Submitted by _crapitalism t3_126ngld in philadelphia
blodreina_kumWonkru t1_jealv59 wrote
Reply to comment by wubbalubbazubzub in [Inquirer] Census data shows Philadelphia population drop in 2022 by _crapitalism
Naaahhhhh
But let's build a few more "luxury" apartment buildings just to be sure!
BUrower t1_jeatub9 wrote
When someone rents a unit in a brand new building, they don’t rent an older unit. Less demand pressure on the old unit keeps rents lower.
We absolutely should be developing more apartment buildings (and for that matter at a greater unit density per acre). Philly has under-built apartments for decades.
doublestoddington t1_jeb42lp wrote
When someone rents in a new building, they may be vacating an old. While there are laws in PA around vacancy decontrol (rent raised at renewal of lease), we do not have any around vacancy control (rent can only be raised x amount for the new tenant). Without that any landlord will of course seek the best rent they can, often a substantial jump and thus a decrease in supply of lower rate rentals. This can be addressed long term with ample supply, both public and private. However in addition to increasing supply, we should be looking at some sort of price control.
Gobirds831 t1_jeb7yvx wrote
As I agree with what some of you said I don’t think the brownstones are charging much less than the new units
BUrower t1_jecq3xl wrote
3BR apartments in new buildings are definitely more expensive than a 3BR row home
Gobirds831 t1_jecr60s wrote
Yeah key piece of information there…3BR. My studio around 16th and spruce was $1,300. A studio in my next building in Old City was $1,650 and had a pool and gym.
UndercoverPhilly t1_jee43vo wrote
Not really. There re lots of new luxury buildings but it is not keeping rents lower. I live in an old building. They are raising our rent more this year than any other since 2015. Im sure they’ll get it since most people leaving are doing so because they can’t afford the increases not because they want to jump into a luxury building and pay $2000 plus for a 1 bedroom. They are moving to more dangerous neighborhoods with cheaper rent or downsizing to a studio. Someone who needs to pay less will move into my building, not someone looking to pay more. This story is being repeated constantly since 2021. Ive heard it from many people (this is anecdotal of course).
According to other articles I read, the average rent in Philadelphia increased by 10% in 2022. I was planning to buy but there is nothing coming available that I can afford—unfortunately I was not ready last Spring when there were many options. My salary hasn’t kept up with the increases so unless I move to another neighborhood or downsize I won’t be accepted into any other building since I’m not making 3x the rent.
BUrower t1_jee8zfc wrote
If landlords are able to raise rents that much, it’s because there is a shortage of housing units. There really isn’t “lots of new luxury buildings.” There are a handful of true luxury apartments and another handful of new construction apartments that have opened recently, but as a percentage of total housing inventory, it’s nothing, not enough to keep rents down.
What you described is a direct result of the city not allowing enough housing, there is an under supply. The city could 1. upzone the more desirable neighborhoods, especially those walking distance to transit .which would permit more housing units on a given parcel 2. Remove burdensome parking minimums and zoning overlays.
wubbalubbazubzub t1_jean3ww wrote
1700/month for your very own studio apartment! With broken fixtures from the 70s and missing floor tiles! Must make 3 times rent. Application costs 500 dollars
blodreina_kumWonkru t1_jeaoyew wrote
AND the added benefit of looking exactly like every other apartment!
the_rest_were_taken t1_jeb1cqp wrote
Yeah building less housing is for sure the best way to lower rent prices! We should probably just stop building any new housing at all
Indiana_Jawns t1_jeb9ndj wrote
What if we built more affordable units now instead of hoping that older units might become available at cheaper rents sometime down the road?
the_rest_were_taken t1_jebasoy wrote
Are these government built affordable housing projects? Or are you proposing a way to force private companies to build housing and sell it for cheaper than it cost to build?
Indiana_Jawns t1_jebgpqb wrote
We already have zoning bonuses for having affordable units or other public amenities. 90% of the time a developer will take a zoning bonus with the promise of having a green grocer and then you end up with a bank branch
the_rest_were_taken t1_jebily8 wrote
> 90% of the time a developer will take a zoning bonus with the promise of having a green grocer and then you end up with a bank branch
If you're going to completely make up numbers it usually helps to make them semi-realistic. What a ridiculous claim lmao. I'm also not sure how any of that answers either of my questions....
Indiana_Jawns t1_jebj2h0 wrote
Your arguments have been too strawmany to take seriously. But developers can still build affordable units and make a profit, especially if they take advantage of the aforementioned zoning bonuses
the_rest_were_taken t1_jebl74t wrote
> Your arguments have been too strawmany to take seriously.
Lmao what?? You suggested that we build more affordable housing instead of regular housing. I asked how you propose we do that. I haven't even made an argument let alone a "strawmany" one.
> But developers can still build affordable units and make a profit, especially if they take advantage of the aforementioned zoning bonuses
Sure, but that only works if they're part of a market rate development. The person I replied to before you jumped into the conversation is opposed to market rate development of any kind.
Indiana_Jawns t1_jec4uac wrote
Yeah dude, your response to criticism of the amount of luxury housing being built is to suggest that the alternative is to build no housing at all. Or that if developers aren’t building luxury housing they’re going to lose money on a project
the_rest_were_taken t1_jecaphs wrote
The person I responded to was arguing that new “luxury” housing raises rent prices across the board. If we pretend that nonsense is true then isn’t the solution to rising rent prices to stop building “luxury” housing?
My second point (that you misinterpreted) was that if developers were forced to only build affordable housing they would have to do so at a loss because construction costs in our region are too high to support a unit price that would be considered affordable. It’s not even close when you factor in added costs for parking minimums, height and other zoning restrictions, and elevated land costs due to the structure of our real estate taxes.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments