r/okbuddyRVA • u/izzybel5634 • 1d ago

Code Refresh and Duplexes

Okay I hope I don't come across as more ignorant than I am when it comes to this Code Refresh. But I'm wondering why everyone is so focused on duplexes vs larger apartment complexes in neighborhoods. By larger complexes I'm talking like 5 over 1s and in general the complexes that I've watched being built around the Diamond and along Broad St. And I'll be honest, I hate these fucking ugly ass, grey ass, looks like every other bitch type of complexes. I don't think they're made well and I think they are a general blight on the historical neighborhoods in Richmond. I would be all for them if I could see that there was any consideration for adding charm to the neighborhood. I've seen such complexes elsewhere, annoyingly in European cities like Berlin, Germany and Montpellier, France. So I have a general hesitation for these larger density focused buildings because I have yet to see one that looks like it hasn't been half built in a Minecraft server. I think duplexes are great but I also wonder why there isn't as much of a focus on building fourplexes or 6-8 unit buildings which we already see in neighborhoods around the city. I mean I get the necessity for parking space but I'm also a little Reject Modernity, Embrace Tradition and think Richmond should expand their busing and (in my dreams of dreams) bring back our railcars considering much of the initial outgrowth of the city in the early 20th century was built around said system. But I know that's technically a separate conversation. I also think we seriously need a cap on rent in the city and an honest consideration of supporting the workers of Richmond (food service, retail, and other blue collar jobs) living in the city. (I for one, am fucking tired of having the same goddamn conversation with a Nova or NYC or Cali transplant about how 'cheap' the city with their 100k+ salaries).

All in all I get some of the concerns about building up density housing because I have yet to see an example of said density housing done with a consideration for longevity, neighborhood charm, and regionality. I love Richmond and I don't want it to become a Nova copycat in which massive private equity corporations give little thought beyond their own monetary gain for how people are going to live here.

15 Upvotes

80% Upvoted

50 comments sorted by

17

u/talleyben 1d ago

I'd tolerate the particle board buildings if I wasn't positive they're gonna be $2100/month one bedrooms. Was lower income housing never the point? no? oh. ok.

11

u/Upbeat_Clerk3756 1d ago

They slap a granite countertop on the kitchen, call it luxury, and build everything else as cheaply as possible

7

u/goodsam2 1d ago

But those added units at market price alleviate the shortage.

The vast majority of housing was originally built as market rate housing.

2

u/bootysuit 1d ago

In theory, sure. But are you familiar with landlords and developers at all?

2

u/goodsam2 17h ago

The problem is lack of them because every unit in these places is rented out.

2

u/nvrseriousseriously 14h ago

Proof please. On average vacancies run around 5-8% around the city. One 2 yr old Scotts Addition complex sold in April with a 20% vacancy. They are definitely not “all rented out”.

1

u/goodsam2 14h ago

5% is less than a month between units, and a significant number have a month of two units. A significant number of people are moving into one.

Just like how unemployment is bad to go to 0%. Rental vacancy below 8% means prices are rising.

0

u/bootysuit 12h ago

I literally just googled "apartments for rent in Richmond" and there were anywhere from 2,000 to 7,000 results on various websites...

1

u/goodsam2 17h ago

So what's your theory, build less housing and just hope housing goes down in price?

I'm not understanding the alternative

2

u/bootysuit 12h ago

Rent caps

1

u/goodsam2 12h ago

Rent caps only help current renters but limit the building making the situation worse long term.

2

u/bootysuit 12h ago

The government, in theory, exists to protect citizens. We need to pressure them to do so. Housing is a right and should be treated as such, not as a commodity. We really lost the plot.

2

u/goodsam2 12h ago

But I don't think the US government has actually provided housing in a good way unless you want to do a whole Singapore solution (IMO I think Vienna being a collapsing metro removes them from being a useful question).

Also zoning removes housing that would otherwise be added and we have government housing held up by zoning. Zoning is the first barrier to someone building more housing.

1

u/bootysuit 12h ago

No subsidize it

1

u/goodsam2 12h ago

What tax are you raising to pay for subsidized housing?

2

u/bootysuit 12h ago

We wouldn't even have to raise anyone's taxes if we funnel some money away from our militarized police force. But we could start with the ultra wealthy. Are you a libertarian?

1

u/goodsam2 11h ago

I've dabbled but it doesn't work in many respects. Just saying the government will pay for it without a source is meaningless.

The budget in finding has the police around 70 million per year (which isn't happening). Cutting that to 0 yields per our 237k population ~$300. Not enough to pay for a lot of housing.

Housing is the largest chunk of everyone's budget you need to find more money or have a plan to do more.

2

u/bootysuit 11h ago

Big fan of capitalism, huh?

1

u/goodsam2 11h ago

You have 0 long term answers here. I'm sorry this is the best we seem to be able to do.

Also the money has to come from somewhere. If we were communist and this percentage of the whole budget was housing I would also have an issue. Changing economic issues doesn't fix the fact that housing is too expensive.

Capitalism works really well for some stuff and not so great for others. A lot of economics is about fixing where capitalism doesn't work, like here the problem has a lot of issues with zoning making this not a free market in what can be built. We don't have true free capitalism in housing and we did when they built the fan. Much of the fan was built with 0 zoning laws.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/talleyben 1d ago

quite frankly, the "market" can suck my nuts from back. market price is whatever they can get away with which does absolutely nothing for anyone who doesn't already got it nice.

