2 ms·

It's a plausible strategy as long as it's part of the plan. If you're in an environment that that makes construction difficult then cheap may not be the best ch

It's a plausible strategy as long as it's part of the plan. If you're in an environment that that makes construction difficult then cheap may not be the best choice. Seattle still has too many taxes and fees for my liking. I appreciate the desire for below market rate units and and low income housing fees. But it's completely ass backwards. Taxes are disincentives. Don't disincentivize the thing you want more of! Developers are slapped with extra fees if they want to build above a certain height. Complete opposite of what's correct. There should be a fee for not building high enough! Le sigh.

OrwellianChild 10y ago
Fellow Seattlite here... Do you have details on those building restrictions? I'm trying to come up to speed, but the complications of building in the city are more than I was bargaining for... Context for non-locals: Seattle is on track to become SF with about 100k new residents each year and an already large housing shortage. The city is struggling to combat it, with regulations designed to force new construction to include affordable units, rather than letting existing inventory move down market with age. If they're taxing dense construction on top of it, I'm inclined to make a few calls to learn more...