- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
as someone who lives in a city with seemingly none of this problem, the whole "YIMBYs are loving white scum, PHIMBY is the real poo poo" attitude from the Left (the "YIMBY" ep of Chapo, District Sentinel, coastal DSA chapters etc) is, to put it lightly, confusing. can someone pls explain
In addition to what others have said, there is a bit of a focus bias where a lot of what the yimby talk about are "in their backyards" aka in their communities and it can be a bit exclusionary to other communities are experiencing.
Take for example, environmental regulations: a lot of yimbys oppose environmental regulations that can delay or increase housing costs because in affluent communities environmental reviews are often used by nimbys as a tool to block development. But in other neighborhoods just miles away it is those environmental regulations that are the only reason developers cant stick people on top of leaking hazardous waste landfills (but they're trying!). So it can be hard to bridge that gap.
In some neighborhoods developers are dying to build and nimbys are stopping them, but in others there's still a housing shortage, but the profit margin too low for developers to be interested in taking the risk. It seems clear that one solution won't fix both.
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2018 21:36
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2024 05:58
|
|
- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
Yeah for those unaware, we're talking about a parcel of land where a hazardous waste dump was on fire for 4 weeks before they put it out.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2018 19:30
|
|
- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
the YIMBY ideal is Fred Trump pumping out massive housing complexes for the middle class
lol that you claim a racist landlord as the YIMBY ideal as if it is a good thing.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2018 08:45
|
|
- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
Even permitted luxury projects are being stalled in some of the highest demand markets due to low profit margins due to labor costs, so clearly the issue has scaled beyond just one of permitting, especially if they're looking at completely redesigning projects to reduce labor costs:
https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2016/10/construction-pipeline-costs-lennar-build-harvest.html
quote:
There’s no question that Bay Area contractors and developers are feeling the crunch of the overheated construction market – to the point that some developments have been put on hold. The biggest problem, they say, is that demand for subcontractors far outweighs supply, which is driving costs to unsustainable levels.
Until those costs come down, contractors and developers are getting creative with their approaches to building – or simply putting projects on the backburner.
Kofi Bonner, regional president of FivePoints — a spinoff of Lennar Urban that is working on the San Francisco Shipyard, Candlestick Point and Treasure Island — said there’s definitely concern in the development community over construction costs.
At the San Francisco Shipyard, FivePoint now has 130 units under construction and plans to break ground on another 66 units at the end of this month. Early next year, it will begin work on another 140 or so as part of a different part of the Shipyard master plan project.
“We are experiencing significant appreciation on the construction costs side,” Bonner said. “The net impact is that projects get slowed down or delayed significantly.”
To address it in the short term, Bonner says his company is doing “a great deal of redesigning.”
In some cases, that might mean a total redesign in an effort to create greater efficiencies and to reduce costs, which delays the delivery of homes.
“Sometimes ... we go out to the market and find that a project might not be financeable based on the increased construction costs,” Bonner said.
Uncertainty is frowned on in the capital marketplace, he pointed out.
“The net effect is then that margins shrink,” Bonner said. “In these cases, we may have to put a project on hold.”
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/05/01/construction-costs-could-limit-where-san-jose-homes-are-built-google-adobe-diridon/
quote:
Construction expenses have pressured developers severely enough that new market-rate apartments are profitable in no more than two districts in San Jose, according to a new report presented to city officials Tuesday.
Even worse, downtown San Jose — seen as a cornerstone of the city’s economy — is one of the sections where development of new housing is unlikely to produce profits for developers, a report from real estate consultancy Keyser Marston Associates determined.
“The housing market currently faces challenges due to high development costs and the inability to project future rent growth to offset rising costs,” Keyser Marston stated in the report. Experts also blame more expensive materials and labor costs for the construction woes.
Just one section of San Jose fit the criteria to be able to produce enough of a profit — at least 10 percent — to justify the risks involved in a major residential development, according to Keyser Marston.
“The only apartment prototype to demonstrate an estimated profit that exceeds the targeted profit threshold is in the West Valley” of San Jose, an area that includes the Stevens Creek Boulevard district, the consultants reported to the council.
The average profit margin in western San Jose was deemed to be $108,000 per apartment unit, or a profit margin of 19 percent of the development costs, the report found. These were based on development of mid-rise apartments reaching as many as seven stories, with parking below the housing units.
A relatively puny profit was found to be possible on West San Carlos Avenue, west of the downtown, or on North First Street, north of the downtown. That modest amount was $17,000 per apartment unit, or 3 percent of the development cost. However, a 3 percent profit wasn’t deemed high enough to justify the risk of construction. In this scenario, the developments were projected to be up to seven stories, with the parking below the residences.
