You can’t just decide to move to Europe, especially as an American. If that were the case, I’d be there already.
6 Likes
Real estate development was once rooted in community values and a human element. But with the rise of private equity in the space, the focus has shifted - now it’s often treated purely as a financial vehicle. This is a big reason why you’re seeing growing criticism around the role of private equity in real estate.
That said, it is possible to create win-win outcomes for cities, developers, and investors. The key lies in adopting a long-term mindset. I’ve seen data firsthand showing that long-term ownership consistently yields the best returns in real estate. The challenge is that this approach runs counter to the fast-money mentality that dominates much of the investment world today.
Interestingly, there are thousands of under-the-radar, high-net-worth investment groups that quietly follow long-term strategies similar to those of Warren Buffett. They prioritize quality and patience—and it pays off.
In contrast, much of today’s headline development is led by “merchant builders,” whose business model is to build as cheaply as possible and sell as quickly as possible to maximize immediate profit. This might make sense under a pure capitalist lens, but it often leads to apartment buildings with poor soundproofing, leaky pipes, or cheap finishes that degrade quickly. These issues don’t just impact residents—they affect the broader neighborhood as well. Once the building faces challenge, it’s not easy to correct the reputation and fix the deficiencies.
Now compare that with a developer pursuing a build-to-hold strategy. If you’re going to own and manage a property long-term, you have every incentive to do it right from the start. For example, investing in soundproofing makes sense because tenant satisfaction directly affects occupancy and rental income.
It’s like the difference between doing something yourself vs. outsourcing it. When you’re responsible for the outcome, you’re more likely to uphold higher standards because you have to live with the results.
11 Likes
A post was merged into an existing topic: Municipal Services and Safety in DTR
You lost me there. Perhaps that was true inside a Norman Rockwell painting, but real estate development has pretty much always been a highly capitalistic, money-talks kind of deal.
Raleigh used to be a sleepier place than it is, so the dollar values that it took to amount to “big money” were less. But grassroots, it was not. Maybe not ever?
1 Like
Real estate has always been driven by capitalism, but intuition and vision once played a significant role in development strategy. Today, every project demands justification and proven benchmarks, leaving little room for innovation in pre-construction valuation. If, for example, the market currently favors four-bedroom luxury units, an investment team won’t acknowledge their full potential unless there is real-time performance data to support the model. Instead, revenue projections are based on established comparables—possibly a two-bedroom unit at half the expected revenue which stifles forward-thinking development. (We would not build the first skyscraper back in the day if we had the investment mindset we have in 21st century)
This dynamic was evident in the story of 15 Central Park West, where the development team had to fight to clad the building in limestone, arguing it would command a much higher premium. Many dismissed the idea as an unnecessary expense, but their conviction prevailed. The building’s success proved that quality, aesthetics, and long-term vision could still drive extraordinary value, even in a market increasingly obsessed with financial modeling over architectural intuition.
From the early 1900s through arguably the 1960s, America’s buildings were true architectural masterpieces, crafted with premium materials and intricate details by thoughtful developers and construction teams. During this era, people recognized and invested in the lasting value of high-quality structures. However, over the past 40 years, the industry’s focus has shifted toward cost-cutting and profit maximization, embracing mass production and lower-cost alternatives, where efficiency takes precedence over craftsmanship.
Fast forward to the last 20 years, and the rise of real estate private equity has further transformed the industry, making quantifiable profit the sole driving force behind development decisions. Unlike traditional firms that balanced long-term value, architectural integrity, and community impact, private equity investors prioritize rapid appreciation, cost-cutting, and exit strategies to maximize returns. This shift has led to formulaic, high-density developments, where financial modeling dictates design choices, leaving little room for anything else. As institutional influence grows, developers must justify every decision with hard data, reinforcing a cycle where creativity is stifled unless it aligns with proven investment metrics.
8 Likes
Disposable consumer cultural attitudes meet private equity results in meh.
5 Likes
The craptastically formulaic death of ingenuity via cost-basis profiteering…Blergh. 
3 Likes
Travel around China, for example, and see how stale and staid most American commercial architecture is. One might argue that architectural design standards and construction in China are inferior to ours, and that might be true (although there is often a degree of implicit racism or assumption of cultural superiority when making statements like that).
American residential architecture, on the other hand is more innovative. To be fair, only the wealthiest Chinese live in detached homes that their architects have free reign to innovate.
The honest truth is ~95% of those living in new dwellings built under the FTO will never use the bus system. Though I believe it is the best path for density since it pushes back on the chronic NIMBYism that would appear otherwise. The unfortunate truth is people will 100% of the time take their car over the bus, where they could (not always) run into an unpredictable mentally-ill person or drug user.
The focus needs to stay on density around commercial areas, emphasizing walkability to restaurants & cafes, grocery stores, and pharmacies. The people who were opposed to the Waverly Place rezoning could not comprehend this; they always have to drive from their SFHs. Following this planning will reduce vehicle trips and road congestion.
1 Like
5% would be great progress for Raleigh. Current numbers are just over 1%.
1 Like
I am confused; I assume you are referring to all of Raleigh? I was just referring to those living in new FTO developments.
1 Like
with this paradigm…would raleigh be going 20 stories as much, or less?
US 3,532,316 square miles of land. China 3,705,410 square miles. US pop: 340.1 million. China pop: 1.411 billion. i expect both have a bunch of empty land.