4 ms·

Nono, wait. The housing being built in Portland over the past handful of years is of a specific type and a certain price range. I regularly check the rental ra

Nono, wait. The housing being built in Portland over the past handful of years is of a specific type and a certain price range. I regularly check the rental rates for units in these new complexes as they come on line and I have yet to find units that I can afford. Portland is very lax with it's high density zoning, or strict depending on how you look at it. They promoted high density housing by disincentivizing alternative zoning types (making it extremely difficult to find non retail commercial spaces). The lack of rent control combined with the proliferation of high-end retail + housing spaces contributes to housing as an investment opportunity which in turn makes low end rent unstable and rare. This past year over half of the renters on my block were kicked out of their homes when owner decided to sell. Sure, there's a glut of $1,500 studios and one bedroom units available, but there's a real lack of rooms or units below $1,000.

skybrian 9y ago
If there's a glut, I wonder if it would work to look for apartments that have been on the market for a while and see if they'll make a deal?
pishpash 9y ago
Welcome to the 19th century: divide up the $1500 studio and live like tenants, you know, as in people in tenements.
- dang 9y ago
  Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News? We're trying for a somewhat higher quality of discussion here.
  - pishpash 9y ago
    I'm sorry you're so delusional about the reality of how density actually works in some of America's cities, that the comment flew over your head. Now why don't you mind your own business?
    - dang 9y ago
      Alas, since I moderate this place, it is my business. You've posted many more unsubstantive comments than that one, and worse, many uncivil ones. We ban accounts that do that, so would you please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow them from now on?
noodle 9y ago
> The housing being built in Portland over the past handful of years is of a specific type and a certain price range. This is true for every city. Developers don't really build low-end units. They build high-end units and rely on the age/deterioration of other buildings to eventually turn them into lower-end buildings. This is sort of working out because people are generally moving back into cities and are willing to pay a premium for it. The reason why I think this article about Portland is interesting is either their influx of people into the city has slowed/stopped, or they've built so many units that its outpaced the influx. A common narrative in cities is "we're building so many units yet prices are still high!!!" But clearly the equation should be rate of new units coming into the market vs rate of change of city population. Which also feels like common sense. But maybe its more like, this article is interesting because it shows there's light at the end of the tunnel.
- evanlivingston 9y ago
  My concern is if and how high density zoning promotes growth models and patterns that detract from them availability and creation of affordable housing. It's also sad to realizing that affordable housing in the metropolitan US also typically means low-end.
  - ewjordan 9y ago
    The median family income in Portland (the city proper, not the metro area) was $77k in 2015 according to http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/oregon/portland/ http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/oregon/portland/. $1500/month is totally within the bounds of the typical 40:1 income to rent ratio, so it's unsurprising that available rents tend to be in that range. If you want something cheaper than that, then yes, it's going to be low-end. I'm not really sure what you're hoping for. Rents were creeping further upwards until building started to catch up with people moving in, and now they're coming down. Are you really trying to argue that the best move, in light of this evidence, is to build less?
    - evanlivingston 9y ago
      Nope, not making that argument at all. I was just wanting to point out that affordable housing is still not the easiest to find in Portland.
sushisource 9y ago
The article addresses exactly this "myth" in the 3rd to last paragraph. A different way of stating what you're saying is that the new supply hasn't existed long enough, which is probably true, but it's not necessarily an indication of a problem with the market.
- evanlivingston 9y ago
  Wait and see if it trickles down? There's a lack of affordable housing. Isn't that a problem with the market?
  - sushisource 9y ago
    Sure, but what's the alternative? Magically conjure more supply into existence? Or, you mean, enforce policy that artificially controls rent, which as mentioned in other comments on this post, is basically a fancy way of pretending the problem doesn't exist and has knock-on bad side-effects.
    - evanlivingston 9y ago
      I don't mean to say don't build high density housing. I think it's a strong part of keeping housing affordable. However I think it's important to keep in mind that building a ton of units and not having other policies in place isn't going to magically get us lower rents.
      - oconnore 9y ago
        > keep in mind that building a ton of units and not having other policies in place isn't going to magically get us lower rents. No, that will actually "magically" get you lower rents, for some definition of "a ton".
        evanlivingston 9y ago
        Lol
aaronbwebber 9y ago
The $1000 units are gone, forever. If Portland builds enough to keep up with demand, eventually inflation will cause the rent in real terms to be equivalent to $1000 2017 dollars, but the sticker price for these units will never be $1000 again. There's a real financial incentive for developers to not take lower rents than they budgeted for - those rents need to cover the payments on the loans they took out to finance the construction of the building. It's why it's usually much more attractive for them to offer incentives like a free month of rent - sure, they take a hit up front, but the long term financial viability of the project is intact. But if they take on a bunch of leases with lower rents than they projected, now they have a building which is just losing money every month. Also, be careful what you wish for - the way you would get back to $1000 a month rents is Detroit-style depopulation, and that really sucks.
- maxlamb 9y ago
  Maybe we could have something in the middle, a bit like Berlin. There's got to be a middle ground between Detroit's $500 rent and most popular cities' $1500+ for 1 bedrooms.
  - evanlivingston 9y ago
    I'll look into it later, but do you have idea what contributes to Europeans paying significantly less for housing?
    - rsynnott 9y ago
      It’s not Europeans in general; some European cities, including some German cities, are very expensive. Berlin is an oddity. Many European countries, do, or have at some point in the past, had extensive social housing production, which does help ease pressure.
    - ddorian43 9y ago
      Uh, NL sucks. Unless you're local and you get put from birth on the waiting list (which you can now only apply on 18 years). So by 40 you may get cheap housing.
oconnore 9y ago
> I regularly check the rental rates for units in these new complexes as they come on line and I have yet to find units that I can afford. The whole point of this article is not that new affordable units are being built, but that the construction of new high-price units causes older units to become available at lower prices. The link is indirect, because markets are indirect. It seems like you either didn't read the article, or don't fully comprehend supply and demand.
- evanlivingston 9y ago
  I was trying to make the point that I personally haven't seen an increase in availability of units at a lower price.
  - oconnore 9y ago
    True, it's still early. The author says this: > The more apartments stand vacant, and the longer they go unfilled, the greater the pressure on landlords to drop prices. Already, some newer apartments are offering move-in bonuses, like a months’ free rent. It’s a sign that the market is turning.
jogjayr 9y ago
When there's a shortage of housing, $1000 units become $1500 units. If housing growth kept pace with population growth this would not happen.

