3 ms·

Is there a reason you're pointing out San Francisco and New York in particular? Is it because we both know they're by far the most absurd instances of this prob

Is there a reason you're pointing out San Francisco and New York in particular? Is it because we both know they're by far the most absurd instances of this problem and quite obviously unique in how absurd they are?

pj_mukh 1y ago
It all started in San Francisco and New York, but now the disease has spread everywhere. Frankly the disease was always there. Millennials trying to buy houses en-masse over COVID is what exposed it. Nobody notices it because it's nationwide (and to a certain extent worldwide) and it's a city-by-city policy issue [1][2][3]. But it's the same issue everywhere, over-indexing neighborhood preferences to slow down and kill construction projects behind a permitting process. [1]: Denver, https://denverite.com/2025/04/14/denver-construction-permitting-new-office/ https://denverite.com/2025/04/14/denver-construction-permitt... [2]: Toronto/Ontario, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-housing-construction-budget-doug-ford-1.7536883 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-housing-const... [3]: Atlanta, https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2024/06/20/metro-atlanta-housing-shortage-2022.html https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2024/06/20/metro-at...
- sorcerer-mar 1y ago
  I don't know what point you think you're arguing against. I am not denying permitting exists and it slows things down. The original point was that this is a major contributor to cost of construction, which it's not. They specifically said "a small cost seems to be the actual labor and materials [compared to permitting etc]"-- this is absolutely not true. It is not even close to reality in the US. Here you're just pointing out two facts: 1) Permitting exists (and slows things down) 2) We have a housing shortage No argument there! But what you are failing to do is demonstrate that (1) is the major driver of (2). The actual drivers are the cost of well-situated land, cost of labor, and cost of materials. This is evident in ANY actual budget from ANY actual construction project. Add to that the fact that large scale homebuilders are petrified of creating a 2008-style oversupply so they've been chronically underbuilding since then -- and will continue to do so regardless of permitting reform. This is evident in the housing starts compared to population growth since the GFC.
  - pj_mukh 1y ago
    There have been 3-4 different comprehensive reports linked in this thread laying out that actually holding costs (please search), legal fees are one of the main drivers of cost along with the 2 others you mentioned. But specifically, it's the worst one because it's unbounded (labor and materials is really costly now, but its a known cost) especially in states with heavy environment regulations or other zoning regulations. In those states, usually any one person can bring in a lawsuit alleging a lack of environment studies or alleged personal damage to slow down construction, so how much holding costs do you budget for? How much lawyer fees? How many people will bring lawsuits? You have no idea! Most projects just don't start if they have a bracket for unbounded costs like that. So now you have fewer and fewer parties willing to take on these projects with more and more people (neighbors, bureaucrats etc.) having the bandwidth to pour over each individual project looking for an opening to sue and stop. It's a doom-loop of red-tape. Do you think the California legislature (not the San Francisco legislature mind you) is wasting its time dealing with this, if it's "not that big of a deal" [1]. The governor ransomed the whole state budget to get this passed. Similar things happened in Minnesota. This is a huge deal. I encourage you to read the various books laying out example after example of these issues and the background data [2], [3]. [1]: https://calmatters.org/housing/2025/06/ceqa-urban-development-infill-budget/ https://calmatters.org/housing/2025/06/ceqa-urban-developmen... [2]: https://www.philipkhoward.com/the-rule-of-nobody https://www.philipkhoward.com/the-rule-of-nobody [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_(Klein_and_Thompson_book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_(Klein_and_Thompson_...
    - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
      Honestly I get the sense that you're not even reading these links. They do not substantiate the argument that you're making. I have at least skimmed every one of the links you've shared (except the Atlanta BizJournal since I don't have the nationwide subscription) and none of them say what you're suggesting they do. I agree there's a problem here. I agree that these risks kill many projects before they are birthed. I do not agree they come anywhere close to the costs of land, material, and especially labor for any actual construction project. Nothing you have posted even attempts to argue that, AFAICT.

pj_mukh 1y ago

It all started in San Francisco and New York, but now the disease has spread everywhere. Frankly the disease was always there. Millennials trying to buy houses en-masse over COVID is what exposed it. Nobody notices it because it's nationwide (and to a certain extent worldwide) and it's a city-by-city policy issue [1][2][3]. But it's the same issue everywhere, over-indexing neighborhood preferences to slow down and kill construction projects behind a permitting process. [1]: Denver, https://denverite.com/2025/04/14/denver-construction-permitting-new-office/ https://denverite.com/2025/04/14/denver-construction-permitt... [2]: Toronto/Ontario, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-housing-construction-budget-doug-ford-1.7536883 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-housing-const... [3]: Atlanta, https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2024/06/20/metro-atlanta-housing-shortage-2022.html https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2024/06/20/metro-at...

sorcerer-mar 1y ago
I don't know what point you think you're arguing against. I am not denying permitting exists and it slows things down. The original point was that this is a major contributor to cost of construction, which it's not. They specifically said "a small cost seems to be the actual labor and materials [compared to permitting etc]"-- this is absolutely not true. It is not even close to reality in the US. Here you're just pointing out two facts: 1) Permitting exists (and slows things down) 2) We have a housing shortage No argument there! But what you are failing to do is demonstrate that (1) is the major driver of (2). The actual drivers are the cost of well-situated land, cost of labor, and cost of materials. This is evident in ANY actual budget from ANY actual construction project. Add to that the fact that large scale homebuilders are petrified of creating a 2008-style oversupply so they've been chronically underbuilding since then -- and will continue to do so regardless of permitting reform. This is evident in the housing starts compared to population growth since the GFC.
- pj_mukh 1y ago
  There have been 3-4 different comprehensive reports linked in this thread laying out that actually holding costs (please search), legal fees are one of the main drivers of cost along with the 2 others you mentioned. But specifically, it's the worst one because it's unbounded (labor and materials is really costly now, but its a known cost) especially in states with heavy environment regulations or other zoning regulations. In those states, usually any one person can bring in a lawsuit alleging a lack of environment studies or alleged personal damage to slow down construction, so how much holding costs do you budget for? How much lawyer fees? How many people will bring lawsuits? You have no idea! Most projects just don't start if they have a bracket for unbounded costs like that. So now you have fewer and fewer parties willing to take on these projects with more and more people (neighbors, bureaucrats etc.) having the bandwidth to pour over each individual project looking for an opening to sue and stop. It's a doom-loop of red-tape. Do you think the California legislature (not the San Francisco legislature mind you) is wasting its time dealing with this, if it's "not that big of a deal" [1]. The governor ransomed the whole state budget to get this passed. Similar things happened in Minnesota. This is a huge deal. I encourage you to read the various books laying out example after example of these issues and the background data [2], [3]. [1]: https://calmatters.org/housing/2025/06/ceqa-urban-development-infill-budget/ https://calmatters.org/housing/2025/06/ceqa-urban-developmen... [2]: https://www.philipkhoward.com/the-rule-of-nobody https://www.philipkhoward.com/the-rule-of-nobody [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_(Klein_and_Thompson_book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_(Klein_and_Thompson_...
  - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
    Honestly I get the sense that you're not even reading these links. They do not substantiate the argument that you're making. I have at least skimmed every one of the links you've shared (except the Atlanta BizJournal since I don't have the nationwide subscription) and none of them say what you're suggesting they do. I agree there's a problem here. I agree that these risks kill many projects before they are birthed. I do not agree they come anywhere close to the costs of land, material, and especially labor for any actual construction project. Nothing you have posted even attempts to argue that, AFAICT.