patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,192,363 comments by 13,871 users - Onvacation, richwicks online now
Homeowners use regulations to boost value of their homes
invite response
2019 Dec 24, 5:01pm 468 views 5 comments
Comments 1 - 5 of 5 Search these comments
1
SunnyvaleCA
2019 Dec 24, 6:06pm
I can tell you that here in Sunnyvale there are quite a few mega condo and apartment complexes going up. It's a double-whammy for existing owners: lowers quality of life due to traffic, congestion, crime, etc. and also lowers existing property values by upsetting the supply/demand equation. My 5 mile commute gets noticeably worse every year. Oh well... I'm about ready to retire and flee.
2
Ceffer
2019 Dec 24, 6:15pm
Ceffer
2019 Dec 24, 6:15pm
Huge apartment clusters going up in Fremont by the freeway along 680 corridor. I was wondering if the infrastructure could even support them, much less the ghetto paratroopers that must be slated for them by the Great Socialist Paradise.
3
Blue
2019 Dec 24, 8:21pm
Employers are hanging on CA Prop 13 entitlements and creating more jobs at the same congested places. That drives up the demand for housing near employers who drives 1000 of miles every month otherwise. This is how it looks if the game is rigged.
4
tovarichpeter
2019 Dec 26, 12:34pm
tovarichpeter
2019 Dec 26, 12:34pm
While I don't always agree with your idea of what is a solution for housing scarcity, I do look forward to the occasional one-line zingers you can produce, @tovarichpeter
Thank you
Thank you
5
SunnyvaleCA
2019 Dec 26, 1:30pm
tovarichpeter says
I agree the homeowners aren't protecting the environment, but I also don't fully agree that all are protecting their financial interests.
Financial interests really depend on the individual homeowner. I live in a neighborhood with some original 1961 residents still left. As a whole, they seem committed to dying in peace in their lifelong homes, not maximizing property values for the escape to Florida. (If they were going to escape California, they would have done so decades ago.)
From my perspective, I specifically went out of my way and paid great expense to buy a very modest house in a "nice" neighborhood. I could have paid much less to buy into an already-crappy neighborhood or to buy far away from work (bad commute), but I specifically bought the neighborhood. I'm not in need of refinancing or any other sort of home-value-related ATM action. What I would like to preserve is exactly what attracted me to the location 15 years ago: less congestion, less crime, less pollution, less noise, etc.
It should also be noted that some kinds of regulation also affect the existing homeowners.
Homeowners aren’t protecting the environment. They are protecting their own financial interests.
I agree the homeowners aren't protecting the environment, but I also don't fully agree that all are protecting their financial interests.
Financial interests really depend on the individual homeowner. I live in a neighborhood with some original 1961 residents still left. As a whole, they seem committed to dying in peace in their lifelong homes, not maximizing property values for the escape to Florida. (If they were going to escape California, they would have done so decades ago.)
From my perspective, I specifically went out of my way and paid great expense to buy a very modest house in a "nice" neighborhood. I could have paid much less to buy into an already-crappy neighborhood or to buy far away from work (bad commute), but I specifically bought the neighborhood. I'm not in need of refinancing or any other sort of home-value-related ATM action. What I would like to preserve is exactly what attracted me to the location 15 years ago: less congestion, less crime, less pollution, less noise, etc.
It should also be noted that some kinds of regulation also affect the existing homeowners.
Homeowners aren’t protecting the environment. They are protecting their own financial interests.