Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by impendia 4321 days ago
I wonder if this is going to increase the political will for additional housing to be built in San Francisco, as indeed is very badly needed?
3 comments

Unlikely. The less that is built, the more the value of the existing housing stock goes up.
Yep, the SF Bay Area housing policy really is a big example of "I've got mine, so fuck you".
The issue isn't that new housing isn't going to be built; in Vancouver, there are condo developments all over the place. The issue is that the vast majority of the housing in Vancouver consists of condo developments that are essentially unaffordable.

As a married, well-paid tech worker with a wife working a union job for a solid wage, we could live extremely well anywhere else, but in Vancouver the idea of buying a home is laughable. At our current combined income, we could 'afford' to buy a place if we had fifty thousand dollars in the bank, but most of the places we could buy are cheap, tiny condos that are barely large enough for the two of us, let alone a cat, a dog, and a baby on the way.

The current state of Vancouver is that it's cheaper to rent than buy, and the new developments going in aren't going to solve that problem at all. The new Vancouver House development in downtown Vancouver is being sold overseas first – to the wealthy elite in Singapore, for example – because it's essentially unaffordable to all but Vancouver's most wealthy (and they already have pricey condos downtown or sprawling mansions in the suburbs).

We rented a two-bedroom condo twenty minutes' walk from the downtown core for about $200 less than a reasonable mortgage would cost (assuming a down-payment larger than we have), but when you add strata fees and maintenance on top of that, it's far more cost-effective to own. It's possible to argue equity, but friends of mine who recently sold their condo to move to the UK approximately broke even on the five years they owned it. Others have lost money on condos they've purchased, but which haven't even finished being built yet.

Owning a home in Vancouver is unaffordable for most, and renting is slightly less unaffordable, but my rent in Vancouver was twice as much as my rent was in Montreal, and my salary certainly hasn't kept pace, and that won't change until more housing is built to appeal to the locals, and not the rich Asian investors/embezzlers and the rich Emirati – but that won't happen until it's more financially viable, and it's difficult to arrange that situation without inconveniencing (and angering) a lot of people, and having to field accusations of racism against Chinese immigrants (rather than classism against the rich elite who care nothing for Vancouver beyond its potential for real estate speculation).

In the meantime, we'll keep renting.

The problem isn't just additional housing, it's increased density in the existing areas that would spur redevelopment and the creation of new units.
Indeed. And SF residents push hard against building upward, unfortunately.

I live in Lower Pac Heights and recently got a notice in the mail that was urging people to oppose a new construction in the area. With the main reason being that it would be taller than the current height limit and establish a "dangerous precedent".

Sometimes I really hate this city...