Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jesse's avatar

Great piece as usual, love the literal tree analogy being used but from someone else.

I think the issue comes back to not the logic of the natural speed limit irrespective of planning controls, but what happens when land is upzoned. There's this weird idea that value of land and the development sites themselves fall upon mass rezoning (I have yet to see convincing evidence from Auckland or elsewhere). In essence saying, currently your plot of land is restricted to a legal tree density of e.g. 1 tree per 10 m2. But if we relaxed that to say 1 per 5 m2 or even abolished the legal limit, what would it do land values and the market for trees?

Of course, the same interest rate logic applies. And as pointed out, you can permit no trees on some land and more trees on other land. End result should be the same. Because it's never been about the amount of trees per plot, but rather the economic constraint binds the quantity of trees in total. And such density constraints could only be effective if they were so strong as to be binding and prevent the quantity of trees reaching the equilibrium with interest rates across the entire market.

Perhaps that's what they believe is happening? But that's the dubious part... That planning is a binding constraint on citywide housing supply.

Expand full comment
MrJP's avatar

Interesting piece and it is painful how many in the housing debate do not even seem to want to acknowledge this mechanism. One thing that I wonder about though is whether it matter that the housing market, specifically those who choose to build, are diverse. Big developers certainly landbank, however, there are also 'mum-and-pap'/'leech-off-your-neighbour' landlords (the richer ones) who build 6-10 unit apartment blocks (at least in Brisbane), and I would expect they do not have the same insights into the market and do operate on the same time scale as large scale developers (e.g. they might delay 1-2 years at most). If correct and there are enough of them, they could create downward price pressure, and in turn disincentive bigger developers to landbank. Kinda like a failure of the commons, but by the land-owning class, and to the benefit of the rest of us. Is anything known about this?

Expand full comment
22 more comments...

No posts