Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Kindly_Boysenberry_7 t1_jdcomjo wrote

Charles, we are NEVER going to be London or Paris. It just ain't happening. Pro-YIMBY people need to stop talking about that. It's foolish.

The biggest issue is affordable housing in a sufficient amount to address the needs NOW. Infill doesn't cut it for that. Too limited, too expensive, and we need affordable housing for sale, not just rent.

And all of the not-for-profits - looking at you BHC - need to STOP trying to be developers. They aren't good at it. Raise money to fund the development and give it to private developers who know what to do and can get it done at scale on a timeline. Yes, you will have to give the Hated Dreaded Developers financial incentives to do projects, so they make money. But everyone needs to get over that objection if they truly want more affordable housing sooner rather than LOTS later.

1

Charlesinrichmond t1_jddasjn wrote

It's not that we are going to become them. It's that that density is really not something to be scared of. People think Manhattan, and that's not what happens with triplexes

3

Kindly_Boysenberry_7 t1_jddiunj wrote

Here's my issue: People are using additional density as a stand-in for affordable housing and IT'S NOT. You cannot solve the affordable housing issues AT SCALE with infill density. It's too slow a process. And the land is way too expensive where infill density will initially go. If the City REALLY wanted to do something about the affordable housing crisis it would provide incentives - and I don't mean LIHTC - for real estate developers to do projects somewhere where the dirt is cheap enough to do affordable housing.

I know you know what I am talking about. But as an example: When I have clients who have $250,000 to spend and they tell me they want to buy something in the Fan District, it's my job to be realistic with them. I am not a magician. You cannot under any circumstances buy a house in the Fan for $250,0000. That is just the facts. You *might* be able to buy a very small condo. So then I have to figure out what it is they really want - walkability? A yard for their dog? Something on the Pulse or at least near transportation? And then I have to try to find them something that meets their *real* wants and needs that they can actually afford. It wastes my time and theirs if we spin our wheels looking for a unicorn that doesn't exist - a $250,000 house in the Fan.

So if the goal is to build affordable housing - and I think that is one of Richmond's most pressing issues right now, and I also believe affordable housing should include for sale housing, not just apartments - then the land has to be cheap enough to work. That's just basic economics. And I hate to tell people - ADUs are a great concept, but they also will not add sufficient additional housing at scale because you cannot get financing to build them. To add an ADU to your property you will need to pay cash out of pocket to build one, or perhaps borrow against your home with a HELOC. Which has its own issues.

That's my issue. Infill cannot add enough additional housing at scale. So we shouldn't be conflating two different issues - additional density and affordability.

1