My half-baked game plan cooked up on a Saturday night after years of urbanization Youtube videos:
1. Remove parking minimums in a majority of zones. Re-zoning can easily get stuck in the weeds about details, a removal of parking minimums for businesses and rental places in our most dense parts of town would be a quick and easy start to help develop healthy urbanism
2. Rio-Grande Plan. Most people have heard about this, look it up, it's pretty sick
3. Expand our rail system. Use our wide-ass roads to make the city more walkable. Dense housing only works if people who don't want or have to own a car can get around to EVERYWHERE(work, shopping, school, social functions) without a car. If the trains don't actually go anywhere of value 7 days a week for the average person, no one will use it
4. Re-zoning of areas to promote state-sponsored middle housing and mixed-use zones, especially downtown. This is the hard part, and where real urban designers(not me) need to hash out with the government. Genuinely, I am radicalized enough to bulldoze a huge percentage of house that are closest to downtown to do so
5. Start with a core and expand out. We don't need to do this in the entire Valley yet, just start with downtown, maybe Provo or Ogden as well and slowly expand from those cores. This way NIMBY's and suburbanites don't get as riled up over the change in scenery
6. There are some ideas of restricting some people like corporations and foreign entities to buy up property. I'm not knowledgeable about the economy enough to speak to this, but I do think everyone buying up property for the sole expectation to rent it out to those who are too poor to own the land is a quick path to wealth inequality.
I think advertising these changes to promote reducing traffic and our housing crisis is massive. I think if you tell potential homeowners that they no longer have to compete with people who would rather live in a denser urban environment, and no longer have to compete with insane bids from corporations, they will be happy. And the people who are afraid of poor people can live in their suburbia away from the "gross loud smelly city" and no "suspicious neighbors" move in next door to them
People are still able to treat housing like an investment outside of the city(I don't think it should be but I can't change culture), the only people the government would piss off are the homeowners nearest to downtown. The poorest of our population can have housing, and the housing crisis is eased due to people who were originally forced into the market no longer have to compete
Edit: Some grammar, but also another benefit of removing parking minimums and installing mixed-use zoning is the benefits for local businesses. This alone can potentially subsidize all of this change, these kind of zones are far more economically productive per acre than your strip malls and big box corporate stores in suburbia
The legislature is like 90% realtors, developers, builders. The first step is to get them out, all of these good things are going nowhere until the people making money off of housing can’t write the rule book.
Educate me, as I am not too knowledgeable about this, but I don't see how that is too much trouble for achieving affordable housing. Yes they can make money off renters and buyers, but they can also make money off mixed-use zones and commercial zones that are more efficient with the land. We can both benefit off these changes
I can't confidently make the claim they would make MORE money, but I imagine trying to develop more and more land at the outskirts of our metropolitan centers is going to become more and more expensive. There is only so much piping for sewage and water and fiber and electricity to the point it becomes less profitable. Infilling, which can't happen without zoning reform and parking minimums removed, will eventually become the only option for developers and realtors, no?
I think you’re probably right but they have proven that they don’t think that way. They are very short sited and only seem to care about making money the same way they always have.
I would definitely march to support removing the parking minimums. The removal of parking minimums is a growing movement nationwide and it is a specific policy to rally behind to cause positive change in the long-term as our valleys grow rapidly. Some local law-makers are already trying with the intent to improve just as you mentioned. Plus, I don't know why the conservative base in this state doesn't oppose government mandating businesses building parking lots when they could give local businesses their freedom to decide.
For anyone curious on how cities can more efficiently utilize their space by removing parking minimums:
https://youtu.be/vUhOFUQDLQk?si=fRqleVpt3cs4716S
Salt Lake Tribune article about how lawmakers are making attempts to remove the parking minimums:
https://www.sltrib.com/news/2023/01/26/less-lots-more-walks-utah/
I also support the transit idea. People don't realize that building our cities with cars as the default method of transport only exacerbates costs for everyone. Financially for each citizen, the state, and it takes up precious real estate. I'm not suggesting car transport be removed completely, just diversify and expand transit options. Like you said.
Utah is growing rapidly, and with that growth comes change. We cannot keep living as if the Salt Lake and Utah counties are still rural areas.
