4 ms·

More housing needs to be built, of course. But it is naive to think you can just ‘build housing’. If areas are not zoned for more housing that requires approva

by brk 3y ago

More housing needs to be built, of course. But it is naive to think you can just ‘build housing’. If areas are not zoned for more housing that requires approvals. Often times those approvals can have a negative impact on existing housing in various ways. Ways that may negatively impact valuations and this would be a change that buyers of the existing inventory were not informed of or expecting. That has to be considered even if there was a magic way to somehow say ‘this new zoning will result in a net better world in the end’ Infrastructure also needs to be considered. Increased population density may not have been accounted for in roads, sewers, etc. Often a fixable issue, with lots of time and money. Schools and other public services may need to be increased as well. There are other things to, but I think you get the point. Meanwhile, converting short term rentals back to standard housing IS something that can be done quickly and with very few approvals relatively speaking. Things were obviously already zoned for this and buyers would have been expecting this anyway. Converting short terms rentals back is likely to cause some amount of property holds to dump (sell) these properties that were only bought to be Airbnbs, potentially lowering house prices, at least temporarily. Ultimately this decision likely is one of the most efficient ways to begin to address the immediate problem in the fastest and most practical way.

ekanes 3y ago
> Often times those approvals can have a negative impact on existing housing in various ways. Ways that may negatively impact valuations and this would be a change that buyers of the existing inventory were not informed of or expecting. This is the problem. We don't build houses because people worry it will affect them, so the problem is pushed elsewhere, with everyone advocating that someone else solve the problem.
arcticbull 3y ago
> If areas are not zoned for more housing that requires approvals. So zone it for housing. I will once again float that zoning should be federalized, and everyone should be able to build whatever they want on their land by-right. If you have a problem with what I want to put on my land, buy my land. I'm not responsible for your property value, you are. The federal government has the authority to invalidate local city council ordinances - for instance the FCC invalidated Chicago rules around satellite dishes. They also regulate housing in e.g. the Fair Housing Act. The housing market is interstate commerce. Houston has no zoning rules and is one of the most affordable major metros in the US. Who cares that some guy lives behind a rollercoaster? [1] > Infrastructure also needs to be considered. If only there was an entity that was responsible for infrastructure, some kind of city council :) the council should be required to develop infrastructure to meet the actual demand in the area. [edit] The whole concept of single-family zoning started in Berkeley as a way to keep minorities from owning homes in the area. By making them more expensive. It quickly spread throughout the US. The whole concept of zoning was meant to be exclusionary through pricing, and guess what, it works. [2] [1] https://www.fastcompany.com/90766731/a-bold-case-against-zoning https://www.fastcompany.com/90766731/a-bold-case-against-zon... [2] https://www.sierraclub.org/san-francisco-bay/blog/2021/06/end-single-family-zoning-berkeley-forces-us-reflect-our-past https://www.sierraclub.org/san-francisco-bay/blog/2021/06/en...
- tivert 3y ago
  > I will once again float that zoning should be federalized, and everyone should be able to build whatever they want on their land by-right. If you have a problem with what I want to put on my land, buy my land. I'm not responsible for your property value. That's unreasonable. What if I'm your neighbor and want to turn my land into a toxic waste dump and burn tires for heat and/or fun? I'm not responsible for your property value, right? Communities are actual things. Pretending like they're not to "solve" one problem just means you'll get other problems.
  - arcticbull 3y ago
    > That's unreasonable. What if I'm your neighbor and want to turn my land into a toxic waste dumb and burn tires for heat and/or fun? I'm not responsible for your property value, right? There is plenty of prior art that draws exactly the right compromises. For example Houston as I mentioned, and Japan.
    - tivert 3y ago
      >> That's unreasonable. What if I'm your neighbor and want to turn my land into a toxic waste dumb and burn tires for heat and/or fun? I'm not responsible for your property value, right? > Zoning should be residential, commercial and industrial. Whatever happened to "everyone should be able to build whatever they want on their land by-right. If you have a problem with what I want to put on my land, buy my land. I'm not responsible for your property value." It seems like that got abandoned fast.
      - arcticbull 3y ago
        > Whatever happened to "everyone should be able to build whatever they want on their land by-right?" An obviously tortured reading of what I was arguing for, so I edited it for clarity. Hope that helps. I suspect however that you'd find burning tires in an urban area to run afoul not of zoning rules but of the EPA.
maximilianroos 3y ago
It addresses the problem of housing costs for long-term residents, we agree. It does that in two ways — it prevents tourists from competing for their house, and it reduces tourism, reducing local wages, which reduces housing demand from other locals. But that's bad! It's bad for the tourists and it's overall bad for the locals. It would be even faster to just prevent all exports from Hawaii, including tourism — housing prices would drop really quickly. Would you advocate for that? Instead, the goal should be to _increase_ the amount that people can trade, so you get some value from seeing a beach in Hawaii for a week and someone who lives in Hawaii can rent out their house or work in an airport or build a sightseeing business. And we can do that through allowing more stuff — including houses — to be built!
nouveaux 3y ago
"Ways that may negatively impact valuations" The housing crisis is when the valuation of the home are too high. The goal is to negatgively impact the valuations so that the prices come down, so that the poor and middle class can afford to live somewhere.
balderdash 3y ago
well you can solve the zoning issues "easily" - take the same approach they are taking with short term rentals - pass legislation. i don't see why impacting valuations can't be done to one group of people (residents) when it can be done to another (short term rental owners). I'm no fan of short term rentals, but this seems more of case of trying to look like you are doing something - while doing it to a group of people that don't vote locally - rather than addressing the more fundamental issues.
epistasis 3y ago
> Ultimately this decision likely is one of the most efficient ways to begin to address the immediate problem in the fastest and most practical way. Rarely is the most politically expedient solution the most efficient one, and here it goes double. So I take a little umbrage at you calling me naive and then saying something like this. When I say that people will do anything except the thing that will fix it, it's precisely because I know it is difficult. It's difficult because politically powerful people don't want change and don't want to admit to the harm they are causing to so many people so they can get their way and block new housing. Converting STRs back to houses will not bring much housing to the market. Just as a vacancy tax will not have much of an impact. Or banning foreign ownership. All these will only bring a few percentage back to the market. But there needs to be a much deeper structural change that allows for much more housing. Though I don't live in Hawaii, I follow a state legislator there very closely: Stanley Chang. He's one of the few people in the country willing to actually advocate for, and try to move the politics towards a solution: https://www.senatorchang.com/2023-housing-delegation https://www.senatorchang.com/2023-housing-delegation Spending political effort on distractions like AirBNB merely let people put off a real solution for a few more years. And perhaps in those few more years, they can come up with some sort of other boogeyman to chase so that the real solution can be delayed even more. AirBNB bans will not alleviate the housing crisis, but they will delay dealing with the real problem. And that itself is bad, inefficient, and harmful to Hawaiians.
- mistrial9 3y ago
  while you two bicker others pocket rents and go to the bar with their local politicians' assistants. Fortunes have reliably been made around the world, while intellectuals split hairs
  - epistasis 3y ago
    Sounds like the three of us are "bickering" while others pocket rents. Unless you are out there somehow getting politicans' assistants to change their bosses' positions at a bar. Instead, I am organizing in political groups that include politicians' assistants, lawyers, professional urban planners, community organizers, and random politically activated folks like myself. We craft legislation, build coalitions with other political organizations, meet with politicians and their legislative aids, but we don't buy them off in bars because that's a fantasy that doesn't work. If it did, I'd have done it years ago. But outside that aspect there's the important part of speaking in public spaces to move opinions of those who might similarly be politically activated. Hacker News is actually a very good place for this. People here tend to be quite active, and can be convinced to make calls to legislators, join organizations, and devote their time to finding more people to do the same. HN is one of the most LVT-pilled places on the internet. So I will continue bickering on here, finding more folks, and seeing ideas develop and spread among some influential people.

