9 ms·

You keep telling yourselves that while we in Seattle keep building and funneling more people that would have lived in San Francisco here because we're able to k

You keep telling yourselves that while we in Seattle keep building and funneling more people that would have lived in San Francisco here because we're able to keep up with Demand ;)

delecti 9y ago
The 10% rent increase I'm looking at this year leaves me skeptical of your argument that Seattle is adequately keeping up with demand.
- futhey 9y ago
  I'm actually pretty proud of Seattle's efforts to re-evaluate zoning regulations in the late 2000's. Almost every neighborhood has been zoned to build taller, and if we're speaking strictly about rents, it's been quite effective. The city added just under 200,000 new residents (2005 - 2017), and the increases in mean rent costs were comparatively modest when compared to increasing demand (https://goo.gl/zadHW6 https://goo.gl/zadHW6). There has still been a noticeable increase, but in part because the City of Seattle underestimated the rate of future growth in demand (https://goo.gl/QKpb36 https://goo.gl/QKpb36). (The city is actually making moves right now to increase housing supply over the next few years to prevent accelerating increases in rents). Demand, however, is not the only factor commonly cited as putting pressure on housing prices. As tech workers flood the city and mean incomes outpace inflation (which has a positive effect on the overall economy), their purchasing power increases. New construction is of comparatively higher quality, especially in neighborhoods like Capitol Hill, which was not nearly as desirable before 2000. This is another part of the “noticeable increase”. As neighborhoods become more desirable (such as SLU, Ballard, and Capitol Hill), residents suddenly find themselves paying a premium (which is not reflected in mean pricing). I believe this is much of what has contributed to the idea that rents have risen dramatically (even when the data says otherwise). Things may not be optimal (there are certainly challenges with market mismatch and misplaced incentives), but I don't think anyone in the industry is saying the major challenges are regulatory.
grillvogel 9y ago
does the ";)" mean you're being sarcastic, because I have no idea how you reached that conclusion otherwise
- timothycrosley 9y ago
  Seattle has built several times the housing of San Francisco and Oakland combined over the last few years: http://www.spur.org/news/2017-06-15/keep-building-oakland http://www.spur.org/news/2017-06-15/keep-building-oakland. , and while getting more expensive is doing much much better than the Bay Area at keeping cost down. All the while, being an equally good place to live (I prefer Seattle by leaps and bounds, many prefer San Francisco.). As a result of this, Seattle is also growing at 3X the rate of San Francisco.

You keep telling yourselves that while we in Seattle keep building and funneling more people that would have lived in San Francisco here because we're able to keep up with Demand ;)

delecti 9y ago

The 10% rent increase I'm looking at this year leaves me skeptical of your argument that Seattle is adequately keeping up with demand.

futhey 9y ago
I'm actually pretty proud of Seattle's efforts to re-evaluate zoning regulations in the late 2000's. Almost every neighborhood has been zoned to build taller, and if we're speaking strictly about rents, it's been quite effective. The city added just under 200,000 new residents (2005 - 2017), and the increases in mean rent costs were comparatively modest when compared to increasing demand (https://goo.gl/zadHW6 https://goo.gl/zadHW6). There has still been a noticeable increase, but in part because the City of Seattle underestimated the rate of future growth in demand (https://goo.gl/QKpb36 https://goo.gl/QKpb36). (The city is actually making moves right now to increase housing supply over the next few years to prevent accelerating increases in rents). Demand, however, is not the only factor commonly cited as putting pressure on housing prices. As tech workers flood the city and mean incomes outpace inflation (which has a positive effect on the overall economy), their purchasing power increases. New construction is of comparatively higher quality, especially in neighborhoods like Capitol Hill, which was not nearly as desirable before 2000. This is another part of the “noticeable increase”. As neighborhoods become more desirable (such as SLU, Ballard, and Capitol Hill), residents suddenly find themselves paying a premium (which is not reflected in mean pricing). I believe this is much of what has contributed to the idea that rents have risen dramatically (even when the data says otherwise). Things may not be optimal (there are certainly challenges with market mismatch and misplaced incentives), but I don't think anyone in the industry is saying the major challenges are regulatory.

grillvogel 9y ago

does the ";)" mean you're being sarcastic, because I have no idea how you reached that conclusion otherwise

timothycrosley 9y ago
Seattle has built several times the housing of San Francisco and Oakland combined over the last few years: http://www.spur.org/news/2017-06-15/keep-building-oakland http://www.spur.org/news/2017-06-15/keep-building-oakland. , and while getting more expensive is doing much much better than the Bay Area at keeping cost down. All the while, being an equally good place to live (I prefer Seattle by leaps and bounds, many prefer San Francisco.). As a result of this, Seattle is also growing at 3X the rate of San Francisco.