Real Estate Crash thread

[RoooR]

And you’d live in a shithole.


Attachment 357104

This looks pretty shitholy to me.


This doesn't look so bad.

[RootSkier]

I don't know about the particular Bill nor the accuracy of the reasons it didn't pass....but as a SFH owner its not about property values for me....its 100% about the type of crowd that dwells in multi-dwelling places....aka apts.

So it's about property values, then? Either that or racism.

[Foggy_Goggles]

people bitching about the lack of affordable housing but who also want to shut down denser housing options are being a bit hypocritical.

Welcome to the mountains of Colorado, where everyone is entitled to piss of their deck and have granite (or "solid surface" for you "mountain modern" folks) counters. It's a fucking joke, in the rest of the world they have these things called "apartment buildings" but her the fact that "nobody wants to live in those" means that we all get to pay a realestate transfer tax (or if you are a developer you can just buy your way out of that as a term of your SIA...seriously) such that politicians can give each other blowies and play designer and a handful of people get tax payer subsidized >$500 sq. ft build cost housing.

[montanaskier]

“Affordable housing” is always a hot topic here in Vail and every other mountain town. I question what that means. What’s affordable? If you are from Alabama or Iowa or Arkansas, affordable is a lot different than here in Vail or downtown San Fran. It’s never going to be truly affordable. These areas are so limited by the available dirt and that dirt isn’t cheap and it’s never going to be cheap. But can we do somethings government wise to make some things more affordable than normal? Yes, but due to lack of dirt, it’s always going to be an issue.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[RoooR]

If you don't want to live next to an apartment building you're well within your rights to buy the lot next door. Or all the lots around you. Or move out of town where you can buy 5 acres to ensure you'll always have a buffer. I guess I'm just a lot more pro free market and pro growth then most of the people on here.

[sirbumpsalot]

I get it; been both homeowner and apartment dweller. But, at the same time, people bitching about the lack of affordable housing but who also want to shut down denser housing options are being a bit hypocritical.

Oh I agree it is hypocritical when its "I am now in, close the door", but if the door is already closed and you buy into that situation (SFH only neighborhoods), its a bit of a different story. You deserve a choice between mix-density neighborhoods and a SFH neighborhoods....not everyone wants one or the other.

Let both coexist and not seek to impose one POV on the other.

[char_]

A few states have removed the SFH zoning and now by default allow up to four unit multi unit everywhere.

Oregon is one.

[sirbumpsalot]

So it's about property values, then? Either that or racism.

Are you blanketing all apt dwellers as non-white? Because that sounds like what you are doing.

[Benny Profane]

“Affordable housing” is always a hot topic here in Vail and every other mountain town. I question what that means. What’s affordable? If you are from Alabama or Iowa or Arkansas, affordable is a lot different than here in Vail or downtown San Fran. It’s never going to be truly affordable. These areas are so limited by the available dirt and that dirt isn’t cheap and it’s never going to be cheap. But can we do somethings government wise to make some things more affordable than normal? Yes, but due to lack of dirt, it’s always going to be an issue.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Affordable is what the average wage earning year round resident working for local businesses, like the ski hills, can afford.

[sirbumpsalot]

This looks pretty shitholy to me.


This doesn't look so bad.

This sums up my point earlier....some people desire high density, some desire low density. Each side bashes the other....coexist...don't squash or force yourself on the other

[AdironRider]

Hah sure it is Benny.

Around the Tetons, the people who complain about a lack of "affordable housing" really are complaining about affording rent when working part time catering two nights a week (and only three months in summer and three months in winter), traveling to Moab twice a year, buying a 5k mountain bike, and oh yeah, you also need to allow my two untrained dogs for no additional security deposit.

[muted]

Let’s hear your arguments for it, in your back yard.

I won’t call it necessarily affordable, but we have more deed restricted employee housing, than any other resort in North America. I’m all for it. Especially when it’s done well.

But not the way he suggests. They tried that in Chicago, it was called Cabrini Green.

I knew you couldn't explain your point.

[RoooR]

Imagine being so entitled that you think you should have a say in what other people do with their private property.

[char_]

Imagine being so entitled that you think you should have a say in what other people do with their private property.

Yeah! What’s up with zoning, building codes, HOAs and local ordinances! Fucking entitled people.

[sirbumpsalot]

Imagine being so entitled that you think you should have a say in what other people do with their private property.

Agreed....thats why zoning exists and developers and HOAs make rules beforehand so that you KNOW what you are buying into and can choose otherwise. There are options for all. Just don't change the rules after the fact and screw those who are already there. If there are changes needed or desired, you get buy in from the stakeholders, not a politician or unelected busybody.

[muted]

Yeah! What’s up with zoning, building codes, HOAs and local ordinances! Fucking entitled people.

This is in a suburb of Austin among some pretty nice houses, just a sliver of what's int he backyard. You can climb up some rickety stairs and peer into the owners neighbors yard. I'm sure they loved the constant stream of tourons like me that visited the place too.

