By Tanza Loudenback – Rate. com
Nearly a year ago, an aging duplex in the kitten corner of my (also aged) apartment in Los Angeles was razed to make way for a new four-story apartment building.
I am in favor of expanding the source of housing in my city. Los Angeles urgently needs more affordable housing, but I admit I felt worried. Current rents in my community are 16% less than the Los Angeles average, which is still $1,000 higher than the national average in August. Could this new development, which can even be considered a “luxury” apartment building, inspire my landlord to increase the rent?
I’m far from the only tenant to worry about. Many other people think that the new structure aimed at middle- and high-income citizens in spaces with older buildings is an indicator of gentrification and low-income communities, which are disproportionately composed of other people of color, are facing displacement of this kind of genuine progression in many giant metropolitan spaces.
But after delving into a report through researchers at UCLA’s Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies, I’m less concerned. Studies recommend that new development, through the expansion of the housing source around me, will improve mood, not boost them.
The effect versus the call to effect
In their report, the authors review several on-the-run articles they read about the effects of new advances on market rates in neighborhoods and, in one case, city-wide, on rents. success in low- and middle-income households. “
This is a more granular technique than has been studied in the past. At this point, the authors note, it is transparent that a greater source of housing can lead to a decrease in costs in a region. But what about rents at the community level? In my case, what happens when you can see the new construction from your bedroom window?
According to the authors, proponents of maximum housing assume that the new progression to the market rate will a) increase the source of housing and thus ease the strain on the nearby housing stock, which will reduce (or attenuate the increase) rents, which is known as the “source effect” – or b) attract wealthy tenants, bring new amenities and encourage domain owners to accumulate existing rents, which is known as the “demand effect” and a stereotypical explanation for gentrification.
These two perspectives may seem incompatible, but by examining the datasets, the UCLA researchers found that truth is an aggregate of both, so they established which effect is stronger— in other words, what is the net result?
Activating a “migration chain”
In five of the six on-run articles reviewed through UCLA studies, hiring in neighborhoods with new advances in market rates has become more over time— that is, any effect of increasing hiring, if any, turned out to be less than any hiring reduction. . (The sixth paper found combined results, which the scholars said may be attributable to the market segment studied and the fact that the studies did not adjust for hiring for inflation. )
An article, published in 2019, revealed that adjustments in market rates lead to a decline in rents in this rapid area as it triggers a “migration chain”. Basically, other people with above-average incomes have a tendency to move into new housing, so freeing up their old housing for other people with slightly lower incomes, etc. After several moves, a new home in a working-class community is available. When this happens on a giant scale, it “creates comfortable slack in the low-end housing market. “
Another paper, from 2021, analyzed housing production in San Francisco and found that within a hundred meters of a progression in the market rate, rents are falling by 2%. In addition, the threat of a low-income renter moving out of the neighborhood decreases by about 17%. There is also a 31% drop in eviction notices for rent-stabilized housing, most likely because landlords have less incentive to evict tenants when costs of non-stabilized housing fall or sn stand up.
Exclusionary zoning hinders new developments
Of course, the structure of new, unsubsidized apartment buildings is not a panacea for the housing affordability crisis, the UCLA authors note, especially when the only progression that occurs is concentrated in low-income neighborhoods. And yet we’re at a standstill in Los Angeles because new progressions have been blocked in many wealthy, largely white neighborhoods taking a Not in My Backyard (NIMBY) company stance. This exclusionary zoning exacerbates the compression of affordability . in low- and middle-income areas.
The researchers say that as long as there is a call for affordable housing, there will be new developments. As a precaution, they cite the knowledge of Echo Park, a community in downtown Los Angeles that is considered “an example of gentrification and the painful dislocations that accompany it. “
From 1970 to 2018, the housing source in Echo Park increased by only about 10%, yet Los Angeles’ population skyrocketed. Many existing houses were renovated or demolished and rebuilt, but new progressions were rare. During the same period, rents only roughly tripled and the region’s median source of income nearly doubled. “Avoiding progression has not prevented change,” the authors write.
Here’s the bottom come: Building new rental housing at market prices can be a valuable tool to stabilize or even slow down hiring in a community or town at large. coverage policies and, yes, residential zoning.
By Tanza Loudenback
Rate. com
Rate. com/research/news covers the world of finance and residential real estate.
Rate. com/research/news covers the world of finance and residential real estate.
View print ads
419-223-1010
419-229-2926
Thank you for sharing our on social media.
Remind us by clicking below.
Send this to a friend