by brk 3y ago

ekanes 3y ago

> Often times those approvals can have a negative impact on existing housing in various ways. Ways that may negatively impact valuations and this would be a change that buyers of the existing inventory were not informed of or expecting. This is the problem. We don't build houses because people worry it will affect them, so the problem is pushed elsewhere, with everyone advocating that someone else solve the problem.

arcticbull 3y ago

> If areas are not zoned for more housing that requires approvals. So zone it for housing. I will once again float that zoning should be federalized, and everyone should be able to build whatever they want on their land by-right. If you have a problem with what I want to put on my land, buy my land. I'm not responsible for your property value, you are. The federal government has the authority to invalidate local city council ordinances - for instance the FCC invalidated Chicago rules around satellite dishes. They also regulate housing in e.g. the Fair Housing Act. The housing market is interstate commerce. Houston has no zoning rules and is one of the most affordable major metros in the US. Who cares that some guy lives behind a rollercoaster? [1] > Infrastructure also needs to be considered. If only there was an entity that was responsible for infrastructure, some kind of city council :) the council should be required to develop infrastructure to meet the actual demand in the area. [edit] The whole concept of single-family zoning started in Berkeley as a way to keep minorities from owning homes in the area. By making them more expensive. It quickly spread throughout the US. The whole concept of zoning was meant to be exclusionary through pricing, and guess what, it works. [2] [1] https://www.fastcompany.com/90766731/a-bold-case-against-zoning https://www.fastcompany.com/90766731/a-bold-case-against-zon... [2] https://www.sierraclub.org/san-francisco-bay/blog/2021/06/end-single-family-zoning-berkeley-forces-us-reflect-our-past https://www.sierraclub.org/san-francisco-bay/blog/2021/06/en...

