You’re right to mention how interconnected it all is.
Tenant rights helps to prevent evictions, discrimination, and to ensure good maintenance.
Vacancy taxes ensures that landlords can’t artificially shrink supply to raise prices and increase values, and to prevent capital strike.
Public housing creates competition that lowers prices for renters.
Appropriate volume of supply makes sure that everyone is housed in a basic sense. But only if it is the right kind of supply
If any of these categories are off they impact the others
I see lots of people rush to say that supply is the problem but you have to consider how market forces act upon the supply. “Luxury” developments don’t help most people. And as you said it has to be the right density too. In my city more than 10% of units are vacant at any time. Thats at least 20,000 units. This is why I want vacancy taxes so much. Zoning needs to be improved, and its worth new construction to do so. But in most US cities, idk about Australia, vacancy taxes would be enough increase in supply on their own.
Its also super important to mention the ramifications are commercial zoning. Vacancy taxes are even more important there. Commercial landlords are all holding out for a big chain to move in so they can jack up prices. Its why there are so few niche stores in US cities nowadays.
I’m ok with very high density zoning if its paired with expansions to mass transit. But generally speaking row housing and 3-4 story apartment buildings are the bread and butter. However any current city dominated by single family detached housing needs serious changes, seriously quickly. In those situations “spikey” development is worth it.
You’re right to mention how interconnected it all is.
I see lots of people rush to say that supply is the problem but you have to consider how market forces act upon the supply. “Luxury” developments don’t help most people. And as you said it has to be the right density too. In my city more than 10% of units are vacant at any time. Thats at least 20,000 units. This is why I want vacancy taxes so much. Zoning needs to be improved, and its worth new construction to do so. But in most US cities, idk about Australia, vacancy taxes would be enough increase in supply on their own.
Its also super important to mention the ramifications are commercial zoning. Vacancy taxes are even more important there. Commercial landlords are all holding out for a big chain to move in so they can jack up prices. Its why there are so few niche stores in US cities nowadays.
I’m ok with very high density zoning if its paired with expansions to mass transit. But generally speaking row housing and 3-4 story apartment buildings are the bread and butter. However any current city dominated by single family detached housing needs serious changes, seriously quickly. In those situations “spikey” development is worth it.