(#15666691)
I don't think we "forget", I think developers are after the quick buck and buyers are after most-sqft-per-dollar. Building up or down is more expensive.
Re:The end of the housing supply debate (maybe)
by davidw on Thursday November 09, 2017 @06:56PM
(#15666806)
Developers just build places for people to live and work. Like the house you live in. They could build a lot more in places like San Francisco and Palo Alto. Yes, it's a bit more expensive, but that's a pretty minimal component of the price at 2/3/4 stories.
The real problem that prevents building up and in is rampant NIMBYism.
Re:The end of the housing supply debate (maybe)
by AnimalMuppet on Thursday November 09, 2017 @07:23PM
(#15666962)
Is it? Assume that land is expensive. If I build up, I can create a lot more units for the same land cost (at the probable price of higher building cost per unit). For some land price, there's probably an optimal height to build to that decreases total cost per unit.
Re:The end of the housing supply debate (maybe)
by sliverstorm on Thursday November 09, 2017 @10:58PM
(#15667842)
Well, it really depends on where. When much of Silicon Valley was built, I believe land was not really that expensive, and that continues to be the case in many parts of the country.
Re:The end of the housing supply debate (maybe)
by stale2002 on Thursday November 09, 2017 @10:05PM
(#15667629)
Building taller buildings isn't degradation. I would argue that it makes the urban environment better, no worse, even if you ignore the housing supply benefits.
This is because newer, taller buildings are almost always going to be higher quality than the old shit that was already there.
My point is that, if a particular housing market is experiencing a shortage of supply due to a speculative boom, but has sufficient housing to actually house people, then you have two options: tackle the supply side by building more houses, or tackle the demand side by addressing the cause of the speculation (e.g. tax incentives could be encouraging this non-productive, speculative investment).