skybrian 9y ago

If there's a glut, I wonder if it would work to look for apartments that have been on the market for a while and see if they'll make a deal?

pishpash 9y ago

Welcome to the 19th century: divide up the $1500 studio and live like tenants, you know, as in people in tenements.

dang 9y ago
Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News? We're trying for a somewhat higher quality of discussion here.
- pishpash 9y ago
  I'm sorry you're so delusional about the reality of how density actually works in some of America's cities, that the comment flew over your head. Now why don't you mind your own business?
  - dang 9y ago
    Alas, since I moderate this place, it is my business. You've posted many more unsubstantive comments than that one, and worse, many uncivil ones. We ban accounts that do that, so would you please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow them from now on?

noodle 9y ago

> The housing being built in Portland over the past handful of years is of a specific type and a certain price range. This is true for every city. Developers don't really build low-end units. They build high-end units and rely on the age/deterioration of other buildings to eventually turn them into lower-end buildings. This is sort of working out because people are generally moving back into cities and are willing to pay a premium for it. The reason why I think this article about Portland is interesting is either their influx of people into the city has slowed/stopped, or they've built so many units that its outpaced the influx. A common narrative in cities is "we're building so many units yet prices are still high!!!" But clearly the equation should be rate of new units coming into the market vs rate of change of city population. Which also feels like common sense. But maybe its more like, this article is interesting because it shows there's light at the end of the tunnel.

