New Proposed Tallest Highrise for Downtown Berkeley (Richmond, Freedom: real estate, apartment complexes)

[Dave Coe]

Downtown’s tallest building: Developer pitches 25-story Berkeley high-rise
The long-planned complex at 2190 Shattuck Ave. would grow to 260 feet, with 326 apartments, under a proposed redesign.

https://www.berkeleyside.org/2022/02...rties-shattuck

[Ruth4Truth]

Supporters of the project countered that providing homes amid a regional housing crisis is more important than preserving those views, and argued the site steps from BART in the heart of downtown is the perfect place for dense, tall development.

"Providing homes" is the main justification? What kind of homes? The last apartment buildings to go into downtown on the excuse that they were "providing housing" were luxury apartments. What kinds of "homes" are these going to be? And do people really want to live on Shattuck Ave. amidst the homeless and other panhandlers, and the storefronts that go through long periods of being boarded up for various reasons? How in-demand are those luxury apartments?

More info needed.

I can't help wondering why these projects always go in right in the middle of downtown. What about farther north along Shattuck, where the neighborhood is quieter and has less issues? Plus the RE would be a little cheaper outside the main commercial zone. Or is that NIMBY territory? Less NIMBY-ism in the downtown area? I could see that...

[MechAndy]

You are losing me here Dave Coe.
I don’t understand what this has to do with racial statistics .

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by MechAndy

You are losing me here Dave Coe.
I don’t understand what this has to do with racial statistics .

ROFL! Maybe it's going to be an "affordable housing" high-rise, or one dedicated to improving Berkeley's "diversity". Or the opposite; maybe the prices will be such, that only those H1B techies and their supervisors will be able to afford it.

[Dave Coe]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

ROFL! Maybe it's going to be an "affordable housing" high-rise, or one dedicated to improving Berkeley's "diversity". Or the opposite; maybe the prices will be such, that only those H1B techies and their supervisors will be able to afford it.

Diversity is good for Berkeley.

[davdaven]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

"Providing homes" is the main justification? What kind of homes? The last apartment buildings to go into downtown on the excuse that they were "providing housing" were luxury apartments. What kinds of "homes" are these going to be? And do people really want to live on Shattuck Ave. amidst the homeless and other panhandlers, and the storefronts that go through long periods of being boarded up for various reasons? How in-demand are those luxury apartments?

Pretty much all new housing in the Bay Area is derided as "luxury" housing. The reason is very simple: It is among the most expensive places to construct housing IN THE WORLD. We can thank our decades of NIMBYism and maze of red tape for that. Despite its problems, the Bay Area manages to be one of the most desirable places to live in the country, so there is no shortage of people who can afford it. Perhaps things would be different if our weather weren't as nice, or if economic powerhouses like Google, Apple, and Facebook decided to relocate. While we're doing our part with global warming to work on the nice weather issue, these big tech companies continue to double down on their real estate holdings, so I don't think much will change.

[Dave Coe]

Originally Posted by davdaven

Pretty much all new housing in the Bay Area is derided as "luxury" housing. The reason is very simple: It is among the most expensive places to construct housing IN THE WORLD. We can thank our decades of NIMBYism and maze of red tape for that. Despite its problems, the Bay Area manages to be one of the most desirable places to live in the country, so there is no shortage of people who can afford it. Perhaps things would be different if our weather weren't as nice, or if economic powerhouses like Google, Apple, and Facebook decided to relocate. While we're doing our part with global warming to work on the nice weather issue, these big tech companies continue to double down on their real estate holdings, so I don't think much will change.

Those who block housing for being too "luxury" are exacerbating the housing scarcity. It is a segment of Leftwing anti-gentrification activists as well as more affluent homeowners making those arguments disingenuously. What is the alternative, force Google to relocated all of their jobs out of the region?

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by davdaven

Pretty much all new housing in the Bay Area is derided as "luxury" housing. The reason is very simple: It is among the most expensive places to construct housing IN THE WORLD. We can thank our decades of NIMBYism and maze of red tape for that. Despite its problems, the Bay Area manages to be one of the most desirable places to live in the country, so there is no shortage of people who can afford it. Perhaps things would be different if our weather weren't as nice, or if economic powerhouses like Google, Apple, and Facebook decided to relocate. While we're doing our part with global warming to work on the nice weather issue, these big tech companies continue to double down on their real estate holdings, so I don't think much will change.

Well, those actually were luxury housing; high-end apartments in the middle of downtown. But that was a few years ago. Anyway, it's a fair question. Do people paying a premium for apartments want to be in the middle of a downtown that's been on the sketchy side for years? Maybe they do. There are a lot of amenities within walking distance of Shattuck and University, not to mention the BART station, so maybe being in the middle of all that is worth the downside.

[davdaven]

Originally Posted by Dave Coe

Those who block housing for being too "luxury" are exacerbating the housing scarcity. It is a segment of Leftwing anti-gentrification activists as well as more affluent homeowners making those arguments disingenuously. What is the alternative, force Google to relocated all of their jobs out of the region?

This is an ongoing issue here in Richmond. Activists don't want new bayside development because they've deemed it high end, when it's actually just at and above the median home price. They only want new housing for poor people. But when you ask them how we are going to pay for that so we can build it, the silence is deafening.

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Do people paying a premium for apartments want to be in the middle of a downtown that's been on the sketchy side for years?

Often wondered this myself. I passed through Dogpatch last night on my way to a concert, and was impressed by the number of new apartment complexes that have been built since I lived in the area. Could not figure out for the life of me why somebody would pay that much to live in an area that lacks day-to-day basics like a grocery store, but then I reminded myself that I don't work in tech or make $250K a year. For them it's not seen as expensive like it is for us normal folks, so they can spend $3000+ a month on rent and still have enough change leftover for Instacart grocery delivery and dinner out every night they don't feel like cooking.

[Dave Coe]

Originally Posted by MechAndy

You are losing me here Dave Coe.
I don’t understand what this has to do with racial statistics .

The problem is displacement. Vertical living space is the solution to oppose racism and displacement. This Silicon Valley tech journalist gets it.


"A future of enclavism in California could either be many people emulating the existing immigrant diaspora model within the current legal framework, freedom of association under a Neighborhood Freedom Amendment in the State Constitution, or a millet system. Under this scenario enclaves would be able to build up for their people without the concerns of whether they have to keep out or accommodate outsiders. It would be a sort of “vertical lebensraum” where different groups coexist without displacement or cutthroat competition."


Are YIMBYism and Enclavism Compatible?


https://robertstark.substack.com/p/a...ism-compatible