5 ms·

> 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

by 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.
derefr 9y ago
What part of "age/deterioration" makes units lose value, exactly? Is it just that buildings aren't built to last, or is it that newer buildings have newer amenities? If the former, would a trend of "over-engineering" buildings—or more rigorous building codes—mean that buildings will take longer to lose value, and so there will be fewer low-value units on the market at a time? If the latter, would a lack of recent domestic innovations mean that new units are basically "just like" old units, and thus stall the aging-down process?
- woolvalley 9y ago
  Houses have general wear and tear that need to get fixed. Housing designs and styles go out of date. Code gets updated to add new standards such as better insulation, earthquake resistance, plumbing. Roofs need to be replaced, walls need to be repainted, floors need replacement after general wear and tear. Electrical standards change since our demands have changed over generations. And most units don't keep all of this stuff up to date through renovation other than the bare minimum. Like a used car. Since buildings last a long time, a 1920s-1970s building is what is considered an aged building. 1980s is on the edge and 1990s is relatively new. A older building that was overengineered will retain better value and so on.
- amorphid 9y ago
  > What part of "age/deterioration" makes units lose value, exactly? Is it just that buildings aren't built to last, or is it that newer buildings have newer amenities? My place is (San Francisco) affordable, but: - 2 people have been shot & killed on my block in the last year - there's regularly poop on the sidewalk in front of my building - one of the two elevators in my building is often out of service (and occasionally it's both!) - my apartment has no kitchen - the plumbing is old (aka leaks) - the door to my bathroom doesn't quite close - the paint is peeling in some noticeable places - some places in the common areas never get dusted - random people walk in and steal packages from time to time - there's no air conditioner (don't really need it tough) - the heater barely works (don't really need it tough) - the electrical outlets are in funny places - the main window never stays open quite all the way - there are small gaps under the fake hardwood flooring - my bathtub looks like it was attacked by a 5 year old with a sharpie It's nice a primo place. Don't get me wrong, I love where I live. But I wouldn't pay primo prices for it. I'm just talking about "age/deterioration", since you asked.
ouid 9y ago
portland has special problems. The state constitution prevents property taxes from going up in proportion to the value of the property as long as you don't do any renovations on it. This means that the only economical reason to develop land is because you intend to charge a lot more for renting it, since any construction will cause your property taxes to spike.
zanny 9y ago
It is infinitely frustrating that because of this - that developers only ever build at worst medium end housing - that you either end up with roommates and no privacy or way more square footage than you need on your own.

by noodle 9y ago

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.

derefr 9y ago

What part of "age/deterioration" makes units lose value, exactly? Is it just that buildings aren't built to last, or is it that newer buildings have newer amenities? If the former, would a trend of "over-engineering" buildings—or more rigorous building codes—mean that buildings will take longer to lose value, and so there will be fewer low-value units on the market at a time? If the latter, would a lack of recent domestic innovations mean that new units are basically "just like" old units, and thus stall the aging-down process?

woolvalley 9y ago
Houses have general wear and tear that need to get fixed. Housing designs and styles go out of date. Code gets updated to add new standards such as better insulation, earthquake resistance, plumbing. Roofs need to be replaced, walls need to be repainted, floors need replacement after general wear and tear. Electrical standards change since our demands have changed over generations. And most units don't keep all of this stuff up to date through renovation other than the bare minimum. Like a used car. Since buildings last a long time, a 1920s-1970s building is what is considered an aged building. 1980s is on the edge and 1990s is relatively new. A older building that was overengineered will retain better value and so on.
amorphid 9y ago
> What part of "age/deterioration" makes units lose value, exactly? Is it just that buildings aren't built to last, or is it that newer buildings have newer amenities? My place is (San Francisco) affordable, but: - 2 people have been shot & killed on my block in the last year - there's regularly poop on the sidewalk in front of my building - one of the two elevators in my building is often out of service (and occasionally it's both!) - my apartment has no kitchen - the plumbing is old (aka leaks) - the door to my bathroom doesn't quite close - the paint is peeling in some noticeable places - some places in the common areas never get dusted - random people walk in and steal packages from time to time - there's no air conditioner (don't really need it tough) - the heater barely works (don't really need it tough) - the electrical outlets are in funny places - the main window never stays open quite all the way - there are small gaps under the fake hardwood flooring - my bathtub looks like it was attacked by a 5 year old with a sharpie It's nice a primo place. Don't get me wrong, I love where I live. But I wouldn't pay primo prices for it. I'm just talking about "age/deterioration", since you asked.

ouid 9y ago

portland has special problems. The state constitution prevents property taxes from going up in proportion to the value of the property as long as you don't do any renovations on it. This means that the only economical reason to develop land is because you intend to charge a lot more for renting it, since any construction will cause your property taxes to spike.

zanny 9y ago

It is infinitely frustrating that because of this - that developers only ever build at worst medium end housing - that you either end up with roommates and no privacy or way more square footage than you need on your own.