I for one have to say this is the most ridiculous proposal I have read. To treat the student population as anything less than standard citizens is down right discriminatory. The fact that this is sweeping across Brown, RISD, PVD College, and Johnson and Wales is going to have severe and adverse effects on students who already struggle to find affordable housing while trying to pay for school. The council woman says this is help with the housing stock problems but this creates no new dwellings, this only displaces a whole demographic who rely on this housing due to proximity to their respective colleges and universities.

In all honesty to make a proposal of this nature is downright negligent and ignoring the real problem at hand which is rent control.

Tax colleges for students living off-campus instead.

This proposal would do the opposite of relieving pressure on housing stock. It would artificially juice demand by not allowing sharing of property. If she really wanted to relieve pressure on housing stock she would propose repealing zoning laws and regulations that make it cost-prohibitive to create more housing increasing supply thus reducing cost.

This was talked about years ago. No way will it pass.

Like college doesn’t cost enough! Now adults can’t even live in apartment just because they are in college?!?

This doesn’t displace students. It would be far more likely to displace locals as students demand more units housing.

>In all honesty to make a proposal of this nature is downright negligent and ignoring the real problem at hand which is rent control.

Providence doesn’t have rent control?

When you get caught, just drop out. No longer a college student. ::taps forehead::

I’d rather all the college kids live together instead of spreading their bullshit across more buildings. Not that all college students are bad, but I lived above kids who were kicked out of a frat house and since they couldn’t go back there our building became their frat’s 2nd location.

They did a similar thing in Narragansett with URI. Making a “no more then 3 unrelated per house” rule. Although I think it recently turned over in court so it no longer applies.

Rhode Island itself doesn't have rent control.

I doubt this goes through, but I kinda get it. There was a house that was recently renovated near me - into two 6 bedroom apartments (which is basically a dorm). That basically takes that property offline if you aren’t a college student in a neighborhood that’s actually not a lot of undergrads. There’s also these “Airbnb” type of rentals for students where you rent just an individual room and share a kitchen. That’s also a glorified dorm. Renovating residential properties to these configurations only makes it worse for non-college students looking for housing.

>which is rent control.

Which is insufficient housing

That definitely can and does happen. I'm not sure what percentage of homes are like that but I think there's probably a better way to limit that by maybe some limit on that kind of renovation being done going forward?

The person who just bought my building did this and I'm pretty pissed off about it. The amount they're getting from them is mind-blowing . I'm sitting here in my studio apartment thinking, I'm gonna have to move aren't I?

Yeah but people will do it anyway

This is not good

Stop saying that. There are more vacant homes than homeless people!

Nope. A new landlord acquired the apartment my partner and I rented. This man didn't even live in PVD and owned 4 other apartments around the city. In the first year he increased the rent by 47% without making any improvements and also replaced our shared laundry and drying machines with machines that weren't only older smaller but also increased the prices.

Is there any rent control anywhere in the US?

This is so fucked up especially for international grad students who choose to live together because they need a social circle just like any normal human being

No more than 3 college students living under one roof...

So those triple-deckers would only have 3 people in them?

We all know housing becomes more affordable when the same amount of people take up more households. Look, if it’s a public safety thing thats an argument, just don’t talk out of both sides of your mouth.

[deleted]

Homeless people are not the only ones demanding housing. So are all the people who would like to live in Providence but can’t afford to, the people living in Providence with parents and roommates who would like to but can’t afford to move out, and families who would like to move into a bigger place, but can’t afford to upsize

The rental vacancy rate in RI overall in 2021 was 2.8%. That’s likely lower in Providence itself. A healthy rate is usually ~5%, below which rents tend to rise. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RIRVAC

All of the classes above benefit from cheaper, more available housing. The way to make housing cheaper is to build more of it

For as much as I rag on Boston, their policy is at 4 unrelated people per unit and is never enforced.

Or ban rent seeking, ownership of a non primary residence (second/vacation homes), and corporate ownership of residences🤷‍♂️

Ya know, actually change things?

NYC has a lot of rent controlled apartments.

Sure, but that logic could be used against every law that has ever existed or will ever exist.

Ahh I see. I didn't know that.

How could this possibly be enforced? 🙄

I do not support this ordinance. At all. In case anyone was wondering.

Yeah also I love that people whine on here all the time about rich and spoiled RISD, Brown, etc. but then are those poor college students about this

>In all honesty to make a proposal of this nature is downright negligent and ignoring the real problem at hand which is rent control.

I hope you mean lack of rent control

No, I’m saying rent control cannot be the problem, because it doesn’t exist.

If you think lack of rent control is the problem, you need to take a minute and understand that rent control and limits on occupant numbers are solutions in the same vein - ie they’re not.

Right. So rent control is not the problem.

I don't disagree that reforming property ownership would make it so that investors (of various sizes) can't take advantage of housing scarcity to earn obscene rents.

However, even doing that still doesn't solve the problem of housing supply-demand mismatch. When housing construction lags population growth for decades there is going to be scarcity no matter what - and that lag in construction is thanks to decades of local, state, and federal support for discriminatory zoning and inefficient property tax policies, fueled by racism and classism.

The landlords are just riding the wave which our governments and zoning boards have prepared for them by attempting to freeze our cities in 1965.

With a sub-5% vacancy rate, if prices fall by half overnight, everyone who currently can't afford a home just won't be able to find a home. The good news is that fixing the supply side lowers prices, takes away those massive rents, and along with them the incentive for rental conversions and speculative purchases.

[removed]

So dumb and would further drive up the cost of housing

Dumb and misplaced. Without the colleges Providence would be a dump.