What's the deal with Developers?

[Anonymous]

Explain to me why developers are bad. I see this take so much whether it's in DC with the Mayor, Montgomery County or any other place. What is it about the developers that makes them awful people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me why developers are bad. I see this take so much whether it's in DC with the Mayor, Montgomery County or any other place. What is it about the developers that makes them awful people?

It's not that they are intrinsically bad. Developers are necessary. But, they are typically entirely profit motivted, meaning they view every deal as the maximum amount of cash they can get per square foot. Thus, left to their own devices they would prioritize building luxury apartments, luxury office spaces and high end retail. They don't care as much about green spaces, or families, young working people, children, and affordable establishments. They also don't care about the impacts on infrastructure, traffic, police or other services, they leave taxpayers holding the bag. It's typically the communities that have to keep them in check and push for those things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me why developers are bad. I see this take so much whether it's in DC with the Mayor, Montgomery County or any other place. What is it about the developers that makes them awful people?

It's not that they are intrinsically bad. Developers are necessary. But, they are typically entirely profit motivted, meaning they view every deal as the maximum amount of cash they can get per square foot. Thus, left to their own devices they would prioritize building luxury apartments, luxury office spaces and high end retail. They don't care as much about green spaces, or families, young working people, children, and affordable establishments. They also don't care about the impacts on infrastructure, traffic, police or other services, they leave taxpayers holding the bag. It's typically the communities that have to keep them in check and push for those things.

I'll add that I say this from having worked on both sides - as an engineering consultant working for developers, and as a municipal engineer working with planning commissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me why developers are bad. I see this take so much whether it's in DC with the Mayor, Montgomery County or any other place. What is it about the developers that makes them awful people?

It's not that they are intrinsically bad. Developers are necessary. But, they are typically entirely profit motivted, meaning they view every deal as the maximum amount of cash they can get per square foot. Thus, left to their own devices they would prioritize building luxury apartments, luxury office spaces and high end retail. They don't care as much about green spaces, or families, young working people, children, and affordable establishments. They also don't care about the impacts on infrastructure, traffic, police or other services, they leave taxpayers holding the bag. It's typically the communities that have to keep them in check and push for those things.

"Luxury apartments" just means new market-rate apartments. All new market-rate apartments have the meaningless term "luxury" slapped on them.

[Anonymous]

They're just like any big industry - they are political donors who have an outsized influence on politics. What Big Tech, Big Ag, Big Oil, and Big Pharma are to the federal government, Big Development is to local government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me why developers are bad. I see this take so much whether it's in DC with the Mayor, Montgomery County or any other place. What is it about the developers that makes them awful people?

Swing by Manila or Jakarta and you’ll get a sense of what a mess unchecked development can do to a city.

[Anonymous]

It’s gotten this far and no one has mentioned the rampant corruption.

It’s hilarious to see people fully disconnected from the fact that Donald Trump is a developer. While it’s not fair to say that his behavior represents all developers, it’s not unfair either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s gotten this far and no one has mentioned the rampant corruption.

It’s hilarious to see people fully disconnected from the fact that Donald Trump is a developer. While it’s not fair to say that his behavior represents all developers, it’s not unfair either.

I thought Trump Org was mostly a management company for rental/condo buildings and name licensing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s gotten this far and no one has mentioned the rampant corruption.

It’s hilarious to see people fully disconnected from the fact that Donald Trump is a developer. While it’s not fair to say that his behavior represents all developers, it’s not unfair either.

I thought Trump Org was mostly a management company for rental/condo buildings and name licensing.

Only because he failed as an actual developer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me why developers are bad. I see this take so much whether it's in DC with the Mayor, Montgomery County or any other place. What is it about the developers that makes them awful people?

It's not that they are intrinsically bad. Developers are necessary. But, they are typically entirely profit motivted, meaning they view every deal as the maximum amount of cash they can get per square foot. Thus, left to their own devices they would prioritize building luxury apartments, luxury office spaces and high end retail. They don't care as much about green spaces, or families, young working people, children, and affordable establishments. They also don't care about the impacts on infrastructure, traffic, police or other services, they leave taxpayers holding the bag. It's typically the communities that have to keep them in check and push for those things.

"Luxury apartments" just means new market-rate apartments. All new market-rate apartments have the meaningless term "luxury" slapped on them.

This is true. Even some 20 yr old class B places market themselves as “luxury apartments”. The term means nothing. I work in property management.