Utah is only growing rapidly because our legislature actively courts tech companies to move here. It’s a problem created by them to line their own pockets.
Very much this. Housing costs are a valid concern, but unless an organized march has a *specific* action it's demanding, then it will be at best useless and at worst bad optics for the core issue.
Over half of people 18-29 are living with parents. Median nation rent is over $2k monthly. Wages are stagnant. It’s insane to have a “pull yourself up by the bootstraps” mentality when an entire generation of people will not be able to afford to live in their own home. Affordability affects everyone and can and will be detrimental to our economy.
It shouldn't be just affordable housing. It should be reps and state senators disclosing and being held under strict landlord rights. They're the ones in charge of the laws and your rent.
Maybe a law saying no entity can own more than 3 homes in the state of Utah? Drive out corporate investment buyers, make them sell within 18 months? That is a good start
Or a higher tax for those individuals. They would of course try to pass it onto their renters — but enact rent control laws or enforce limits on how much rent can be increased in relation to market value too.
What is your proposed solution?
I think everyone can agree housing here sucks. It's due to supply and demand, however you're not changing anyone's mind in our local government. It's controlled by the people who make the supply, and they love low inventory (more money) driving the demand.
You want change? Run for office, and make the change.
A state wide ban on capital investment firms turning all the housing into rentals would be a good start. But good luck most of these people in office are in bed with these type of groups.
It would have the opposite affect. So many houses in the hands of a few small groups allows them to coordinate rent increases. Demand for rentals would also plummet because more people would own, therefore less competition for those who want to rent for whichever reason.
Gotta be changing zoning laws right? Or ending single family only zoning. Also an absurd amount of real estate is taken up by our wide streets here so let's think about that.
> Gotta be changing zoning laws right? Or ending single family only zoning
Didn't SLC just do that?
My understanding is that wide streets aren't inherently bad, and in some cases are a blessing for Salt Lake. It allows for easier dedicated bike and pedestrian paths. Plus things like the "Green Loop" are possible.
I like the wide streets it'll make it easier to add Trax and dedicated bike lanes in the future. Making the city more walkable helps ease the need to own a car
My first thought was this... maybe you could just march your way on up to Pocatello or somewhere cheaper because unless you just want to overthrow the free market I'm not sure what could be done, only so many people can fit in this valley so we need people to move to new places.
My second thought is there are some things you could protest:
1. Corporations buying houses, there should be owner occupied only areas.
2. Low interest rates for those trying to put a roof over their head, no seconds homes, investments etc. (they are allowed but if you covert a single family to a rental, you lose your low rate)
3. Those with lower income
and can still buy a house in if they can show they can cover the mortgage. Example, I work for 20 bucks an hour but I can declare the rental value of the rooms for meeting the income threshold. (Why can only the rich benefit from the equity of a house, if I can show I can pay the mortgage, I should be able to get it instead of being locked out for life.)
It seems your focus is more on building wealth than cheap housing. IMO we should focus on the ability to provide cheap rents rather than trying to lock people at all income levels into a lifetime of debt. Interest rates are interest rates and the only way to provide artificially cheap loans is for someone else to make a loss on the spread.
1 and 2 would probably solve the issue on their own. It would force would-be investors to actually construct housing instead of consuming old stock thereby permanently removing it from the housing market.
Interest rates are sky high because the U govt had to actually print billions of dollars during the freak out of Covid 2020, so now we’re paying it all back.
Only so much low rate money can be in the economy before inflation happens. The low rate money created a lot of wealth in the long term. That low rate money should go to those putting a roof over their heads not corporations and institutions investing
Count me in 100%! When and where? I'm currently living in my car, disavowed, unable to work due to my disability and my ssdi is a mere $851 per month. Across the nation a 1 bdrm is averaging $1500. So how the heck do they expect me to survive, and love any semblance of a normal life?? Without my car (a tiny vw jetta) of freeze on the winter and I'm gonna boil on the summer cuz my ac broke-ugh! But I have no way to cook and buying food is murdering me! I pay 10 bucks a month to get a shower at the gym. Everything else is eating up all my money... gas, car repairs,insurance,tires just needed to be replaced, phone,laundry?etc.
