I actually built a website because of rising rents to help tenants evaluate landlords and negotiate rents.
It's like a Glassdoor for Rents so tenants can see the Rent History of an address or Apartment property to see a landlords pricing tactics.
The site does rely on user submissions so I appreciate anyone who adds their rent history to the site and/or shares it around since it can be more useful to tenants the more people that contribute to it.
The site is [rentzed.com](http://rentzed.com) and has submissions for over 3,400 addresses.
Great idea, but you’ve got to somehow find a way to scrape rental history from Zillow/Redfin/etc. Relying on users to manually input rental history to get value out of this will doom the site from reaching its potential. Bookmarking and wishing you the best.
All SB10 does is allow cities to cram as much condos and apartments into one area that they can. Then give a percentage of it to “low income families” meanwhile traffic congestion gets worse, and would you know it? So does crime.
Why do you even choose to live in a city if you hate living around other people so much?
Thats what I dont understand about NIMBYs. Youd all be better off in the other 99% of the city where you can always easily park your car and never have to worry about scawwwy minorities and poor people
The funny this is that, there is a lot of places being built right now. So many apartments going up in north Park and normal heights. But if you check the prices they are insane. 2 bedrooms for 5k a month wtf. Im glad I found a decent place years ago.
This is not a sustainable “plan” either. It’s very popular to say this but all it does is kick the can down the road. Whether we like it or not San Diego is basically a desert and it - like much of Southern California - has and will continue to experience multi year droughts and Luther resource strains.
Pretending that current issues can just be waved away by building more housing is - IMO though controversial - not a real solution. Even more controversial; there probably needs to be a limit. You see these kinds of limits in place in smaller environments that are both easier for us to grasp intuitively in terms of size, and more extreme in terms of environment: Tristan da Cunha for example.
Placing some seriously strict ownership and rent increase limitations would probably go a long way to fixing both; but in the end the idea of limiting growth needs to also be open to discussion.
But denser housing is more efficient and better for the environment than a new place in the suburbs.
You can limit growth, but the end result will always be our current state of more housing prices because the number of new jobs here has outpaced new housing for many years
Rent control does. Not. Fucking. Work.
It’s creates a one time “land grab” for people to get into the system, but long term has the complete opposite of the intended effect, because there is no longer any incentive for people to build or move.
Look no further than San Francisco and New York. The long term effects of rent control are well known at this point.
I’d be interested to hear your “ownership limitation” ideas, and I hope it’s something more serious than “we’ll stop corporations and Chinese nationals from owning homes!” Because anyone that’s down any actual amount of research into the situation knows those are minuscule drivers in the grand scheme of things in San Diego. Any person claiming that’s the problem isn’t a person worth taking seriously.
Going on posts and upvotes it would seem to be the opposite. All the posts and comments here consistently push the “more and smaller living spaces” and any other viewpoint is either “fearmongering” or “BS NIMBYism”.
Thank you! This insanity of unlimited building and growth has somehow eroded any reasonable discussion about simple resource constraints let alone the lack of “need” for these these things. Glad you said it at least.
I was just reading a nice article about how in the Sunbelt rents are falling because they allowed lots of units to be built. Perhaps we should try that here? Imo there are plenty of places that could easily accommodate more small apartment buildings with little additional impact
Corporations won’t built, insurance companies won’t insure and banks won’t fund the growth bc of the current regulations, monetary and fiscal policies in place.
San Diego needs to create a well thought out plan that discourages corporate investment, that's a start. Perhaps even find a way to add a tax or fee for property owners who don't like in California, unless they lived in the home and simply moved out of state. I'm talking about pure investors. Lastly, we need to place a tighter cap on rents, 10% doesn't work.
So your solution to the housing shortage is increased regulations, taxation, and rent control? I’m sorry, but that only intensifies the issue. By recommending pushing out corporate investments from buying up the supply, you’re saying that home prices and rent are inelastic. Meaning, changes in home prices or rent doesn’t change consumer demand. We all know that’s not the case.
By pushing out corporate investments we are pushing out a key player in what keeps the RE market moving. They bring liquidity, capital, jobs, and growth to the economy. They take on the risk and pay taxes that help fund future government works. This sends the wrong message, if you allow the government that much corporate control, we’ll see other industries continue to leave CA in fear of future regulations. And you’ll see future growth and development come to a hault.
In short, home prices are elastic, corporate investments are needed for economic growth and over regulation and taxation only hinders it.
Needs to happen but the existing housing investors have too much pull.
They'll keep trickling out "affordable housing" projects subsided by tax payers to keep the population thinking they are working on the problem.
They built lots of new high-density housing in my neighborhood. A $4K/mo studio without parking doesn't really help anybody. All of the new units tend to rent far above the average price, and there's no way to build or even rezone areas for high density housing fast enough to keep up with the growing population.
I actually built a website because of rising rents to help tenants evaluate landlords and negotiate rents. It's like a Glassdoor for Rents so tenants can see the Rent History of an address or Apartment property to see a landlords pricing tactics. The site does rely on user submissions so I appreciate anyone who adds their rent history to the site and/or shares it around since it can be more useful to tenants the more people that contribute to it. The site is [rentzed.com](http://rentzed.com) and has submissions for over 3,400 addresses.
Great idea, but you’ve got to somehow find a way to scrape rental history from Zillow/Redfin/etc. Relying on users to manually input rental history to get value out of this will doom the site from reaching its potential. Bookmarking and wishing you the best.
A map feature would be amazing, maybe something integrated with Google maps?
Lots of people have mentioned that as well. I'll add it in at some point. Thanks for the suggestion
To the complete surprise of absolutely no one.
Mayor continues to stay at home and dress up his cats.