That being said- as for this discussion. Developers are not evil. They are for profit companies, that do what they do for owner/shareholder value. I don’t fault them at all for that. Which is why it is on local boards to balance the needs for housing (hint- we need housing) with the ramifications of building said housing. I’m hardly a nimby by any means, but I think some of the harder zealots for upzoning either don’t account for the ramifications of housing (parking, schools, basically all of infrastructure) and seem to think we should just raise taxes on everyone should those things happen.

But developers are nothing other than a middle man in this, who looks out for their financial interests. That doesn’t make them good or bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me why developers are bad. I see this take so much whether it's in DC with the Mayor, Montgomery County or any other place. What is it about the developers that makes them awful people?

It's not that they are intrinsically bad. Developers are necessary. But, they are typically entirely profit motivted, meaning they view every deal as the maximum amount of cash they can get per square foot. Thus, left to their own devices they would prioritize building luxury apartments, luxury office spaces and high end retail. They don't care as much about green spaces, or families, young working people, children, and affordable establishments. They also don't care about the impacts on infrastructure, traffic, police or other services, they leave taxpayers holding the bag. It's typically the communities that have to keep them in check and push for those things.

"Luxury apartments" just means new market-rate apartments. All new market-rate apartments have the meaningless term "luxury" slapped on them.

Using the term "market rate" is a joke - you can only afford them if you're part of the top 5-10%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me why developers are bad. I see this take so much whether it's in DC with the Mayor, Montgomery County or any other place. What is it about the developers that makes them awful people?

It's not that they are intrinsically bad. Developers are necessary. But, they are typically entirely profit motivted, meaning they view every deal as the maximum amount of cash they can get per square foot. Thus, left to their own devices they would prioritize building luxury apartments, luxury office spaces and high end retail. They don't care as much about green spaces, or families, young working people, children, and affordable establishments. They also don't care about the impacts on infrastructure, traffic, police or other services, they leave taxpayers holding the bag. It's typically the communities that have to keep them in check and push for those things.

"Luxury apartments" just means new market-rate apartments. All new market-rate apartments have the meaningless term "luxury" slapped on them.

This is true. Even some 20 yr old class B places market themselves as “luxury apartments”. The term means nothing. I work in property management.

That being said- as for this discussion. Developers are not evil. They are for profit companies, that do what they do for owner/shareholder value. I don’t fault them at all for that. Which is why it is on local boards to balance the needs for housing (hint- we need housing) with the ramifications of building said housing. I’m hardly a nimby by any means, but I think some of the harder zealots for upzoning either don’t account for the ramifications of housing (parking, schools, basically all of infrastructure) and seem to think we should just raise taxes on everyone should those things happen.

But developers are nothing other than a middle man in this, who looks out for their financial interests. That doesn’t make them good or bad.

Expect zero altruism from developers. Governments and advocates have to make special efforts and exertion to get them to build anything that would benefit the lower 80% of society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me why developers are bad. I see this take so much whether it's in DC with the Mayor, Montgomery County or any other place. What is it about the developers that makes them awful people?

It's not that they are intrinsically bad. Developers are necessary. But, they are typically entirely profit motivted, meaning they view every deal as the maximum amount of cash they can get per square foot. Thus, left to their own devices they would prioritize building luxury apartments, luxury office spaces and high end retail. They don't care as much about green spaces, or families, young working people, children, and affordable establishments. They also don't care about the impacts on infrastructure, traffic, police or other services, they leave taxpayers holding the bag. It's typically the communities that have to keep them in check and push for those things.

"Luxury apartments" just means new market-rate apartments. All new market-rate apartments have the meaningless term "luxury" slapped on them.

Using the term "market rate" is a joke - you can only afford them if you're part of the top 5-10%

And the other 90% of us live where?

[Anonymous]

Big campaign money for the NOVA dems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me why developers are bad. I see this take so much whether it's in DC with the Mayor, Montgomery County or any other place. What is it about the developers that makes them awful people?

It's not that they are intrinsically bad. Developers are necessary. But, they are typically entirely profit motivted, meaning they view every deal as the maximum amount of cash they can get per square foot. Thus, left to their own devices they would prioritize building luxury apartments, luxury office spaces and high end retail. They don't care as much about green spaces, or families, young working people, children, and affordable establishments. They also don't care about the impacts on infrastructure, traffic, police or other services, they leave taxpayers holding the bag. It's typically the communities that have to keep them in check and push for those things.

"Luxury apartments" just means new market-rate apartments. All new market-rate apartments have the meaningless term "luxury" slapped on them.

Using the term "market rate" is a joke - you can only afford them if you're part of the top 5-10%

Yes, only the top 5-10% can afford to live in that particular place. And?