10 ms·

Hong Kong's is profitable mostly because it is run as a real estate company. They acquire land before adding a metro station and then lease/sell the valuable la

by acchow 8y ago

Hong Kong's is profitable mostly because it is run as a real estate company. They acquire land before adding a metro station and then lease/sell the valuable land after adding the station. Why don't other cities do this?

distances 8y ago
I think all land within city limits should be publicly acquired with eminent domain before zoning and building of utilities. No reason to let the land value increase fall to private landowners when it's all due to build-up of public services. Better use the profits for maintaining the services.
- mcv 8y ago
  That's roughly the case in Amsterdam. All land is technically owned by the city, and homeowners lease it for 50 years. When the lease will run out is always a detail to pay attention to when buying a home.
  - C1sc0cat 8y ago
    Leases that short must make getting a mortgage hard.
    - mcv 8y ago
      When the lease is about to run out, it means you need to reserve money for that, meaning the price of the house will be lower. I think you can still use the mortgage to pay for that lease. So overall it doesn't make much difference, it's just an extra thing to pay attention to, or you'll end up with unexpected costs.
      - icebraining 8y ago
        If the lease is set to expire in twenty years, can you know in advance how much it will cost to renew, so that you can include it in the mortgage? If so, then it doesn't really seem to help the city to capture the gains that may have accrued over those years. If not, what happens if the lease now costs much more and you can't afford it? Do you get kicked out of the house?
        falsedan 8y ago
        In the UK, usually you negotiate for the occupier to refresh the lease before concluding the sale. After 50 years, you'll probably be dead so you don't have to worry about lease renewal (in the UK the standard leasehold is 99 years, so you'll definitely be dead by then). If you were due for a renewal, and you didn't have the funds to pay the fee, you'd remortgage. If you were very wise, you'd take out an insurance policy when you moved in to pay for it.
        C1sc0cat 8y ago
        It effects the value of your estate and you wont get a mortgage on a short lease very easily.
        mcv 8y ago
        It's also not necessary for a short lease. If you're going to pay every month or every year, a mortgage is pointless. If you want to pay it off for 50 years, that's when you're probably going to need a mortgage.
        falsedan 8y ago
        In the UK, this part: > In the UK, usually you negotiate for the occupier to refresh the lease before concluding the sale is a requirement your mortgage lender will impose. Yes, it puts a burden of a few hundred pounds of solicitor's fees + lease renewal to get the leasehold reset when your executors/inheritors dispose of the property.
        GordonS 8y ago
        Aren't leaseholds pretty rare in the UK? I'm in Scotland, but I don't think I've ever come across a leasehold property here.
        mcv 8y ago
        I think the cost of the lease depends on an estimated value of the house. So if the lease expires soon, you can fairly accurately estimate what it's going to cost. If it expires in 20 years, it depends on what your house is going to be worth in 20 years. There are also arrangements where you pay this lease every month or every year, rather than paying it off for 50 years at once. If you can't afford to pay the whole thing at once, you can probably take a mortgage to pay for it, but you may also be able to switch to a monthly or yearly payment system. This estimated value of the house (the WOZ value) is also used for property taxes and you can appeal the estimate if you think it's wrong. In any case, it ensures that the city benefits to some degree from the rising value of the land.
      - C1sc0cat 8y ago
        In the Uk you wont get a mortgage on a short lease
  - distances 8y ago
    That's actually a great way to address this somewhat fairly. I just hope this would be more widespread. Here the city owns large parts and rents the land out with up to 100 year contracts, but lots of the land is also just privately owned.
- isostatic 8y ago
  A land value tax would sort this out. Build a new train station (crossrail was a massive subsidy to land owners[0]), land price increases, more is raised in tax, which pays for the infrastructure. On the other hand, build a new bypass, land prices drop, and nearby land owners get compensation for their inconvenience. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/18/house-prices-surge-near-crossrail-stations-by-up-to-82 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/18/house-prices...
titanix2 8y ago
Because it's not East-Asia. It works in HK, Japan, Taiwan or others countries because a train station increase value of the surroundings but in France a train station is a place you want to avoid, especially at night. In any city of a respectable size this is where you have you have a lot of beggars, thieves etc. trying to extorts you cigarettes and money. It is even worse for women that get everything of that plus sexual harassement (and it's not from native French).
- ReptileMan 8y ago
  I don't know. Securing a city is not that hard. East Asia is not some crime free utopia. So it boils down to lack of political will.
- adrianN 8y ago
  That seems to be a problem that can be fixed with some security guards.
  - icebraining 8y ago
    Not really. This kind of low-key theft and coercion are hard to catch in the act. You can criminalize loitering and begging itself, but that's problematic, plus rife for discriminatory abuse. Finally, even if you do catch them, the low amounts in question usually mean they'll spend a few hours at a police station, and then they'll go back.
- isostatic 8y ago
  I was shocked by how bad the metro stations were in Paris at night, I changed somewhere in the central zone and it was a right dive. I've never seen a London tube station, or Manchester metrolink, anywhere near as bad as Paris metro ones. No harassment, just homeless people pissing on the platforms etc. Paris is a dive though, give me Berlin, Munich, Rome, Prague, etc any day.