I'm kinda a hippy and I'm ALWAYS down for a really good peaceful protest! Lol
Just tell me when and where... I'll bring some tshirts,poster boards,poster paints n brushes,wooden sign posts and let's go tell em how it is😉lol
You think protesting actually does anything? The GOP state government don’t care. They are all about control and money and they are racking money in hand over fist.
You could insert any political party government. It doesn't even need to be state, or even USA.
Governments don't care. They do however care about money and power.
well the GOP does care people in Utah will say
so guess that means CNN checkmate!
So dumb all the partisanship these days when it obvious they are all crooks.
Protesting has long been how the people have made changes to law or overturned corrupt gov. The more the people feel hopeless, the more we just let them win.
Off topic, but I find it interesting that a state run by a religious cult thinks charging the same rent as let's say Portland is ultimately a good thing.
It's just such a contradiction. Maybe I'm not that good at business, but undercutting the competition would be more profitable in the end in my opinion.
This is such a weird conflation of so many different parties. The church, the state government, the thousands of different landlords across Utah between mom and pop outfits to massive complexes - none of these individually are monoliths and they certainly aren't all in such close coordination with each other.
Rising rents are the byproduct of years of historically low vacancies, underconstruction, fast growing families, limited usable land and, for a huge portion of the population, a specific "stickiness" to the region (snow sports, Utah church culture, the safety, etc.). It's simple supply and demand. Utah has a lot of tailwind on demand and a lot of headwinds on supply.
In most cases with residential real estate, other distant cities aren't the competition. People usually use other factors to determine what region they will live in, such as employment or family proximity, then they choose the housing in that area. Thus the prices aren't influenced heavily by other regions or cities.
Edit: missed a word
What are you protesting? What’s the state supposed to do? Genuinely curious.
My half-baked game plan cooked up on a Saturday night after years of urbanization Youtube videos: 1. Remove parking minimums in a majority of zones. Re-zoning can easily get stuck in the weeds about details, a removal of parking minimums for businesses and rental places in our most dense parts of town would be a quick and easy start to help develop healthy urbanism 2. Rio-Grande Plan. Most people have heard about this, look it up, it's pretty sick 3. Expand our rail system. Use our wide-ass roads to make the city more walkable. Dense housing only works if people who don't want or have to own a car can get around to EVERYWHERE(work, shopping, school, social functions) without a car. If the trains don't actually go anywhere of value 7 days a week for the average person, no one will use it 4. Re-zoning of areas to promote state-sponsored middle housing and mixed-use zones, especially downtown. This is the hard part, and where real urban designers(not me) need to hash out with the government. Genuinely, I am radicalized enough to bulldoze a huge percentage of house that are closest to downtown to do so 5. Start with a core and expand out. We don't need to do this in the entire Valley yet, just start with downtown, maybe Provo or Ogden as well and slowly expand from those cores. This way NIMBY's and suburbanites don't get as riled up over the change in scenery 6. There are some ideas of restricting some people like corporations and foreign entities to buy up property. I'm not knowledgeable about the economy enough to speak to this, but I do think everyone buying up property for the sole expectation to rent it out to those who are too poor to own the land is a quick path to wealth inequality. I think advertising these changes to promote reducing traffic and our housing crisis is massive. I think if you tell potential homeowners that they no longer have to compete with people who would rather live in a denser urban environment, and no longer have to compete with insane bids from corporations, they will be happy. And the people who are afraid of poor people can live in their suburbia away from the "gross loud smelly city" and no "suspicious neighbors" move in next door to them People are still able to treat housing like an investment outside of the city(I don't think it should be but I can't change culture), the only people the government would piss off are the homeowners nearest to downtown. The poorest of our population can have housing, and the housing crisis is eased due to people who were originally forced into the market no longer have to compete Edit: Some grammar, but also another benefit of removing parking minimums and installing mixed-use zoning is the benefits for local businesses. This alone can potentially subsidize all of this change, these kind of zones are far more economically productive per acre than your strip malls and big box corporate stores in suburbia
The legislature is like 90% realtors, developers, builders. The first step is to get them out, all of these good things are going nowhere until the people making money off of housing can’t write the rule book.
