Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's much like Seattle's law too. It produces relatively few new affordable units, at a massive cost: all new and existing market rate units are effectively re-set to the values and rents determined by the higher replacement cost. That's somewhat offset by the added value of the upzones, but not entirely, and it's a huge missed opportunity for market rate to be more affordable by omitting the fees/subsidies. The effect is to limit the volume of housing construction.
As for my question, without reading the local codes and whereases, I don't see the quote above as responding: Can you achieve 1,000,000 with less than half of the zoned additional capacity? I'm seeing 36,000 new units in five or six years, though that's out of context and unclear on several fronts. In any case it sounds like a pretty moderate number.
That's much like Seattle's law too. It produces relatively few new affordable units, at a massive cost: all new and existing market rate units are effectively re-set to the values and rents determined by the higher replacement cost. That's somewhat offset by the added value of the upzones, but not entirely, and it's a huge missed opportunity for market rate to be more affordable by omitting the fees/subsidies. The effect is to limit the volume of housing construction.
As for my question, without reading the local codes and whereases, I don't see the quote above as responding: Can you achieve 1,000,000 with less than half of the zoned additional capacity? I'm seeing 36,000 new units in five or six years, though that's out of context and unclear on several fronts. In any case it sounds like a pretty moderate number.
DC builds more affordable housing than any city in America. We provide gap funding to affordable housing deals through our HPTF program. We also provide gap funding through DMPED. The city provides $100 million to the construction of affordable housing annually. DC has been doing that for over a decade now. The reality when comparing DC to other cities is an embarrassment of riches that helps get projects done. The city has a lot of money and surpluses every year which helps with that.
Now, as for development capacity, if you look at where DC was 20 years ago, it’s very obvious where the rest of the city is headed. Cities don’t build up like DC which is funny because DC is the one with the height limits. Development constraints in most cities including San Francisco, Philadelphia, or Boston etc. are represented by the lack of high-rise construction outside the city center when compared to DC.
DC has only one place to go and that is up. The difference is we can’t build anything else downtown, so the rest of the city has to go up. The irony of that is downtown areas are really small. Building up throughout the city will provide hundreds of thousands of units compared to stuffing it all downtown. Every inch through the 61 sq. miles will have to do their share to help the city grow. I don’t know how long that will take, but it’s happening.
What DC is doing is up-zoning areas so housing can be built by right. The areas that still require a PUD or when map amendments are requested, that’s when the extra affordable housing will be required.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by djesus007
Nope, I said Montreal can compete with DC in response to another poster saying it does not (when the numbers indicate that yes, it does compete). Furthermore, there's also plenty of projects that are 40m in Montreal U/C but are not included with your arbitrary threshold. The list I provided also has a cut off of projects under $20M nor doesn't include billions of planned projects. There are literally hundreds of projects that are not included cause they're either 1-4 story office buildings, or industrial buildings that are 2 floors, or all the 4-8 floor condos that usually end up being 44-48m in height and were not included in that list provided cause they don't meet the threshold.
Again, I never said anything about more buildings 50m+ U/C, only that MTL can compete and you should not leave it out.... two very different things.
Ok understood, and Montreal obviously is doing something right. Everything you've posted thus far is great news for Montreal as it deserves to be in the conversation.
What DC is doing is up-zoning areas so housing can be built by right. The areas that still require a PUD or when map amendments are requested, that’s when the extra affordable housing will be required.
My point is that inclusionary zoning and fee systems can be counterproductive for affordability by disincentivizing new market-rate construction. That's especially true if the low-income units have to be onsite.
As for Seattle, we have other means...like the levy that's been in place for quite a few years that provides I think $40 million per year.
Here's a great photo of the green line extension in Boston with Cambridge in the background: https://flic.kr/p/2hD5Yr8
Was taken a little over a year ago, though.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