by acchow 8y ago

distances 8y ago

I think all land within city limits should be publicly acquired with eminent domain before zoning and building of utilities. No reason to let the land value increase fall to private landowners when it's all due to build-up of public services. Better use the profits for maintaining the services.

mcv 8y ago
That's roughly the case in Amsterdam. All land is technically owned by the city, and homeowners lease it for 50 years. When the lease will run out is always a detail to pay attention to when buying a home.
- C1sc0cat 8y ago
  Leases that short must make getting a mortgage hard.
  - mcv 8y ago
    When the lease is about to run out, it means you need to reserve money for that, meaning the price of the house will be lower. I think you can still use the mortgage to pay for that lease. So overall it doesn't make much difference, it's just an extra thing to pay attention to, or you'll end up with unexpected costs.
    - icebraining 8y ago
      If the lease is set to expire in twenty years, can you know in advance how much it will cost to renew, so that you can include it in the mortgage? If so, then it doesn't really seem to help the city to capture the gains that may have accrued over those years. If not, what happens if the lease now costs much more and you can't afford it? Do you get kicked out of the house?
      - falsedan 8y ago
        In the UK, usually you negotiate for the occupier to refresh the lease before concluding the sale. After 50 years, you'll probably be dead so you don't have to worry about lease renewal (in the UK the standard leasehold is 99 years, so you'll definitely be dead by then). If you were due for a renewal, and you didn't have the funds to pay the fee, you'd remortgage. If you were very wise, you'd take out an insurance policy when you moved in to pay for it.
        C1sc0cat 8y ago
        It effects the value of your estate and you wont get a mortgage on a short lease very easily.
        mcv 8y ago
        It's also not necessary for a short lease. If you're going to pay every month or every year, a mortgage is pointless. If you want to pay it off for 50 years, that's when you're probably going to need a mortgage.
        falsedan 8y ago
        In the UK, this part: > In the UK, usually you negotiate for the occupier to refresh the lease before concluding the sale is a requirement your mortgage lender will impose. Yes, it puts a burden of a few hundred pounds of solicitor's fees + lease renewal to get the leasehold reset when your executors/inheritors dispose of the property.
        GordonS 8y ago
        Aren't leaseholds pretty rare in the UK? I'm in Scotland, but I don't think I've ever come across a leasehold property here.
      - mcv 8y ago
        I think the cost of the lease depends on an estimated value of the house. So if the lease expires soon, you can fairly accurately estimate what it's going to cost. If it expires in 20 years, it depends on what your house is going to be worth in 20 years. There are also arrangements where you pay this lease every month or every year, rather than paying it off for 50 years at once. If you can't afford to pay the whole thing at once, you can probably take a mortgage to pay for it, but you may also be able to switch to a monthly or yearly payment system. This estimated value of the house (the WOZ value) is also used for property taxes and you can appeal the estimate if you think it's wrong. In any case, it ensures that the city benefits to some degree from the rising value of the land.
    - C1sc0cat 8y ago
      In the Uk you wont get a mortgage on a short lease
- distances 8y ago
  That's actually a great way to address this somewhat fairly. I just hope this would be more widespread. Here the city owns large parts and rents the land out with up to 100 year contracts, but lots of the land is also just privately owned.
isostatic 8y ago
A land value tax would sort this out. Build a new train station (crossrail was a massive subsidy to land owners[0]), land price increases, more is raised in tax, which pays for the infrastructure. On the other hand, build a new bypass, land prices drop, and nearby land owners get compensation for their inconvenience. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/18/house-prices-surge-near-crossrail-stations-by-up-to-82 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/18/house-prices...

titanix2 8y ago

Because it's not East-Asia. It works in HK, Japan, Taiwan or others countries because a train station increase value of the surroundings but in France a train station is a place you want to avoid, especially at night. In any city of a respectable size this is where you have you have a lot of beggars, thieves etc. trying to extorts you cigarettes and money. It is even worse for women that get everything of that plus sexual harassement (and it's not from native French).

ReptileMan 8y ago
I don't know. Securing a city is not that hard. East Asia is not some crime free utopia. So it boils down to lack of political will.
adrianN 8y ago
That seems to be a problem that can be fixed with some security guards.
- icebraining 8y ago
  Not really. This kind of low-key theft and coercion are hard to catch in the act. You can criminalize loitering and begging itself, but that's problematic, plus rife for discriminatory abuse. Finally, even if you do catch them, the low amounts in question usually mean they'll spend a few hours at a police station, and then they'll go back.
isostatic 8y ago
I was shocked by how bad the metro stations were in Paris at night, I changed somewhere in the central zone and it was a right dive. I've never seen a London tube station, or Manchester metrolink, anywhere near as bad as Paris metro ones. No harassment, just homeless people pissing on the platforms etc. Paris is a dive though, give me Berlin, Munich, Rome, Prague, etc any day.