Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado > Denver
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-23-2016, 09:42 AM
SQL SQL started this thread
 
Location: The State of Delusion - Colorado
1,337 posts, read 1,193,660 times
Reputation: 1492

Advertisements

Since this seems to be a hot button issue, I wanted to create a thread to discuss and post news regarding Denver's municipal government's efforts to make housing more affordable for lower and middle income citizens.

There seems to be a lot in the news lately, hence the idea for this thread.

Denver to developers: Want to build higher? Add more affordable housing – The Denver Post

Quote:
new building heights plan adopted for the area near Denver’s new 38th and Blake transit station proposes that the city offer a deal to developers hungry to break ground in the burgeoning neighborhood: Include affordable housing, and the city would allow them to build higher — up to 16 stories.

The first-of-its-kind recommendation for a focused affordable housing incentive is part of the 38th & Blake Station Area Height Amendments, which the City Council approved 13-0 Monday night.
Denver council approves creation of city’s first affordable-housing fund – The Denver Post

Quote:
An affordable housing proposal aimed at raising more than $150 million in the next decade from property taxes and new development impact fees prompted drawn-out debate in recent months.

But after drawing a counter-proposal and heavy doses of second-guessing, the measure won an easy victory Monday night.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-23-2016, 01:43 PM
 
Location: Sedalia, CO
277 posts, read 306,662 times
Reputation: 628
What a load of yuck...

Quote:
And business interests and some developers have opposed the new development impact fees, also called “linkage fees.” The one-time fees would range from $1,500 for a standard new house to six or even seven figures for large hotels and office buildings.
How genius - more fees for builders to pass on to buyers, making the cost of housing go up even more
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2016, 02:04 PM
SQL SQL started this thread
 
Location: The State of Delusion - Colorado
1,337 posts, read 1,193,660 times
Reputation: 1492
Default Wow, so well articulated...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponyupgrl View Post
What a load of yuck...



How genius - more fees for builders to pass on to buyers, making the cost of housing go up even more
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2016, 02:19 PM
 
Location: Na'alehu Hawaii/Buena Vista Colorado
5,528 posts, read 12,672,056 times
Reputation: 6198
Quote:
Originally Posted by ponyupgrl View Post
What a load of yuck...
Please explain what bothers you about creating a fund for affordable housing. Looks to me like a win/win situation -- the city will approve certain development by having the developer pay into this fund. It's not coming out of taxpayers pockets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2016, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
760 posts, read 883,700 times
Reputation: 1521
Its the concern that the developers will increase rents/cost in order to make up for these Fees.

So in the end, the median rent will just continue to grow, and developers will be more hesitant to build more inventory. We wouldn't have as many housing issues if the inventory matched the demand, making market rate more affordable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2016, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Sedalia, CO
277 posts, read 306,662 times
Reputation: 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreaming of Hawaii View Post
Please explain what bothers you about creating a fund for affordable housing. Looks to me like a win/win situation -- the city will approve certain development by having the developer pay into this fund. It's not coming out of taxpayers pockets.
Not true - if you read it, part of the plan is a property tax increase.

Also, the developers aren't going to just eat the cost. They'll just pass the increase onto whoever is buying the new properties. Which just increases housing costs. Which is what they're trying to avoid in the first place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2016, 03:21 PM
 
Location: Eastern Colorado
3,887 posts, read 5,748,737 times
Reputation: 5386
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Ski View Post
Its the concern that the developers will increase rents/cost in order to make up for these Fees.

So in the end, the median rent will just continue to grow, and developers will be more hesitant to build more inventory. We wouldn't have as many housing issues if the inventory matched the demand, making market rate more affordable.
Rent going up have very little to do with cost and more to do with demand, if the cost gets high enough people stop coming here or people leave the cost of rent will go down, just like if the population boom continues it will continue to go up.

Depending on who you ask there are reasons to believe that it has already started to slow down, but it will take time to see when or if the rents come down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2016, 03:25 PM
 
Location: Eastern Colorado
3,887 posts, read 5,748,737 times
Reputation: 5386
Quote:
Originally Posted by ponyupgrl View Post
Not true - if you read it, part of the plan is a property tax increase.

Also, the developers aren't going to just eat the cost. They'll just pass the increase onto whoever is buying the new properties. Which just increases housing costs. Which is what they're trying to avoid in the first place.
Developer cannot just decide to price their properties higher, there have to be comparables in the area to justify the price, and there have to be buyers willing to pay the higher prices. Now always easy unless the appraiser is getting kickbacks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2016, 04:32 PM
 
214 posts, read 260,318 times
Reputation: 380
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Ski View Post
Its the concern that the developers will increase rents/cost in order to make up for these Fees.

So in the end, the median rent will just continue to grow, and developers will be more hesitant to build more inventory. We wouldn't have as many housing issues if the inventory matched the demand, making market rate more affordable.
More government intervention seems to always lead to less affordable housing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2016, 09:39 AM
 
1,951 posts, read 2,300,032 times
Reputation: 1819
they should build a development people can actually afford, mini homes , mini streets, mini , 7 elevens, mini schools and mini people .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado > Denver
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top