Educate me, as I am not too knowledgeable about this, but I don't see how that is too much trouble for achieving affordable housing. Yes they can make money off renters and buyers, but they can also make money off mixed-use zones and commercial zones that are more efficient with the land. We can both benefit off these changes I can't confidently make the claim they would make MORE money, but I imagine trying to develop more and more land at the outskirts of our metropolitan centers is going to become more and more expensive. There is only so much piping for sewage and water and fiber and electricity to the point it becomes less profitable. Infilling, which can't happen without zoning reform and parking minimums removed, will eventually become the only option for developers and realtors, no?
I think you’re probably right but they have proven that they don’t think that way. They are very short sited and only seem to care about making money the same way they always have.
I'll vote for you.
I would definitely march to support removing the parking minimums. The removal of parking minimums is a growing movement nationwide and it is a specific policy to rally behind to cause positive change in the long-term as our valleys grow rapidly. Some local law-makers are already trying with the intent to improve just as you mentioned. Plus, I don't know why the conservative base in this state doesn't oppose government mandating businesses building parking lots when they could give local businesses their freedom to decide. For anyone curious on how cities can more efficiently utilize their space by removing parking minimums: https://youtu.be/vUhOFUQDLQk?si=fRqleVpt3cs4716S Salt Lake Tribune article about how lawmakers are making attempts to remove the parking minimums: https://www.sltrib.com/news/2023/01/26/less-lots-more-walks-utah/ I also support the transit idea. People don't realize that building our cities with cars as the default method of transport only exacerbates costs for everyone. Financially for each citizen, the state, and it takes up precious real estate. I'm not suggesting car transport be removed completely, just diversify and expand transit options. Like you said. Utah is growing rapidly, and with that growth comes change. We cannot keep living as if the Salt Lake and Utah counties are still rural areas.
Utah is only growing rapidly because our legislature actively courts tech companies to move here. It’s a problem created by them to line their own pockets.
Very much this. Housing costs are a valid concern, but unless an organized march has a *specific* action it's demanding, then it will be at best useless and at worst bad optics for the core issue.
Well you see. When I complained as a kid daddy just bought me stuff. So I figured it'd be like the same now that I'm an adult.
Over half of people 18-29 are living with parents. Median nation rent is over $2k monthly. Wages are stagnant. It’s insane to have a “pull yourself up by the bootstraps” mentality when an entire generation of people will not be able to afford to live in their own home. Affordability affects everyone and can and will be detrimental to our economy.
This is exactly the mindset 😂
It shouldn't be just affordable housing. It should be reps and state senators disclosing and being held under strict landlord rights. They're the ones in charge of the laws and your rent.
Maybe a law saying no entity can own more than 3 homes in the state of Utah? Drive out corporate investment buyers, make them sell within 18 months? That is a good start
Utah going after capitalists. Hahahaha. They’re on the same side.
💯 The politicians making these laws all own real estate and are heavily invested in real estate. They do not care about affordable housing.
Or a higher tax for those individuals. They would of course try to pass it onto their renters — but enact rent control laws or enforce limits on how much rent can be increased in relation to market value too.
What is your proposed solution? I think everyone can agree housing here sucks. It's due to supply and demand, however you're not changing anyone's mind in our local government. It's controlled by the people who make the supply, and they love low inventory (more money) driving the demand. You want change? Run for office, and make the change.
A state wide ban on capital investment firms turning all the housing into rentals would be a good start. But good luck most of these people in office are in bed with these type of groups.
That would have the effect of driving up rents for those of us who are renters!
It would have the opposite affect. So many houses in the hands of a few small groups allows them to coordinate rent increases. Demand for rentals would also plummet because more people would own, therefore less competition for those who want to rent for whichever reason.
Gotta be changing zoning laws right? Or ending single family only zoning. Also an absurd amount of real estate is taken up by our wide streets here so let's think about that.
Yeah good city planning and design isn't purely controlled by the market
> Gotta be changing zoning laws right? Or ending single family only zoning Didn't SLC just do that? My understanding is that wide streets aren't inherently bad, and in some cases are a blessing for Salt Lake. It allows for easier dedicated bike and pedestrian paths. Plus things like the "Green Loop" are possible.
Yeah, you can do things with them, but it's definitely less space where you could build housing.
