Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

transit_snob1906 t1_jeetzpo wrote

Densification is the answer, say it with me Philadelphia, we can have nice things, we deserve nice things.

492

TooManyDraculas t1_jefb07j wrote

And when that densely packed housing is all poorly constructed "luxury" condos, apartments and parking spaces? That'll sit vacant as a tax write off or sell as an investment opportunity?

There's already a bunch of these types of buildings, though not that large obviously, in the area. A ton of the units in them are vacant, they're expensive, the units are small. And the one around the corner from me has a fire about every 20 days.

There's thousands of projects like this around the city. All target at the luxury market. Tens of thousands of units of housing going in over the next five to ten years. Apparently just few hundred to a thousand are meant to be middle income.

Density is good. But it's hard to look forward to something meant to price you out. Maybe it's a good sign that it's a local developer, but I kind of doubt it.

−70

sluman001 t1_jefcs0n wrote

That’s simply not true. Regardless of the price range, more supply reduces overall prices.

80

RustedRelics t1_jegm14b wrote

I don’t think I’ve ever seen rents decrease due to increased housing supply/development — either here or in NYC before moving here. I’m all for more housing in Philly, but it’s not going to bring rents down.

10

xander_man t1_jegmki7 wrote

If building would reduce rent they wouldn't do it. They're doing it because rents are going up anyway.

If they overbuild, they would end up staying the same or going down a little in some markets or segments.

9

RustedRelics t1_jegnm62 wrote

Precisely. And Philly is not one of those markets. (Neither are the other large coastal cities and Chicago)

1

AbsentEmpire t1_jeh2ywq wrote

Philly only has a less than ~5% vacancy rate on apartments. That's so low that the small amount of incoming supply isn't enough to have any meaningful impact on decreasing rates.

The answer to that is that we need to build even more of everything to account for all the demand. The clowns saying we shouldn't build new housing are the same people who bitch about how expensive rent is. They're too dumb to connect the lack for supply with the incoming population, and the subsequent increase in rent.

10

TooManyDraculas t1_jefeyat wrote

Ha.

No.

The current real estate market, especially on rentals, is basically engaged in price fixing. They all use a single algorithm based pricing service. One that's major innovation was discarding the idea of maximizing occupancy in favor of high turn over and continual rent or price increases.

We also have a tax system in the US that gives massive write offs for real estate losses due to vacancy, and allows pass through of those losses to individuals. And breaking them up over multiple years. That's how Trump ended up not paying taxes for a decade.

Then there's the consolidation of housing, particularly single family homes by investment capital and major banks. Which practically speaking means there's always a buyer.

Nationally we've been hearing housing costs would be going down for a variety of reasons since the great recession. They've just continued to sky rocket.

What tends to happen with this model of development. Is it actually reduces supply of middle income housing. As more and more space gets pushed as high priced housing, regardless of demand. Fewer and fewer units are available to most residents, driving up average rents.

The new expensive units, turn and burn, often sitting vacant. Then get flipped to a bank or sold off as investment properties.

Without a crash of some sort or a regulatory step in I don't see that changing any time soon. We've been watching it happen, over and over, in cities around the globe for over a decade now.

−27

In_Search_Of_Gainz t1_jefm2u5 wrote

It’s a block off of Rittenhouse on very desirable real estate, of course units are going to be expensive. There are a lot of reasonably affordable apartments in the city but you can’t really expect them to be located in the highly desirable and expensive neighborhoods. Spoiler alert: they’re not building project homes in Society Hill or Old City either.

I understand the sentiment and agree that folks of average means deserve to afford a place to live but you can’t expect that place to be in a brand new high rise a block off Rittenhouse.

32

NotUnstoned t1_jegcdzq wrote

Thanks for actually being rational and making sense. I see too many arguments made that housing should be affordable when it’s being built in high-demand areas of the city. If these developers were required to rent out units for $500 a month, they would simply not build it.

8

In_Search_Of_Gainz t1_jegdl97 wrote

Thanks, it’s not often I get to be a voice of reason. Wanna picket outside of liberty2 with me about not being able to afford a penthouse?

7

NotUnstoned t1_jege4yz wrote

Give me a 2BR condo for $200 per month or give me death!

4

In_Search_Of_Gainz t1_jegec11 wrote

Woah woah woah, if you expect me to pay $200 a month it better be 6k sq/ft and have a terrace!

6

NotUnstoned t1_jegeidc wrote

I don’t see a pool or a state of the art fitness center and a private dog park listed. I’m gonna need those added before I sign this lease

4

UndercoverPhilly t1_jegibva wrote

Where are you getting $500 a month from? Nobody who is living in Center City is paying that or expects to pay that.

−1

In_Search_Of_Gainz t1_jegl02e wrote

Pretty obvious they were just throwing out an random absurdly low rent figure to make a point. I guess not too too obvious tho…

12

215illmatic t1_jeg97og wrote

Nobody tell this guy the rental vacancy rate in the city is still ~2.6% even with the insane amount of rental development going on.

“Tons” of vacant units just isn’t the case. Your point about diminishing middle income housing is absolutely true but this is a luxury apartment building essentially in Rittenhouse so not sure what anyone thought would be going there.

13

shibabao t1_jegt4h4 wrote

I’m sure the ghosts who currently occupy these housing units (?) would be very glad that you are voicing for them.

2