Villaraigosa and Newsom want to build more houses in California than ever before. Experts see the candidates' goal as an (Los Angeles: real estate, 2015)

[FirebirdCamaro1220]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

Housing wouldn't be a problem if nobody wanted to live here. But, the demand has always been there and likely always will be.

Pretty much the only big factor keeping people from moving here is the cost of housing. So, let's say a bunch of new units are built and so the supply actually meets or exceeds demand for a minute. What do you think would happen? No more people would move to CA so the problem is solved forever?

Laugh really loud.

Honestly it would depend on how many new jobs were created, no one would move somewhere without a job or potential job, that would be stupid. So if the supply of new housing outpaces new jobs, then supply could catch up to demand a good bit

[Electrician4you]

Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220

Honestly it would depend on how many new jobs were created, no one would move somewhere without a job or potential job, that would be stupid. So if the supply of new housing outpaces new jobs, then supply could catch up to demand a good bit

The building pace would have to be three times the pace of the bubble days. It’s not gonna happen. There isn’t enough to ramp up construction. It’s not just building the house. There needs to be roads built utilities allocated gas and the materials to build these houses. So production of lumber copper wire and piping glass cabinetry etc would need to be ramped up to meet demand.
A politician hammering about building enough houses to meet demand is simply talkingnout if their ass like they usually do. It’s nothing but lip service to make voters feel good.

[Electrician4you]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Yeah it sounds like a lot of local construction workers got into other fields during the housing crash , which makes sense . Or they probably moved away . Keep hearing there are labor shortages and it’s hard to find decent contractors now too .

Tony V promised us he would plant a million trees as Mayor but we only got like 407,000..

Trees are a lot easier to plant than building a house .



L.A.'s million trees, more or less - latimes

I know a lot of guys who got out of it. The ones that stayed are all 10 years older. I know I won’t go back to doing field work in a worker capacity. I’ll do the walk with plans stuff. Construction beats your body up pretty badly. It’s heavy labor and it’s not rewarding in most cases. Companies are having to give someone me good concessions to get people. I got hit up to take a job. I told the guy it’s gonna take 130k a year for me to consider it.

[tijlover]

For those that have never lived high up in a condo tower, referring to it as cramped living, you're overlooking the delusion of spaciousness.

I once had a 2 bedroom unit on the 38th floor of a high rise in Minneapolis, with floor to ceiling windows, and I never felt cooped up or cramped living there as the views make it appear that you're living in a much larger space. I could see 30 miles to the south, watch the storms arrive in the city from the west, couldn't hear the sirens, and there were mornings the fog was below my windows. A never ending show! And at night, my bed up against the glass windows, the lights are absolutely mesmerizing.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by Electrician4you

The building pace would have to be three times the pace of the bubble days. It’s not gonna happen. There isn’t enough to ramp up construction. It’s not just building the house. There needs to be roads built utilities allocated gas and the materials to build these houses. So production of lumber copper wire and piping glass cabinetry etc would need to be ramped up to meet demand.
A politician hammering about building enough houses to meet demand is simply talkingnout if their ass like they usually do. It’s nothing but lip service to make voters feel good.

Yeah. The only politician I'd probably listen to about construction is Trump. But of course they aren't going to ask for his advice.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Yeah. The only politician I'd probably listen to about construction is Trump. But of course they aren't going to ask for his advice.

Well, he's not exactly a great business model, with all the lawsuits and unpaid contractors, failed developments and oh yeah, bankruptcies.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Yeah , of course the promise of “affordable housing “ is attractive to voters . They can’t tell people the truth of course . CA is a high demand and attractive state and it’ll never be affordable for everyone .

We see it here in L.A with Mayor Garcetti saying “L.A should be affordable for everyone no matter what their income “ this is a dangerous thing to say especially since CA already has the highest poverty rate when you adjust for cost of living.

We have a huge homeless population too I don’t think we should be encouraging more people to move here if they aren’t able to afford it .

Never be affordable to anyone:


https://goo.gl/images/ye92eg

https://goo.gl/images/wCa7oe

Okay. It was before.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Never be affordable to anyone:


https://goo.gl/images/ye92eg

https://goo.gl/images/wCa7oe

Okay. It was before.

If we could only find a time machine and go back in time and buy property in CA cheap right?

Of course you have to multiply for inflation too . Of course CA housing especially in SoCal and the Bay Area has exceeded inflation .

The population was much lower and there was more available space can’t compare it to today .
Central Valley of CA is still pretty affordable .

Of course there’s still open land there .

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by jm1982

If we could only find a time machine and go back in time and buy property in CA cheap right?

Of course you have to multiply for inflation too . Of course CA housing especially in SoCal and the Bay Area has exceeded inflation .

The population was much lower and there was more available space can’t compare it to today .
Central Valley of CA is still pretty affordable .

Of course there’s still open land there .

Multiplying for inflation it’s 100k. Also the Central Valley is a hellish landscape of hillbillies and rednecks with toxic air and terrible heat.

[citizensadvocate]

Originally Posted by TheFlats

Surprise surprise, the usual suspects coming in to say...what? Nothing can be done so let's not try? Single family homes with big yards as far as the eye can see (and somehow affordable)? Increasing supply to meet demand won't moderate prices? No one is living in skyscrapers in SF or LA? Then why are some of the most expensive areas of the state the high-rise districts, maybe because there is unmet demand for living in a proper urban area?

Can you guys ever come up with solutions instead of mindless bitching? Your solutions to the housing crisis: widen freeways, don't build skyscrapers because people only want single family homes, don't ease development restrictions, and don't build anything because it's going to be too expensive to buy anyways. Great stuff lol.

Removing parking minimums is a good place to start:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...housing-crisis

Parking minimums are created due to heavy congestion due to parking shortage which is inevitable in a city which people have little alternative to driving in most cases. Traffic circling for parking and parking congestion causes pollution and result a hazardous situation should fire or other emergency exists also increases crime in neighboring residential areas.

Though I agree we should rethink how we do parking minimums. I.e instead of requiring parking on each property that are exclusive to those authorized to be on the property, nothing more frustrating to have empty but off limits parking spaces when people are circling for parking for blocks, we should make it minimum parking per city block based on the zoning, number of people, sq ft, units, etc. Parking that are available to everyone visiting, working, or residing in that block, for a fee that is not too extreme is acceptable for daily, weekly, or monthly use. The issue today is that in some parts of Los Angeles such as downtown LA there appears to be more parking spaces than people. In that case there is really no need to build private parking facilities on each property built there. But in other neighborhoods especially on the Westside there are so many properties or units barely have one parking space but there are often two or three cars per unit. Resulting in a constant traffic and parking nightmare as people circle the neighborhood at commute hours for parking. In this case it appears building those automated parking garages are the best solution to each block. So we can get the cars off the road quickly, it also makes the area more walking friendly.