Paying a subscription for your heated steering wheel and seats is the ultimate in this insanity.
1 Like
âAs of serviceâ is definitely hitting nearly all categories these days.
When I think âownershipâ - itâs keeping the risk/upside solely to those with possession, but it doesnât remove the expense of âholding/having somethingâ because you still are typically responsible for ongoing cost (CDâs collections not so much).
With renting, you are basically removing the risk and not partaking in the upside, in return you get the predictability and possibly the flexibility. A lot of residential leases are yearly, but then there are commercial leases that can be decades, and then ground leases that go to nearly 100 years.
While unlikely, a 10-year home lease with fixed annual increases could provide a massive advantage in stagnant markets because it allows you to cap your housing costs while offloading the risk of declining asset values. We are very fortunate that Raleigh is experiencing a massive population boom causing rapid appreciation, but as history has shown - other places in the US arenât so lucky.
6 Likes
i was born in raleigh, late 60s. folks had been here since the late 40s and early fifties via the school for the blind and state govt jobsâŚ.sure, much different situation than today. hopping to a different neighborhood (based on in our case transit changes or work localeâŚstill within the beltline or just ouside of it) via a house sale at the time was easyâŚ.quick sale and generally quick buy. if planning changes and employment scattering has changed all that, im not sure.
1 Like
Today the city council approved the purchase and protection of 277 acres in Granville Co. (just north of Wake) by buying it from a family whoâs owned it for hundreds of years. The land is in the watershed of Falls Lake, and protecting it contributes to our water quality. I fully support this action. In total, the city has invested nearly $13M over time protecting nearly 12,000 acres over the years.
That said, we should remind the city council that protecting watershed land where we can is intrinsically connected to developing densely as the yin to the yan of good city government decision making. While not an urban development boundary, the city protecting this additional land today requires growth to either come through densification, suburban development that avoids/leapfrogs beyond the protected areas, or a combination of both. If we as a city can see the value of buying land thatâs outside of not only our city limits, but also the county limits, then we should be motivated by the value of densifying land thatâs already under our control.
12 Likes
I have a friend who says theyâre âproâruralâ precisely because theyâre proâurban. Their view is that if we focus growth within existing boundary and build upward to increase density, to make better use of developed land, this allows us to avoid sprawling into untouched rural areas. In their mind, strong, compact urban development actually protects open landscapes, allowing those natural spaces to remain unspoiled for people to visit, explore, and enjoy!
23 Likes
Saw this analysis about underground infrastructure:
âIn low density each household has to proportionally pay for the pavement, utilities, hydrants, valves, etc to service their home. That can be anywhere from 100-200 linear feet per home for a typical subdivision.
In medium density you have to upsize waterlines from 8" to 12"âŚmaybe even 16". But the linear feet per household is much lower. Maybe even down to 10-20 linear feet per household. So you have double the cost of infrastructure but 10x the people to pay for it.
Then in high density, all the infrastructure sizes double underground (24" and 36" waterlines) but the density increases to as low as 3-5 linear feet per householdâŚmaybe even lower. Another 2x cost in infrastructure but 3-4x in people to pay for it.â
7 Likes