4 ms·

You haven't addressed any of the real drivers of costs, however. Such as: -compliance with the 891-page residential building code -that making one change to

You haven't addressed any of the real drivers of costs, however. Such as: -compliance with the 891-page residential building code -that making one change to an existing, out of compliance dwelling means that the whole building must then be brought up to the latest building code in all respects (which means that tearing it down and building a newer, more expensive structure which sells for more makes more sense in financial terms) -expensive and onerous licensing of tradesmen leads to more expensive maintenance construction -ridiculous levels of code enforcement -corruption and collusion of developers and local politicians Nice verbiage, though ... makes it sound like you know what you are talking about.

dclusin 13y ago
He identified problems and proposed a solution to those problems. You've identified problems and used them as an excuse to continue the status quo or bring us back to a previous and less safe time in history. What exactly do you find onerous in this 891 page residential code? Which country, state, municipality is it from? Could you provide a link? Who on the city council have you talked to about it? If a foundation is cracked and unsound the landlord should be able to slap a new coat of paint on it and then flip it? Licensing of tradesman is critical because it saves lives and mitigates losses from negligence. If you don't think it is, come to California and ask a Sheriff how swell of a job those pot farmers did wiring up their latest grow up in a house they rented from somebody else. Code enforcement is like doing the dishes. If you don't do them every once and a while they start to pile up. It is also unfortunately necessary because people have shown time and again they WILL prioritize their income over the lives and well being of others. Given your condescending attitude I wouldn't be surprised if you were just such a person, hence the idle complaining.
- patrickg_zill 13y ago
  More taxes, will not reduce the actual costs inherent in building something on a piece of land. The IRC is a building code that is incorporated by reference into almost all building ordinances across the USA. https://archive.org/details/gov.law.icc.irc.2012 https://archive.org/details/gov.law.icc.irc.2012 Your foundation example is a strawman argument. I said "expensive and onerous licensing" - if there are 3 towns in close geographic proximity, should a tradesman have to pay $500 or more, to each of those 3, in order to be licensed in each town - and have to file more tax forms for each jurisdiction, even if he did not work in that town during the year? Who ultimately will pay the necessarily higher rates that will be charged? (Unfortunately the SF government website either gives me broken links or requires all kinds of online forms to fill out to determine what the cost is for contractors, so I can't easily give you an example.) The collusion and corruption of local pols is well known - it even reached the Supreme Court in the form of the Kelo case regarding eminent domain.
ChuckFrank 13y ago
I would strongly argue that building code is the driver of costs. In China, there's hardly a building code, yet the housing supply is vastly overpriced. Besides, building codes are a great thing. They are the minimum standards of occupancy that we've developed after fires, building collapses, earthquakes, and everything else that we've had to deal with. As to compliance changes. I've never seen a building torn down because it's out of compliance. Most buildings get grandfathered as the code changes. Perhaps you can show me an example. I think you can argue that the artificial control of labor by unions in some areas (NYC) leads to an increased price of construction, but the response might be that those labor costs are necessary to avoid exploiting the local workers where living costs are higher too. But licensing alone? I doubt it. Certainly some licensing is overdone, but generally I'm extremely glad to have licensing standards for the trades - see the changes in structural steel in the trades because of the LA earthquake. Only licensing gets that information out there fast. I've never seen code over enforced. However, I certainly have seen my share of corruption and collusion between developers and politicians. It means that bad projects get built, but I'm not sure how much it impacts affordable housing per se. It something that we need to be vigilant about though. I agree.

dclusin 13y ago

He identified problems and proposed a solution to those problems. You've identified problems and used them as an excuse to continue the status quo or bring us back to a previous and less safe time in history. What exactly do you find onerous in this 891 page residential code? Which country, state, municipality is it from? Could you provide a link? Who on the city council have you talked to about it? If a foundation is cracked and unsound the landlord should be able to slap a new coat of paint on it and then flip it? Licensing of tradesman is critical because it saves lives and mitigates losses from negligence. If you don't think it is, come to California and ask a Sheriff how swell of a job those pot farmers did wiring up their latest grow up in a house they rented from somebody else. Code enforcement is like doing the dishes. If you don't do them every once and a while they start to pile up. It is also unfortunately necessary because people have shown time and again they WILL prioritize their income over the lives and well being of others. Given your condescending attitude I wouldn't be surprised if you were just such a person, hence the idle complaining.

patrickg_zill 13y ago
More taxes, will not reduce the actual costs inherent in building something on a piece of land. The IRC is a building code that is incorporated by reference into almost all building ordinances across the USA. https://archive.org/details/gov.law.icc.irc.2012 https://archive.org/details/gov.law.icc.irc.2012 Your foundation example is a strawman argument. I said "expensive and onerous licensing" - if there are 3 towns in close geographic proximity, should a tradesman have to pay $500 or more, to each of those 3, in order to be licensed in each town - and have to file more tax forms for each jurisdiction, even if he did not work in that town during the year? Who ultimately will pay the necessarily higher rates that will be charged? (Unfortunately the SF government website either gives me broken links or requires all kinds of online forms to fill out to determine what the cost is for contractors, so I can't easily give you an example.) The collusion and corruption of local pols is well known - it even reached the Supreme Court in the form of the Kelo case regarding eminent domain.

ChuckFrank 13y ago

I would strongly argue that building code is the driver of costs. In China, there's hardly a building code, yet the housing supply is vastly overpriced. Besides, building codes are a great thing. They are the minimum standards of occupancy that we've developed after fires, building collapses, earthquakes, and everything else that we've had to deal with. As to compliance changes. I've never seen a building torn down because it's out of compliance. Most buildings get grandfathered as the code changes. Perhaps you can show me an example. I think you can argue that the artificial control of labor by unions in some areas (NYC) leads to an increased price of construction, but the response might be that those labor costs are necessary to avoid exploiting the local workers where living costs are higher too. But licensing alone? I doubt it. Certainly some licensing is overdone, but generally I'm extremely glad to have licensing standards for the trades - see the changes in structural steel in the trades because of the LA earthquake. Only licensing gets that information out there fast. I've never seen code over enforced. However, I certainly have seen my share of corruption and collusion between developers and politicians. It means that bad projects get built, but I'm not sure how much it impacts affordable housing per se. It something that we need to be vigilant about though. I agree.