4 ms·

Increasing density improves the value of the land tremendously. Opposition to density is about protecting a specific lifestyle, not money.

shuckles 7y ago
I don't think people believe that, even if it might be true. I've long thought a "density will make your land more valuable" advertising campaign would be interesting education which might sway some avaricious minds.
TrainedMonkey 7y ago
It could also be greedy local optimization, if everyone around you sells out your house is worth more. So you do want high rises everywhere except your own little neighborhood.
notatoad 7y ago
it increases the value of the land that is being densified. It does not increase the value of the surrounding existing low-density housing that is currently being held at a ridiculously high value because of the artificial scarcity that zoning laws have created. And it definitely doesn't make rents go down, which if you're a landowner in the bay area is a huge source of revenue.
- ohazi 7y ago
  > It does not increase the value of the surrounding existing low-density housing Yes it does. If I live in suburbia surrounded by suburbia, my house is worth X, because it's a house in a quiet area. I have to drive to SF to have fun, which sucks because it's far, traffic sucks, and parking sucks. If I live in suburbia but am surrounded by islands of new mixed-use buildings (housing on top, retail on the bottom), then my house is worth X + Y, because a) it's still a house in a quiet area, but b) it's now also close to walkable outdoor spaces with chic shops and restaurants, at least one of which is likely to become a popular upscale haunt. I now have the luxury of being able to quickly drive there in my car to hang out, and then quickly go back home to my (large, quiet) house when I'm done. I get convenient use of the new space, without the inconvenience of living in an overpriced shoebox above a nightclub. It's literally having your cake and eating it too.
  - sharkmerry 7y ago
    What about the people near the new mixed-use developments? Thats where the issues come in, if you are adjacent to it, there is noise, traffic etc which do not increase your value
    - ohazi 7y ago
      I think this is more of an issue when rezoning already dense areas like San Francisco. In SF, everybody's close to something they don't like. But if this is a critique on low density suburbs, then I don't really buy the argument. These new developments are mostly replacing run down commercial areas that are already well separated from suburbanites and their valuable property. They're mostly near transit and other commercial areas, but when they do come near residential zoning, it's almost always older apartments rather than houses. Even when they do end up on the border of a nice-house-suburb, the sprawl means that relatively few suburbanites live near the border, while relatively many do not, but still enjoy convenient access by car.
    - empath75 7y ago
      From my experience in Reston the houses near the mixed use developments are soaring in price. People like living close to shopping and restaurants.
  - jartelt 7y ago
    Would your home be worth more if the single family home next to you was demolished and a multi-floor apartment building was built next to you? The situation you describe is applicable to the apartment complexes and new developments being built along El Camino Real on the peninsula, but you are ignoring the issue of single family home zoning. There is a ton of opposition to upzoning in pretty much all neighborhoods on the peninsula. No body wants a duplex next to their single-family home, so they prevent any zoning changes.

shuckles 7y ago

I don't think people believe that, even if it might be true. I've long thought a "density will make your land more valuable" advertising campaign would be interesting education which might sway some avaricious minds.

TrainedMonkey 7y ago

It could also be greedy local optimization, if everyone around you sells out your house is worth more. So you do want high rises everywhere except your own little neighborhood.

notatoad 7y ago

it increases the value of the land that is being densified. It does not increase the value of the surrounding existing low-density housing that is currently being held at a ridiculously high value because of the artificial scarcity that zoning laws have created. And it definitely doesn't make rents go down, which if you're a landowner in the bay area is a huge source of revenue.

ohazi 7y ago
> It does not increase the value of the surrounding existing low-density housing Yes it does. If I live in suburbia surrounded by suburbia, my house is worth X, because it's a house in a quiet area. I have to drive to SF to have fun, which sucks because it's far, traffic sucks, and parking sucks. If I live in suburbia but am surrounded by islands of new mixed-use buildings (housing on top, retail on the bottom), then my house is worth X + Y, because a) it's still a house in a quiet area, but b) it's now also close to walkable outdoor spaces with chic shops and restaurants, at least one of which is likely to become a popular upscale haunt. I now have the luxury of being able to quickly drive there in my car to hang out, and then quickly go back home to my (large, quiet) house when I'm done. I get convenient use of the new space, without the inconvenience of living in an overpriced shoebox above a nightclub. It's literally having your cake and eating it too.
- sharkmerry 7y ago
  What about the people near the new mixed-use developments? Thats where the issues come in, if you are adjacent to it, there is noise, traffic etc which do not increase your value
  - ohazi 7y ago
    I think this is more of an issue when rezoning already dense areas like San Francisco. In SF, everybody's close to something they don't like. But if this is a critique on low density suburbs, then I don't really buy the argument. These new developments are mostly replacing run down commercial areas that are already well separated from suburbanites and their valuable property. They're mostly near transit and other commercial areas, but when they do come near residential zoning, it's almost always older apartments rather than houses. Even when they do end up on the border of a nice-house-suburb, the sprawl means that relatively few suburbanites live near the border, while relatively many do not, but still enjoy convenient access by car.
  - empath75 7y ago
    From my experience in Reston the houses near the mixed use developments are soaring in price. People like living close to shopping and restaurants.
- jartelt 7y ago
  Would your home be worth more if the single family home next to you was demolished and a multi-floor apartment building was built next to you? The situation you describe is applicable to the apartment complexes and new developments being built along El Camino Real on the peninsula, but you are ignoring the issue of single family home zoning. There is a ton of opposition to upzoning in pretty much all neighborhoods on the peninsula. No body wants a duplex next to their single-family home, so they prevent any zoning changes.