But downtown San Jose apartment towers? No profit. North San Jose mid-rise apartments? No profit. Low-rise apartments in east San Jose and south San Jose? No profit. The locations also might put a damper on plans for transit villages in some instances due to the location.
If developers are demanding 10% profit margins but costs are too high to give them the returns the want, you either have to build public housing or directly subsidize private construction. If we're spending public dollars to build housing, we shouldn't just give it away to maintain the profits of investors.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2018 21:03
|
|
- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
Suburbs don't have have to be lovely like the US does them. Plenty of suburbs in other developed countries that are still reasonably dense with good transit going into the city.
The American suburbs that are pre-car are proof that even Americans can make good suburbs.
Of course then we tore out the trolly lines and light rail, but at some point they were good!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2018 23:50
|
|
- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
What the gently caress are people doing in their backyards that they don't do in parks?
Is there some, like, backyard orgy trend running throughout suburbia that just nobody talks about?
You can be arrested for letting your kids play in the park unsupervised. Not so in your backyard.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2019 21:55
|
|
- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
This sounds like a Stranger Danger situation, where something that has happened, like, once or twice is blown up into a national epidemic.
True, they apparently passed a 2016 law to try to legalize letting your kids walk to the park.
But there have been quite a number of times parents have either been arrested or had CPS force them to never ever let their kid go to the park alone again:
quote:
SILVER SPRING, Md. — Maryland parents accused of child neglect for letting their kids roam around their neighborhood had to retrieve them from the county's Children's Protective Services after police removed the youngsters from a park.
At about 4:55 p.m. ET Sunday, Montgomery County police received a call to check on the welfare of Danielle and Sasha Meitiv's children — Rafi, 10, and Dvora, 6 — at a park here. Officers found the children unattended and brought them to the agency as part of protocol, they said.
Montgomery County police and county Children's Protective Services are jointly investigating the Meitivs of Silver Spring for allowing their children to walk repeatedly around the neighborhood alone. The parents say they know where their children are but are allowing them independence.
Officers picked up the children about two blocks from home, Rafi said, telling them they would drop them off at home. Instead, the two sat in a patrol car for 2½ hours then were taken about 10 miles away to Children's Protective Services offices in Rockville, Md.
Parents tapped for child neglect after kids walk alone
The Meitivs said they had taken the children to the park at around 4 p.m. and told them to be home by 6 p.m. When the children hadn't returned by 6:30, the Meitivs started looking frantically for them.
Social workers did not contact them until after 8 p.m., the couple said. Their children were released to them at 10:30 p.m.
"I can't believe we're going through this again," Danielle Meitiv said. "They've been missing since 6 o'clock. Somebody called 911, the police called CPS, they decided to bring the kids here and they didn't call us."
To take the children home, the Meitivs had to sign a safety plan that prohibits them from leaving their children unattende, they said.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/13/parents-investigated-letting-children-walk-alone/25700823/
quote:
For most of the summer, her daughter had stayed there with her, playing on a laptop that Harrell had scrounged up the money to purchase. (McDonald's has free WiFi.) Sadly, the Harrell home was robbed and the laptop stolen, so the girl asked her mother if she could be dropped off at the park to play instead.
Harrell said yes. She gave her daughter a cell phone. The girl went to the park—a place so popular that at any given time there are about 40 kids frolicking—two days in a row. There were swings, a "splash pad," and shade. On her third day at the park, an adult asked the girl where her mother was. At work, the daughter replied. The shocked adult called the cops. Authorities declared the girl "abandoned" and proceeded to arrest the mother.
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/07/arrested-for-letting-a-9-year-old-play-at-the-park-alone/374436/
quote:
Just after returning home from a walk around the block with her dog, Marshmallow, an 8-year-old Wilmette girl expected a visit from a playmate. Instead, police officers arrived at the family’s door.
An anonymous caller had contacted police after seeing the girl walking the dog alone, said her mother, Corey Widen. While police never pursued charges, the seemingly common activity launched an Illinois Department of Children and Family Services investigation to see if Widen was neglecting her children, she said.
“For something like this to happen to me, there’s something really wrong,” said Widen, 48, who agreed to let her 8-year-old daughter and 17-year-old son get the Maltese puppy last year as long as everyone took turns walking her. Widen, who asked that her daughter’s name not be used, said the girl’s walk around the block — most of which Widen says she can see out her windows — is the only time her home-schooled daughter is unsupervised. “The funny thing is … I’m a joke with my friends because my kids are around me all the time.”
https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-life-leaving-kids-alone-moms-shamed-20180820-story.html
Since the laws are pretty vague on this its pretty much if someone calls CPS or if the cops want to hassle you.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2019 22:11
|
|
- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
So far, that "quite a number" seems to be "three."
presumably any number of articles I post will be met with a similar response. and since we can barely keep track of how many people the cops kill we have dont have exactly have good statistics to work with.
but yes, parents get harassed for letting their kids play in the park. its america of course the cops and busybodies harass people.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2019 22:38
|
|
- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
I mean in the US it really just comes down to the idea of rented property being a shameful thing and that you won't be fully whole until you buy a detached home with a yard. Kind of like how it's okay that fast food workers pay so shittily and not expected to be jobs that support a person or family: you're a piece of poo poo if you don't move out of that, so you deserve less than what's even necessary.