He’s not done enough but he’s certainly more pro housing than his opponent who opposes SB10 implementation
All SB10 does is allow cities to cram as much condos and apartments into one area that they can. Then give a percentage of it to “low income families” meanwhile traffic congestion gets worse, and would you know it? So does crime.
Oh, so you’re just a right wing NIMBY asshole who is glad to see rents increasing Makes more sense now lol
And insults too 😢 we’ll enjoy the scent of hobo urine up in Hillcrest.
Why do you even choose to live in a city if you hate living around other people so much? Thats what I dont understand about NIMBYs. Youd all be better off in the other 99% of the city where you can always easily park your car and never have to worry about scawwwy minorities and poor people
a story as old as time
DUHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Conclusion: Duh.
The funny this is that, there is a lot of places being built right now. So many apartments going up in north Park and normal heights. But if you check the prices they are insane. 2 bedrooms for 5k a month wtf. Im glad I found a decent place years ago.
It's so wild to see these 70 year old dumps in University Heights priced exactly the same as new build in downtown. Gee, which one shall I choose?!
Build more housing units to ease the supply constraint
This is not a sustainable “plan” either. It’s very popular to say this but all it does is kick the can down the road. Whether we like it or not San Diego is basically a desert and it - like much of Southern California - has and will continue to experience multi year droughts and Luther resource strains. Pretending that current issues can just be waved away by building more housing is - IMO though controversial - not a real solution. Even more controversial; there probably needs to be a limit. You see these kinds of limits in place in smaller environments that are both easier for us to grasp intuitively in terms of size, and more extreme in terms of environment: Tristan da Cunha for example. Placing some seriously strict ownership and rent increase limitations would probably go a long way to fixing both; but in the end the idea of limiting growth needs to also be open to discussion.
But denser housing is more efficient and better for the environment than a new place in the suburbs. You can limit growth, but the end result will always be our current state of more housing prices because the number of new jobs here has outpaced new housing for many years
Rent control does. Not. Fucking. Work. It’s creates a one time “land grab” for people to get into the system, but long term has the complete opposite of the intended effect, because there is no longer any incentive for people to build or move. Look no further than San Francisco and New York. The long term effects of rent control are well known at this point. I’d be interested to hear your “ownership limitation” ideas, and I hope it’s something more serious than “we’ll stop corporations and Chinese nationals from owning homes!” Because anyone that’s down any actual amount of research into the situation knows those are minuscule drivers in the grand scheme of things in San Diego. Any person claiming that’s the problem isn’t a person worth taking seriously.
For some reason scarcity isn’t kosher to talk about anymore. Overpopulation is just the destiny of the world now.
Going on posts and upvotes it would seem to be the opposite. All the posts and comments here consistently push the “more and smaller living spaces” and any other viewpoint is either “fearmongering” or “BS NIMBYism”.
There is plenty of water available for residential use in San Diego.
Thank you! This insanity of unlimited building and growth has somehow eroded any reasonable discussion about simple resource constraints let alone the lack of “need” for these these things. Glad you said it at least.
Agree, they are building in a lot of new units all around the county and that’s fine. But it leads to other issues like crime, traffic, etc.
Let’s start in Del Mar
Agreed!
Building companies are pacing themselves to keep prices high. The big guys know what they're doing. To drown the little guys.
I agree need to expand more east
So not in your backyard.
What’s wrong with the east, housing is housing.
Nothing, just funny people advocating for build in a place they don’t live and not in their backyard, in this case PB.
Pb is built….
Nah, we can fit more in Del Mar or PB. Stop being such a NIMBY.
It’s easy to not be a NIMBY when you don’t own. I suggest buying a home and building in your back yard. Good luck!
There’s two directions San Diego can expand, east and up. I say we do both!
I was just reading a nice article about how in the Sunbelt rents are falling because they allowed lots of units to be built. Perhaps we should try that here? Imo there are plenty of places that could easily accommodate more small apartment buildings with little additional impact
Corporations won’t built, insurance companies won’t insure and banks won’t fund the growth bc of the current regulations, monetary and fiscal policies in place.
shit that house in the photo is literally in my neighborhood
Apparently someone is renting them.
San Diego needs to create a well thought out plan that discourages corporate investment, that's a start. Perhaps even find a way to add a tax or fee for property owners who don't like in California, unless they lived in the home and simply moved out of state. I'm talking about pure investors. Lastly, we need to place a tighter cap on rents, 10% doesn't work.
So your solution to the housing shortage is increased regulations, taxation, and rent control? I’m sorry, but that only intensifies the issue. By recommending pushing out corporate investments from buying up the supply, you’re saying that home prices and rent are inelastic. Meaning, changes in home prices or rent doesn’t change consumer demand. We all know that’s not the case. By pushing out corporate investments we are pushing out a key player in what keeps the RE market moving. They bring liquidity, capital, jobs, and growth to the economy. They take on the risk and pay taxes that help fund future government works. This sends the wrong message, if you allow the government that much corporate control, we’ll see other industries continue to leave CA in fear of future regulations. And you’ll see future growth and development come to a hault. In short, home prices are elastic, corporate investments are needed for economic growth and over regulation and taxation only hinders it.
Needs to happen but the existing housing investors have too much pull. They'll keep trickling out "affordable housing" projects subsided by tax payers to keep the population thinking they are working on the problem.
So anything except building more hosing in the face of a massive shortage, lmao
They built lots of new high-density housing in my neighborhood. A $4K/mo studio without parking doesn't really help anybody. All of the new units tend to rent far above the average price, and there's no way to build or even rezone areas for high density housing fast enough to keep up with the growing population.
In US* May be even the world lol