Housing (Supply Crisis & Public Policy)

[as02155]

"burn it all down"

Healey, as perhaps the best and highest most representative of the investor and developer class (aka the Epstein class), clearly is messaging that they won't have anything to do with a "burn it all down" approach either. They don't want to lose out on the possible rents, but, they are not going to let the market overshoot on housing, either.

 

[St. Botolph Street]

https://www.wgbh.org/news/local/202...control-will-only-worsen-state-housing-crisis

Pray that rent control does not get passed this fall.

As much pain as skyrocketing rents are generating for overly-burdened renters, I can't imagine a more efficient way to deter developers--already apprehensive about surging construction materials costs, the challenge of getting financing, projects generally just not penciling--from submitting proposals for desperately needed housing. Which of course will only deepening the crushing supply/demand imbalance...

I would add to that list of impediments for developers the costs that Wu has imposed: higher payments for affordability, environmental rules, not sure if there are others but I'm sure those are a factor in the collapse of the Boston housing development pipeline.

 

[as02155]

Doubtful that it is so localized to these policy decisions. On a macro scale, we're still seeing construction loans of 6 to 10% and mortgages north of 7%. All of these factors - in an area with high labor costs (another macro/external factor) - will be equally a burden if not even more significant to housing production. What is truly necessary is a proven Keyensian-ish approach to the housing market - the state needs to keep housing production going in the face of private equity and private market failure.

 

[Justbuildit]

Sure, and the state is making that harder, even if at the margin, by requiring that 1 of 5 units is fixed for affordable housing. Removing the policy outcome question, this absolutely makes it less likely a given development will get started.

 

[as02155]

Sure, and the state is making that harder, even if at the margin, by requiring that 1 of 5 units is fixed for affordable housing. Removing the policy outcome question, this absolutely makes it less likely a given development will get started.

That is a non-Keynesian approach, at worse, and maybe possibly a low-tier Keynesian approach. Let the housing authorities rip - the Commonwealth can fund non-Faircloth restricted units - let 'em rip. And, get Faircloth out of here, too!

That being said, I think new housing should be accessible by every income level. Giving hand-me-down houses to the poorest isn't a positive societal outcome either.

 

[Justbuildit]

But that's not what we have right now; everyone has hand-me-down houses because we aren't building anything. Inverse filtering, where rich people pay $4,000/month for old triple deckers and less-rich people leave the city altogether is not a policy solution. Brand new homes for everyone is impossible, and it is a fine outcome if there is a distribution of houses of all sizes, kinds, and qualities. Building more creates choice and somewhat efficient tradeoffs.

 

[as02155]

that's not what we have right now

That *is* what we have for all the cities that have been permitting housing with inclusionary zoning: brand-new homes for every part of the income ladder. Some for ownership, mostly for rentals.

 

[themissinglink]

Old mills are hard to turn into apartments. But could they help solve the state’s housing crisis? - The Boston Globe

Massachusetts needs to build nearly a quarter of a million new homes over the next decade to meet demand.

www.bostonglobe.com

Old mills, though difficult to develop, have some built-in benefits. They offer available building stock, in a state where land for big, new projects can be hard to come by. And repurposing long-vacant buildings into residential or commercial properties can skirt the kind of NIMBY community opposition that can sometimes derail new construction, according to Curtis.
Jessica Rudden-Dube, executive director of Preservation Massachusetts, said that some of the easier mill projects have already been converted. But improved incentives from the state have encouraged developers to repurpose those that still remain.
For her organization, the projects are a way to preserve history and build new housing at once. “It’s sort of a no-brainer if that space is historic and can be preserved in its historic character but serve a new purpose,” she said.
Two decades ago, New Bedford conducted an inventory of about a 100 of its mills and changed zoning laws to permit their development into housing or mixed uses, said Jennifer Carloni, director of city planning. A lot of them have found new uses, such as the Kilburn Mill that overlooks Clarks Cove. It’s now home to artists, antique vendors, a cafe, and a bookshop, along with yoga studios, gyms, and other small businesses.
But a few New Bedford mills remain untouched, awaiting builders with enough wherewithal — and deep enough pockets — to tackle challenging environmental conditions.

 

[KCasiglio]

Build it and they will come — but will they have a good place to buy their groceries? - The Boston Globe

It’s the chicken-or-egg conundrum when it comes to livability: What comes first? The luxury condos or the full-service grocery store?

www.bostonglobe.com

“What comes first? Jobs, people, amenities is the standard sequence,“ said Gary Menger, president and founder of Applied Geographic Solutions. ”The amenities are always the last to show up because investment in restaurants, retail, and even parks and recreation doesn’t happen until the people arrive — with cash in hand."

[...]

So, what’s a city like Boston to do to become more livable?

“You’re not just buying a house, you’re buying a neighborhood,” said Kira Greene, a founding agent of Compass in Rhode Island who has spent the last decade working with Boston-area buyers priced out of the city. “That resonates with every buyer I’ve worked with from Boston.”

The increasing problem is what kind of neighborhood Boston’s development pipeline is actually delivering. New luxury towers have risen across the Seaport and other development corridors, promising to revitalize underutilized land and inject new life into the city’s housing stock. But it’s not hard to find a consistent take from those walking these gleaming new streets: Something feels missing — be it a longtime neighborhood pub or that elusive full-service grocery store (Though they try to fill the void).

[...]

“You end up getting this barbell of housing typologies,” said Luc Schuster, executive director of Boston Indicators and one of the coauthors of the Greater Boston Housing Report Card. “It’s either pretty expensive single-family homes or larger new apartment buildings.”

That missing middle is the kind of neighborhood most Boston homebuyers seek. But everyday amenities — the independent coffee shop, the hardware store, the casual neighborhood restaurant — require a diverse and steady customer base to survive.

They also require a local workforce. Build a neighborhood where only high earners can afford to live, and you’ve priced out some of the very people needed to staff and sustain the places that make a neighborhood worth living there.

 

[parkave]

Old mills are hard to turn into apartments. But could they help solve the state’s housing crisis? - The Boston Globe

Massachusetts needs to build nearly a quarter of a million new homes over the next decade to meet demand.

www.bostonglobe.com

I recently made a map of all the surviving pre war mill and manufacturing buildings in Massachusetts. There are still hundreds that are abandoned, underutilized, or still industrial. That being said there are a few demolished every year, and even more stripped bare and turned into self storage units (the cheapest reuse of the buildings). Fall River and New Bedford in particular have THOUSANDS of units worth of mill buildings ripe for reuse