Well and it is enforced by weak renters’ rights. Landlords can charge extra if you hang a photo on the wall and leave a mark, charge extra for pets, and demand insane quiet hours to make it harder to raise kids.
People feel renters are second class citizens because they are legally treated like th.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2019 15:24
|
|
- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
In the US developers demand a 15%+ profit margin on new housing developments, so even in places like the SF Bay Area you have fully permitted housing ready to build that developers refuse to build until construction wages decline.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2019 14:51
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2024 05:58
|
|
- Trabisnikof
- Dec 24, 2005
-
|
Do you have a link for that? I'm skeptical that there are permissioned developments in SF which add a significant number of units and aren't profitable. Markets like SF and NYC can support building very expensive skyscrapers so it seems weird that an ordinary development wouldn't make money.
Construction costs are insanely high because construction labor is high cost because you have to live 3+ hours away if you do construction.
For context SJ is actually the bigger SF bay city than SF:
quote:
Construction expenses have pressured developers severely enough that new market-rate apartments are profitable in no more than two districts in San Jose, according to a new report presented to city officials Tuesday.
Even worse, downtown San Jose — seen as a cornerstone of the city’s economy — is one of the sections where development of new housing is unlikely to produce profits for developers, a report from real estate consultancy Keyser Marston Associates determined.
“The housing market currently faces challenges due to high development costs and the inability to project future rent growth to offset rising costs,” Keyser Marston stated in the report. Experts also blame more expensive materials and labor costs for the construction woes.
Just one section of San Jose fit the criteria to be able to produce enough of a profit — at least 10 percent — to justify the risks involved in a major residential development, according to Keyser Marston.
“The only apartment prototype to demonstrate an estimated profit that exceeds the targeted profit threshold is in the West Valley” of San Jose, an area that includes the Stevens Creek Boulevard district, the consultants reported to the council.
The average profit margin in western San Jose was deemed to be $108,000 per apartment unit, or a profit margin of 19 percent of the development costs, the report found. These were based on development of mid-rise apartments reaching as many as seven stories, with parking below the housing units.
Want to find more housing coverage and connect with our journalists?
Click here to join our new Facebook group
A relatively puny profit was found to be possible on West San Carlos Avenue, west of the downtown, or on North First Street, north of the downtown. That modest amount was $17,000 per apartment unit, or 3 percent of the development cost. However, a 3 percent profit wasn’t deemed high enough to justify the risk of construction. In this scenario, the developments were projected to be up to seven stories, with the parking below the residences.
But downtown San Jose apartment towers? No profit. North San Jose mid-rise apartments? No profit. Low-rise apartments in east San Jose and south San Jose? No profit. The locations also might put a damper on plans for transit villages in some instances due to the location.
(https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/05/01/construction-costs-could-limit-where-san-jose-homes-are-built-google-adobe-diridon/)
Even habitat for humanity is having trouble with the costs:
quote:
The group, Habitat for Humanity, says it can’t raise money fast enough to cover the gap between what very low-income residents can pay and the actual costs of providing homes, even with the help of legions of volunteers.
That scenario is playing itself out right now in Fremont, where Habitat for Humanity is selling 19 of 30 planned condos to families whose income is 40 to 115 percent higher than that of the buyers originally targeted.
Janice Jensen, president and CEO of Habitat for Humanity East Bay/Silicon Valley, said costs for everything from raw materials such as wood and drywall, to labor and real estate have soared over the past five years. Materials alone jumped almost 5 percent from December 2016 to December 2017, the fastest rate in six years, according to the Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc.
“If you look broadly at affordable housing, it’s never been more expensive than it is right now to build,” Jensen said.
When first envisioned, half of the condos in Habitat’s Central Commons project were supposed to be sold to very low-income families and half to low-income families. But Habitat had to raise the price of the homes twice in the past couple of years to cover the additional $3.54 million the project was costing, effectively excluding very low-income families from a shot at the homes. Those families earn up to half of the median income for the area, or $58,100 for a family of four.
(https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/01/02/even-habitat-for-humanity-cant-build-homes-cheaply-enough-for-lower-income-buyers/)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2019 15:17
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2018 21:36
