[HN Gopher] NYC Active Major Construction
___________________________________________________________________
NYC Active Major Construction
Author : apsec112
Score : 50 points
Date : 2020-02-14 18:37 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www1.nyc.gov)
(TXT) w3m dump (www1.nyc.gov)
| ydnaclementine wrote:
| This map does not seem to cover road construction type things. I
| walk some road construction everyday and it's not on here.
| lbotos wrote:
| I'm fairly certain that is because "Active Major Construction"
| is a specific classification, and it does not apply to road
| construction.
| gok wrote:
| That's an interesting definition of "major". Some of these
| permits are for projects like a 59 square foot expansion [1] of a
| single family home.
|
| [1]
| http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/JobsQueryByNumberServlet?p...
| rayiner wrote:
| Still not enough. Here is why Tokyo housing prices are stable,
| despite the city growing, while NYC's continue to go up:
| https://reason.com/2019/04/02/nimbys-argue-new-housing-suppl...
|
| > According to the Journal, the Japanese capital of nearly some
| 13 million people saw the construction of 145,000 new housing
| units started in 2018--more than New York City, Los Angeles,
| Houston, and Boston combined. The country as a whole has managed
| to add close to the same amount of new housing as the U.S.,
| despite having about half the population.
|
| What's remarkable about that last point is that Japan has been
| shrinking for a few years now, while the US continues to grow.
| pkaye wrote:
| Japanese homes are only kept for 20-30 years from what I read.
| Do the above statistics include homes that are demolished and
| rebuilt?
| gfiorav wrote:
| The map is made with www.carto.com, a pretty sweet mapping
| solution!
| mushufasa wrote:
| it does look cool. i'm honestly more impressed by the overall
| look-and-feel and responsiveness of the dashboard. at first i
| thought it was shiny or Dash by plotly. does carto interop with
| or fork those??
| asdfasgasdgasdg wrote:
| Considering the NY-Newark metro area has ~18M people, 120k
| proposed housing units (at ~2.5 persons per household) is about a
| 1% increase above the base rate of housing, assuming no vacancies
| and one household per unit. Considering the already astronomical
| price of housing in the area, it's hard to imagine that this is
| really going to move the needle. If we were serious about
| reducing housing cost, you'd see 3-5x the number of proposed
| units as you do, or more.
| formercoder wrote:
| There's actually oversupply and prices are pretty good right
| now - relatively speaking of course.
| vanusa wrote:
| The first statement is completely false, of course.
|
| The second is simply vacuous.
| __initbrian__ wrote:
| While you're right that there is not an oversupply(needs
| citation), it is interesting to note some Burroughs have
| seen a decrease in rent in the past few years.
|
| [0] (2018)
| https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-12/pick-a-
| ne...
| vanusa wrote:
| This point is that these local decreases a basically a
| blip against a backdrop of an overall affordability
| situation which is extremely bleak for most people who
| live in the city. And quite different from how things
| were 20 years ago or more.
| aqme28 wrote:
| Just because prices are going down doesn't mean that they are
| going down to the level they _should_ be at (whatever that
| would mean).
| thedance wrote:
| The historical (before 1980) rate of housing starts in American
| cities was 1 per 100 people per year, not per 100 households.
| volkl48 wrote:
| You are comparing the entire metro area population to housing
| units under construction only within the NYC city limits (and
| the population within NYC city limits is ~8.4 million).
|
| I agree there needs to be a far faster rate of housing
| development if you want to see housing cost reductions, I just
| don't think the comparison you're drawing makes much sense.
|
| There is substantial (if also insufficient) housing development
| going up in NJ, parts of NY outside the city limits, etc.
|
| The comparison needs to either include all of those units, or
| only compare against the NYC population instead of the metro
| population.
| asdfasgasdgasdg wrote:
| Good point. My apologies and thanks for the correction. I did
| not intend to mislead.
|
| So, the fraction of existing stock that is being developed is
| about 2% rather than 1%. Although, I don't know how many of
| these proposed units replace existing units, so perhaps the
| estimate was also too generous in the other direction.
| asah wrote:
| Broadly, 1% could be bad, or it could be helpful... it depends.
|
| NY-Newark is clearly the wrong metric, since the new housing
| website only covers NY. The comparable statistic is 8.4M for
| 2020: http://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/new-york-city-
| pop...
|
| But I agree this isn't right either - you really want new
| commutable housing vs existing commutable housing, and that's
| obviously a lot bigger number on both sides of the equation,
| and because it affects multiple jurisdictions (NJ, CT, LI, etc)
| it would be a pain to gather properly... even assuming everyone
| could agree on "commutable" - for some, that means 20mins, for
| others 2hrs is fine sitting comfortably on LIRR, NJT or metro
| north; let alone capturing the impact of transfers, flaky vs
| reliable transit options, transit cost... I once commuted by
| LIRR: all fun and games until you're waiting for a train
| transfer outdoors in high wind in Feb, and then get to your
| car, which has thawed/refrozen and you need to excavate to even
| get in...)
|
| hope this helps, please be gentle.
| vonmoltke wrote:
| > sitting comfortably on ... NJT
|
| In what alternate dimension does this NJT exist in? I'm not
| often "sitting comfortably" on anything operated by NJT. Some
| days I'm lucky to be sitting at all.
| vertig0h wrote:
| From experience, I recommend a good pair of noise
| cancelling headphones.
| vanusa wrote:
| _If we were serious about reducing housing cost, you 'd see
| 3-5x the number of proposed units as you do, or more._
|
| And your plan for achieving that number is - what precisely?
|
| There's a reason for the modest increases in unit counts these
| plans produce: In reality, they all end up being way harder to
| implement (and costing a lot more) than you or I would like to
| think they would.
| maratd wrote:
| > And your plan for achieving that number is - what
| precisely?
|
| Ease up on the zoning laws. Many zoning laws in that same
| metro area _prohibit_ high density housing. The same high
| density housing that is most profitable and reduces the cost
| of housing.
| vanusa wrote:
| _Ease up on the zoning laws._
|
| Sounds like a hunch, rather than a plan.
|
| I say that because while it sounds like that "ought to
| work" there's no evidence that (by itself) it will be
| sufficient to make a dent in the problem.
| bobthepanda wrote:
| This is just a map of the housing construction in the five
| boroughs.
|
| Some suburbs are densifying around train stations and some are
| not, but New York City has no mechanism to make the suburbs
| densify.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-02-14 23:00 UTC)