I think a bigger threat than corporations buying single family houses is that there are certain types of housing that will likely never not be owned by a single entity such as the large apartment buildings with shared entry areas.
I think the YIMBYs need to start adding “ownable units of housing” to their list of things to look for when developing new housing structures. A lot of places in California are starting to build again, but they’re building a lot of corporate-owned apartment buildings with hundreds of units that only help further consolidate the housing market.
My neighborhood did a mixed development model and I think that’s the way it should go: some apartments, some townhouses, some condos. Stop letting a single company own the entirety of the new housing units you’re building.
Same here - yimby me up. I live on the edge of a multi family neighborhood currently being scaled up. It’s objectively good in that we’re building more housing units walkable to the town center and train station. However these are huge apartment blocks that can only ever be corporate owned. They’re replacing smaller multifamily houses much more likely to be owned privately.
So we’re getting more places to live but rent is going up and we’re getting more high end places and fewer places where anyone can live. We’re helping engineers live closer to transit, which is good, but pricing out a lot of regular people
Even worse, my town always had the reputation of the affordable places where anyone to live, in the midst of a cluster of expensive towns. Not anymore. Now we’re grouped as one of the expensive towns
Corps should only be able to own apartment style housing. I’d be fine with more of them being built if we removed single family homes from the rental market.
That varies a lot depending upon where you’re talking about. In my area, the overwhelming majority of people that rent aren’t renting single family houses.
My area of New England, rentals seem to be either big corporate places or a unit in a triple-decker (3-story building with a single unit on each floor, traditionally owned by someone who lives in one of the units).
I live in a condo I own, which seems like an ok balance of privacy, responsibility, and being able to actually afford housing. Mortgage, HOA fee, taxes, etc, is still $800/month cheaper than my old corporate apartment, and I promise you I’m not spending $800/month in maintenance and neither was my landlord.
I think we need to look beyond individual ownership towards collective ownership. Apartment buildings should be a housing cooperative managed collectively by the people who live there.
Agree! With the added note that they shouldn’t do it the way the developers in my area did: they pitched it as affordable, accessible mixed use, and then built luxury homes that normal people couldn’t afford.
I think a bigger threat than corporations buying single family houses is that there are certain types of housing that will likely never not be owned by a single entity such as the large apartment buildings with shared entry areas.
I think the YIMBYs need to start adding “ownable units of housing” to their list of things to look for when developing new housing structures. A lot of places in California are starting to build again, but they’re building a lot of corporate-owned apartment buildings with hundreds of units that only help further consolidate the housing market.
My neighborhood did a mixed development model and I think that’s the way it should go: some apartments, some townhouses, some condos. Stop letting a single company own the entirety of the new housing units you’re building.
Same here - yimby me up. I live on the edge of a multi family neighborhood currently being scaled up. It’s objectively good in that we’re building more housing units walkable to the town center and train station. However these are huge apartment blocks that can only ever be corporate owned. They’re replacing smaller multifamily houses much more likely to be owned privately.
So we’re getting more places to live but rent is going up and we’re getting more high end places and fewer places where anyone can live. We’re helping engineers live closer to transit, which is good, but pricing out a lot of regular people
Even worse, my town always had the reputation of the affordable places where anyone to live, in the midst of a cluster of expensive towns. Not anymore. Now we’re grouped as one of the expensive towns
Corps should only be able to own apartment style housing. I’d be fine with more of them being built if we removed single family homes from the rental market.
That varies a lot depending upon where you’re talking about. In my area, the overwhelming majority of people that rent aren’t renting single family houses.
My area of New England, rentals seem to be either big corporate places or a unit in a triple-decker (3-story building with a single unit on each floor, traditionally owned by someone who lives in one of the units).
I live in a condo I own, which seems like an ok balance of privacy, responsibility, and being able to actually afford housing. Mortgage, HOA fee, taxes, etc, is still $800/month cheaper than my old corporate apartment, and I promise you I’m not spending $800/month in maintenance and neither was my landlord.
I think we need to look beyond individual ownership towards collective ownership. Apartment buildings should be a housing cooperative managed collectively by the people who live there.
I’m on board with that too, but I think that’s a tougher sell politically.
That’s reasonable. Given the current climate of apartments, I think the most accessible option for folks would be tenant unions
Get a group of people interested in doing that. And enough money to buy it.
It’s possible, my city passed an ordinance to allow right of first refusal to tenants. 3 immediately formed, and there’s been a few more since.
That’s dope. I like hearing that. Spread that news, it’s good news to spread. Im interested in how that works out.
Agree! With the added note that they shouldn’t do it the way the developers in my area did: they pitched it as affordable, accessible mixed use, and then built luxury homes that normal people couldn’t afford.