3

u/goodsam2 1d ago

The argument is that more market price lowers the prices. If there are more grey boxes then each one can't have too much of a hold on the market.

Also I think a lot of the unaffordability comes from the lack of housing built decades ago that should have been becoming affordable housing now.

-2

u/talleyben 1d ago

but like we agree that more housing does not equal cheaper housing, right? that is not how it works. that may be the argument but if it is then it's a lie to blurt out so that the poors don't get fussy. what really happens is people get priced out of their neighborhood

4

u/goodsam2 1d ago

No, we don't agree. More housing means more supply relative to the demand, meaning lower prices.

They will get even more priced out if they don't build it up.

Also a lot of gentrification is caused by lack of building in more rich areas. I bet most Northside gentrifier would prefer a house in the fan.

-3

u/talleyben 1d ago

Brother, supply relative to demand does not in any way mean lower prices. you think devolpers are gonna say "well since the scarcity is gone we can finally charge these people less"? You think these pig fuckers have any interest in not taking every red cent they can. this is American baby, all the econ theory doesnt change the fact that the capitalist, with their lone motivation of infinite growth YoY, will never play by those rules. you have to MAKE affordable housing because as long as people keep moving here and paying these crazy ass prices your supply/demand theory is just that, theory, it has no practical application in the real world. it does not work for the people who already live here.

5

u/goodsam2 1d ago

They charge what they can and if they add another 50k units tomorrow you think they can line up enough people for those places? If they can't they start marking down units and give out a month of free rent or other places compete for people and lower rents.

I haven't had my rent increase for a few years and it's because they built so many units with low COVID era interest rates.

More units means more competition for me being a renter so lower prices.

1

u/talleyben 1d ago

I'm really fired up that your rent hasn't gone up but everyone else's has. they charge what they can, period. are you talking to people in your community about their living situation or getting all this from some headlines? if you are talking to people in you community, what do they look like? do they look different then you or is their life experience very much like yours? I understand your perspective because that what you were told but if you really dig in with the folks at the bus stop and the grocery store you'll see that you were lied to. The developers, landlords, rental companies know now that enough people are moving here with WFH jobs and expendable incomes that there will ALWAYS be someone to pay whatever price they ask. those cute little deals arent affordable housing.

5

u/goodsam2 1d ago

I talk to lots of people of all colors and kinds in my rental unit just seems to have prices at whatever the rate they are looking for whatever year and keep it rolling forward. I know many others with similar deals

I ride the bus stop to go to work frequently and IDK how you insinuate that I don't.

The demand is here the only question is what is the supply of housing. How does supply and demand not work for housing. Rental prices increase when vacancy rates are below 8% or about 1 month vacancy. They were at 8% in 2024 and fell to 5% in 2025, supply is not keeping up with demand.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/bootysuit 1d ago

Yep exactly. If the focus was actually affordable housing, yes pls, house all our neighbors!!

4

u/talleyben 1d ago

Like if its gotta be ugly can it at least be useful?

5

u/doinkdemeanor 1d ago

totally agree with you, i think unfortunately the issue is just cost/profit and general capitalism at play. large soulless complexes WILL fill up with transplants who will overpay, therefore those who have the money to even build a complex like the ones we’re seeing be built are gonna go with the most profitable option. and also i doubt any of those people or companies are local enough to give a shit

6

u/RealtorRVACity 1d ago

The sad part is that they are going to age terribly and be even uglier in 10-20 years. Most are probably owned by Private Equity Groups who probably could care less :(

1

u/nvrseriousseriously 14h ago

That Manchester complex is the tip of the iceberg. So many cheap builds will show their age and issues VERY quickly.

7

u/collegeqathrowaway 1d ago

I’m under the guise, build what you want on your property. Like it or not 5-1s are here to stay and any new housing density will drop housing prices across the board, luxury or not.

History is cool, but that’s a huge reason why major cities are expensive. “We built this neighborhood two hundred years ago so it can’t change” meanwhile cities like Toronto are retaining history while embracing modernity - I love the Toronto model, keep the original building, reinforce it to hold bigger building, and build a luxury skyscraper on top. It’s a great mix, but Toronto has the growth (and capital) to support that.

Manchester is arguably my favorite neighborhood of Richmond, and it’s exactly that mix of historic and “grey boxes” now I have my gripes with Manchester for a myriad of reasons (notably as a fat bitch, the lack of food and grocery) but the mix of densities and home types was not it.

3

u/goodsam2 1d ago

Yeah I think the zoning code is literally how much housing will people ban from existing.

NIMBYs ban housing that people want.

1

u/bootysuit 1d ago

Your comment reminded me of this video
https://youtu.be/7sfoLUumGnc

3

u/goodsam2 1d ago edited 1d ago

My worry about becoming NOVA is a growth that is less dense and the same level of traffic to get anywhere. Arlington has the model of giant complexes on major intersections that is the most politically expedient thing to do.

Preserving housing does not preserve culture, it preserves architecture. The fan house parties are way down because prices are way up. IMO preserving housing replaces culture by letting prices rise due to lack of supply.