evanlivingston 9y ago
My concern is if and how high density zoning promotes growth models and patterns that detract from them availability and creation of affordable housing. It's also sad to realizing that affordable housing in the metropolitan US also typically means low-end.
- ewjordan 9y ago
  The median family income in Portland (the city proper, not the metro area) was $77k in 2015 according to http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/oregon/portland/ http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/oregon/portland/. $1500/month is totally within the bounds of the typical 40:1 income to rent ratio, so it's unsurprising that available rents tend to be in that range. If you want something cheaper than that, then yes, it's going to be low-end. I'm not really sure what you're hoping for. Rents were creeping further upwards until building started to catch up with people moving in, and now they're coming down. Are you really trying to argue that the best move, in light of this evidence, is to build less?
  - evanlivingston 9y ago
    Nope, not making that argument at all. I was just wanting to point out that affordable housing is still not the easiest to find in Portland.

sushisource 9y ago

The article addresses exactly this "myth" in the 3rd to last paragraph. A different way of stating what you're saying is that the new supply hasn't existed long enough, which is probably true, but it's not necessarily an indication of a problem with the market.

evanlivingston 9y ago
Wait and see if it trickles down? There's a lack of affordable housing. Isn't that a problem with the market?
- sushisource 9y ago
  Sure, but what's the alternative? Magically conjure more supply into existence? Or, you mean, enforce policy that artificially controls rent, which as mentioned in other comments on this post, is basically a fancy way of pretending the problem doesn't exist and has knock-on bad side-effects.
  - evanlivingston 9y ago
    I don't mean to say don't build high density housing. I think it's a strong part of keeping housing affordable. However I think it's important to keep in mind that building a ton of units and not having other policies in place isn't going to magically get us lower rents.
    - oconnore 9y ago
      > keep in mind that building a ton of units and not having other policies in place isn't going to magically get us lower rents. No, that will actually "magically" get you lower rents, for some definition of "a ton".
      - evanlivingston 9y ago
        Lol

aaronbwebber 9y ago

The $1000 units are gone, forever. If Portland builds enough to keep up with demand, eventually inflation will cause the rent in real terms to be equivalent to $1000 2017 dollars, but the sticker price for these units will never be $1000 again. There's a real financial incentive for developers to not take lower rents than they budgeted for - those rents need to cover the payments on the loans they took out to finance the construction of the building. It's why it's usually much more attractive for them to offer incentives like a free month of rent - sure, they take a hit up front, but the long term financial viability of the project is intact. But if they take on a bunch of leases with lower rents than they projected, now they have a building which is just losing money every month. Also, be careful what you wish for - the way you would get back to $1000 a month rents is Detroit-style depopulation, and that really sucks.

maxlamb 9y ago
Maybe we could have something in the middle, a bit like Berlin. There's got to be a middle ground between Detroit's $500 rent and most popular cities' $1500+ for 1 bedrooms.
- evanlivingston 9y ago
  I'll look into it later, but do you have idea what contributes to Europeans paying significantly less for housing?
  - rsynnott 9y ago
    It’s not Europeans in general; some European cities, including some German cities, are very expensive. Berlin is an oddity. Many European countries, do, or have at some point in the past, had extensive social housing production, which does help ease pressure.
  - ddorian43 9y ago
    Uh, NL sucks. Unless you're local and you get put from birth on the waiting list (which you can now only apply on 18 years). So by 40 you may get cheap housing.

oconnore 9y ago

> I regularly check the rental rates for units in these new complexes as they come on line and I have yet to find units that I can afford. The whole point of this article is not that new affordable units are being built, but that the construction of new high-price units causes older units to become available at lower prices. The link is indirect, because markets are indirect. It seems like you either didn't read the article, or don't fully comprehend supply and demand.

evanlivingston 9y ago
I was trying to make the point that I personally haven't seen an increase in availability of units at a lower price.
- oconnore 9y ago
  True, it's still early. The author says this: > The more apartments stand vacant, and the longer they go unfilled, the greater the pressure on landlords to drop prices. Already, some newer apartments are offering move-in bonuses, like a months’ free rent. It’s a sign that the market is turning.

jogjayr 9y ago

When there's a shortage of housing, $1000 units become $1500 units. If housing growth kept pace with population growth this would not happen.