Today’s Globe editorial is about the Boston rental market but the same laws of supply and demand apply here.
Many of those new units, whether they’re condos or apartments, are too expensive for the average family. But the city believes that they’ve reduced the demand on older housing stock enough that owners of existing units have been forced to lower their prices to compete. The law of supply and demand, it would appear, is working in Boston.
The Mayor’s commission on affordable housing clearly stated that no amount of development envisioned for Newton would have an impact of housing prices.
For rentals,if people prefer luxury units then rents for older units would decrease.
But this causes ‘land-prices’ for purchases’ in a positive way. The influx of affluent renters will eventually want to buy in the neighborhood. The older stock generally have the larger lots and better locations, so developers will bid up the oldest and crappiest houses to flip/rebuild.
This is good for older folks who need a nest egg for retirement, whether or not it increases the tax base to make up for increased school enrollment is unknown…
@Paul: If you consider Newton in a vacuum, sure, the difference will be microscopic. But if we are one of many greater Boston suburbs moving towards smart growth, it will definitely have an impact.
@Bryan
Maybe– I haven’t seen good data supporting your point, and generally housing prices have only gone in one direction irrespective of housing policies in other major cities across the world.
Perhaps a topic for another thread (or this one), but it generally feels like we’re creating a housing policy that is looking back instead of looking forward.
We’re on the cusp of a major revolution in transportation with self-driving vehicles. That will have a significant impact on many things, including housing. Newton and other high-cost cities’ primary attraction are good schools and short commutes, and its not clear how much the latter will be important in 30 years.
We may be building up housing stock, right as technology takes us in a very different direction. Greater density leading to increased economic activity was very true for the last century, it will be less true for the next century. Telecommunications, transportation and increasing globalization will all make the distance between here and Worcester– or further– feel a lot smaller or less relevant in the future.
Many seniors want to stay in Newton, and there’s simply nowhere to go once home ownership becomes a burden. Unfortunately, that’s the state of things right now.
As one who’s on the front end of the boomer generation, I can assure you the problem is going to escalate until it becomes a crisis – a crisis for which there’s no technological answer. It’s not just a local problem, but as Bryan mentioned, every community will have to do its fair share.
Paul,
The Self driving capability may only be 5-10 years away, but the affordability is more like 20 years away.
I’m pretty confident a car can self-drive around town (not just highway) within the next 6 years, but the costs look to be at least 40k. It would probably take another 15 years for it to trickle down to a Honda Civic.
To cost of an Uber from Newton -> Boston is around $30 one way, It would have to get down to $7 one-way to be economical. Imagine the costs from further suburbs.
In 5 years, those who can afford million dollar homes in Newton will be able to drive to the T and then send the car back home and get picked up again later. Commute into Boston in a relaxing manner and send the car back to save on parking.
If we get to the point where most jobs can be telecommuted, then way hire an American for 100k when you could get someone equally educated in India/Asia for only 10k? This is definitely something you don’t want to wish for…