[RootSkier]

Are you blanketing all apt dwellers as non-white? Because that sounds like what you are doing.

The history of single-family zoning is steeped in racism. You can look it up, but here's a quick take: https://www.kqed.org/news/11840548/t...ly-home-zoning

[54-46]

Oh I agree it is hypocritical when its "I am now in, close the door", but if the door is already closed and you buy into that situation (SFH only neighborhoods), its a bit of a different story. You deserve a choice between mix-density neighborhoods and a SFH neighborhoods....not everyone wants one or the other.

Let both coexist and not seek to impose one POV on the other.

IMO, people need to be a little more open to change and more flexible in their thinking. Of course, YMMV.

Loosening multi-dwelling issues and incentivizing denser housing near transit wouldn’t necessarily create “apartment dweller” issues.

Things can’t remain static; our population and society keeps changing.

Just because a place has been SFH zoned traditionally doesn’t mean that such a neighborhood deserves to have a “moat” when our population has increased and needs change.

The “moat” is one aspect people point to when they discuss how segregated life has become between the haves/have nots (race is an additional component to be discussed).

And, as pointed out above, allowing up to 4 units in residential areas that used to be just SFH can still be “family friendly.” There’s one hybrid way to partially address the issue.

How many families are split custody and have two parents with kid(s) in smaller homes than a “typical” 3/2 1700 sq ft? Half of the marriages end in divorce.

Don’t they deserve to be able to live in a relatively “family friendly” situation versus being set off to the side with “apartment dwellers?”

[AdironRider]

I think the problem with a lot of the affordable housing talk is the level of entitlement a lot of people have to live exactly where they want, for however much they deem affordable. Your desire to live within walking distance of everything your little heart wants doesn't mean you automatically have the right to have it.

This becomes very acute in super desirable areas like mountain towns. Everyone wants to live there, but no matter how many high rises you put in, there will always be a constraint of supply at some point. Always. There is only so much beachfront property, there is only so much real estate in downtown NYC. The list goes on. Meanwhile, you can live 10,20, or 30 minutes away and things are more available, or more affordable, or whatever. You cannot legislate away supply and demand when there are limits to how many people can physically occupy a space.

Call it a moat if you want, but there are carrying capacities for places that are determined by factors that are not always within your control. Think sewage capacity. One example is Hoback Junction just south of Jackson. That place was the original affordable place to live in the valley, but was overbuilt and now has severe water quality issues from groundwater contamination as a result of all that development. That is a carrying capacity for that area that no zoning law is going to fix.

[Benny Profane]

Hah sure it is Benny.

Around the Tetons, the people who complain about a lack of "affordable housing" really are complaining about affording rent when working part time catering two nights a week (and only three months in summer and three months in winter), traveling to Moab twice a year, buying a 5k mountain bike, and oh yeah, you also need to allow my two untrained dogs for no additional security deposit.

Not much of an argument here. Or, how about, what a non working retiree from the east can afford to live the rest of his life in the mountains in winter and travel most of the rest of the year?

[sirbumpsalot]

The history of single-family zoning is steeped in racism. You can look it up, but here's a quick take: https://www.kqed.org/news/11840548/t...ly-home-zoning

So you are calling me racist.

[Toadman]

Or use a property tax surcharge on non-primary residential properties to fund workforce housing.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

In WA state they charge a quarter point to the seller on the sale of their home for low cost housing. One way or another people who earn a living pay for those that don't.

[Toadman]

If you don't want to live next to an apartment building you're well within your rights to buy the lot next door. Or all the lots around you. Or move out of town where you can buy 5 acres to ensure you'll always have a buffer. I guess I'm just a lot more pro free market and pro growth then most of the people on here.

There are some very nice homes around here with mountain views. A lot of lots in front of those views are vacant. When I did a tax record search of some of these vacant lots, I discovered that a large number of them are owned by the individuals in the home behind the vacant lot.

In fact I know a former NFL football player who bought the lot next to him when it came up for sale. He didn't want anyone next to him. He fenced it and put in a massive playground for his kids.

[RoooR]

There are some very nice homes around here with mountain views. A lot of lots in front of those views are vacant. When I did a tax record search of some of these vacant lots, I discovered that a large number of them are owned by the individuals in the home behind the vacant lot.

In fact I know a former NFL football player who bought the lot next to him when it came up for sale. He didn't want anyone next to him. He fenced it and put in a massive playground for his kids.

As is your right in a free market economy. What you shouldn't do is get a bunch of your angry neighbors together to harass your local elected officials to get the developers permits revoked. That's rent seeking.

[Toadman]

As is your right in a free market economy. What you shouldn't do is get a bunch of your angry neighbors together to harass your local elected officials to get the developers permits revoked. That's rent seeking.

Harass? From what I have personally dealt with, it's the other way around. That's fascism. YMMV.