tivert 3y ago
> I will once again float that zoning should be federalized, and everyone should be able to build whatever they want on their land by-right. If you have a problem with what I want to put on my land, buy my land. I'm not responsible for your property value. That's unreasonable. What if I'm your neighbor and want to turn my land into a toxic waste dump and burn tires for heat and/or fun? I'm not responsible for your property value, right? Communities are actual things. Pretending like they're not to "solve" one problem just means you'll get other problems.
- arcticbull 3y ago
  > That's unreasonable. What if I'm your neighbor and want to turn my land into a toxic waste dumb and burn tires for heat and/or fun? I'm not responsible for your property value, right? There is plenty of prior art that draws exactly the right compromises. For example Houston as I mentioned, and Japan.
  - tivert 3y ago
    >> That's unreasonable. What if I'm your neighbor and want to turn my land into a toxic waste dumb and burn tires for heat and/or fun? I'm not responsible for your property value, right? > Zoning should be residential, commercial and industrial. Whatever happened to "everyone should be able to build whatever they want on their land by-right. If you have a problem with what I want to put on my land, buy my land. I'm not responsible for your property value." It seems like that got abandoned fast.
    - arcticbull 3y ago
      > Whatever happened to "everyone should be able to build whatever they want on their land by-right?" An obviously tortured reading of what I was arguing for, so I edited it for clarity. Hope that helps. I suspect however that you'd find burning tires in an urban area to run afoul not of zoning rules but of the EPA.

maximilianroos 3y ago

It addresses the problem of housing costs for long-term residents, we agree. It does that in two ways — it prevents tourists from competing for their house, and it reduces tourism, reducing local wages, which reduces housing demand from other locals. But that's bad! It's bad for the tourists and it's overall bad for the locals. It would be even faster to just prevent all exports from Hawaii, including tourism — housing prices would drop really quickly. Would you advocate for that? Instead, the goal should be to _increase_ the amount that people can trade, so you get some value from seeing a beach in Hawaii for a week and someone who lives in Hawaii can rent out their house or work in an airport or build a sightseeing business. And we can do that through allowing more stuff — including houses — to be built!

nouveaux 3y ago

"Ways that may negatively impact valuations" The housing crisis is when the valuation of the home are too high. The goal is to negatgively impact the valuations so that the prices come down, so that the poor and middle class can afford to live somewhere.

balderdash 3y ago

well you can solve the zoning issues "easily" - take the same approach they are taking with short term rentals - pass legislation. i don't see why impacting valuations can't be done to one group of people (residents) when it can be done to another (short term rental owners). I'm no fan of short term rentals, but this seems more of case of trying to look like you are doing something - while doing it to a group of people that don't vote locally - rather than addressing the more fundamental issues.

epistasis 3y ago

> Ultimately this decision likely is one of the most efficient ways to begin to address the immediate problem in the fastest and most practical way. Rarely is the most politically expedient solution the most efficient one, and here it goes double. So I take a little umbrage at you calling me naive and then saying something like this. When I say that people will do anything except the thing that will fix it, it's precisely because I know it is difficult. It's difficult because politically powerful people don't want change and don't want to admit to the harm they are causing to so many people so they can get their way and block new housing. Converting STRs back to houses will not bring much housing to the market. Just as a vacancy tax will not have much of an impact. Or banning foreign ownership. All these will only bring a few percentage back to the market. But there needs to be a much deeper structural change that allows for much more housing. Though I don't live in Hawaii, I follow a state legislator there very closely: Stanley Chang. He's one of the few people in the country willing to actually advocate for, and try to move the politics towards a solution: https://www.senatorchang.com/2023-housing-delegation https://www.senatorchang.com/2023-housing-delegation Spending political effort on distractions like AirBNB merely let people put off a real solution for a few more years. And perhaps in those few more years, they can come up with some sort of other boogeyman to chase so that the real solution can be delayed even more. AirBNB bans will not alleviate the housing crisis, but they will delay dealing with the real problem. And that itself is bad, inefficient, and harmful to Hawaiians.

mistrial9 3y ago
while you two bicker others pocket rents and go to the bar with their local politicians' assistants. Fortunes have reliably been made around the world, while intellectuals split hairs
- epistasis 3y ago
  Sounds like the three of us are "bickering" while others pocket rents. Unless you are out there somehow getting politicans' assistants to change their bosses' positions at a bar. Instead, I am organizing in political groups that include politicians' assistants, lawyers, professional urban planners, community organizers, and random politically activated folks like myself. We craft legislation, build coalitions with other political organizations, meet with politicians and their legislative aids, but we don't buy them off in bars because that's a fantasy that doesn't work. If it did, I'd have done it years ago. But outside that aspect there's the important part of speaking in public spaces to move opinions of those who might similarly be politically activated. Hacker News is actually a very good place for this. People here tend to be quite active, and can be convinced to make calls to legislators, join organizations, and devote their time to finding more people to do the same. HN is one of the most LVT-pilled places on the internet. So I will continue bickering on here, finding more folks, and seeing ideas develop and spread among some influential people.