| > No. I'm referring to the kind of gentrification that takes place in the real world. Because that's what's permitted under the existing laws. > Retrofitting a residential building is far cheaper and profitable than a full demolition followed by a rebuild. That's what real estate investors go for. Suppose that it costs a million dollars to build a 5-story building with 20 units. Furthermore, a quality unit is going for $500,000, and there is an existing 2-story building with 8 dilapidated units that you can buy for three million dollars. You can update the units cheap -- let's say it's even free -- so then you turn the $3M into $4M. But if you spend another million dollars, you get 20 units instead of 8, and turn your $4M into $10M. When the price of a unit is high compared to the cost of construction, that is obviously the more profitable thing to do. Unless it's prohibited by law. > Also, there are limits to which you can increase the number of floors in a building. These are not whimsical, arbitrary, "oh it's just regulation" rules. They reflect real world constraints such as water supply, waste management, access to emergency response teams, even parking. At the current growth rate, the water treatment plant will be at its design capacity in three years. Therefore, prohibit any additional growth to preserve the status quo forever. That is a tyrannical attitude. If the water treatment plant will be at its design capacity in three years then the government's role is to issue a bond to fund an upgrade and then use the property tax revenue from the new construction to pay for it. |