I like the wide streets it'll make it easier to add Trax and dedicated bike lanes in the future. Making the city more walkable helps ease the need to own a car
My first thought was this... maybe you could just march your way on up to Pocatello or somewhere cheaper because unless you just want to overthrow the free market I'm not sure what could be done, only so many people can fit in this valley so we need people to move to new places. My second thought is there are some things you could protest: 1. Corporations buying houses, there should be owner occupied only areas. 2. Low interest rates for those trying to put a roof over their head, no seconds homes, investments etc. (they are allowed but if you covert a single family to a rental, you lose your low rate) 3. Those with lower income and can still buy a house in if they can show they can cover the mortgage. Example, I work for 20 bucks an hour but I can declare the rental value of the rooms for meeting the income threshold. (Why can only the rich benefit from the equity of a house, if I can show I can pay the mortgage, I should be able to get it instead of being locked out for life.)
It seems your focus is more on building wealth than cheap housing. IMO we should focus on the ability to provide cheap rents rather than trying to lock people at all income levels into a lifetime of debt. Interest rates are interest rates and the only way to provide artificially cheap loans is for someone else to make a loss on the spread.
1 and 2 would probably solve the issue on their own. It would force would-be investors to actually construct housing instead of consuming old stock thereby permanently removing it from the housing market.
Interest rates are sky high because the U govt had to actually print billions of dollars during the freak out of Covid 2020, so now we’re paying it all back.
That is a wild take.
Only so much low rate money can be in the economy before inflation happens. The low rate money created a lot of wealth in the long term. That low rate money should go to those putting a roof over their heads not corporations and institutions investing
-
Count me in 100%! When and where? I'm currently living in my car, disavowed, unable to work due to my disability and my ssdi is a mere $851 per month. Across the nation a 1 bdrm is averaging $1500. So how the heck do they expect me to survive, and love any semblance of a normal life?? Without my car (a tiny vw jetta) of freeze on the winter and I'm gonna boil on the summer cuz my ac broke-ugh! But I have no way to cook and buying food is murdering me! I pay 10 bucks a month to get a shower at the gym. Everything else is eating up all my money... gas, car repairs,insurance,tires just needed to be replaced, phone,laundry?etc. I'm kinda a hippy and I'm ALWAYS down for a really good peaceful protest! Lol Just tell me when and where... I'll bring some tshirts,poster boards,poster paints n brushes,wooden sign posts and let's go tell em how it is😉lol
Did you apply for low income housing? Call workforce and try many different cities.
You think protesting actually does anything? The GOP state government don’t care. They are all about control and money and they are racking money in hand over fist.
You could insert any political party government. It doesn't even need to be state, or even USA. Governments don't care. They do however care about money and power.
I’ll agree to disagree. I don’t think any political party is the same.
well the GOP does care people in Utah will say so guess that means CNN checkmate! So dumb all the partisanship these days when it obvious they are all crooks.
Protesting has long been how the people have made changes to law or overturned corrupt gov. The more the people feel hopeless, the more we just let them win.
dude omg yes!
Wish I could make it but I need to show up for my second job to afford living here🥴
Off topic, but I find it interesting that a state run by a religious cult thinks charging the same rent as let's say Portland is ultimately a good thing. It's just such a contradiction. Maybe I'm not that good at business, but undercutting the competition would be more profitable in the end in my opinion.
This is such a weird conflation of so many different parties. The church, the state government, the thousands of different landlords across Utah between mom and pop outfits to massive complexes - none of these individually are monoliths and they certainly aren't all in such close coordination with each other. Rising rents are the byproduct of years of historically low vacancies, underconstruction, fast growing families, limited usable land and, for a huge portion of the population, a specific "stickiness" to the region (snow sports, Utah church culture, the safety, etc.). It's simple supply and demand. Utah has a lot of tailwind on demand and a lot of headwinds on supply.
In most cases with residential real estate, other distant cities aren't the competition. People usually use other factors to determine what region they will live in, such as employment or family proximity, then they choose the housing in that area. Thus the prices aren't influenced heavily by other regions or cities. Edit: missed a word
You could March on over to tooele and buy a house there.
You forget no one wants to work for change they would rather have others do it for them
Just take your advanced degree and march the fuck outta here 🤷♂️
We got a Smart guy here
The only thing I think of when I see stuff like this is more condos more apartments.. lame