US Cities Try Changing Their Zoning Rules to Allow More Housing (npr.org) 191
Tech workers are accused of driving up rents in America's major cities — but in fact, the problem may be everywhere. Half of America's renters "are paying more than a third of their salary in housing costs," reports NPR's Weekend Edition, "and for those looking to buy, scant few homes on the market are affordable for a typical household.
"To ramp up supply, cities are taking a fresh look at their zoning rules and the regulations that spell out what can be built where and what can't." And many are finding that their old rules are too rigid, making it too hard and too expensive to build many new homes. So these cities, as well as some states, are undertaking a process called zoning reform. They're crafting new rules that do things like allow multifamily homes in more neighborhoods, encourage more density near transit and streamline permitting processes for those trying to build... Minneapolis was ahead of the pack as it made a series of changes to its zoning rules in recent years: allowing more density downtown and along transit corridors, getting rid of parking requirements, permitting construction of accessory dwelling units, which are secondary dwellings on the same lot. And one change in particular made national news: The city ended single-family zoning, allowing two- and three-unit homes to be built in every neighborhood.
Researchers at The Pew Charitable Trusts examined the effects of the changes between 2017 and 2022, as many of the city's most significant zoning reforms came into effect. They found what they call a "blueprint for housing affordability." "We saw Minneapolis add 12% to its housing stock in just that five-year period, far more than other cities," Alex Horowitz, director of housing policy initiatives at Pew, told NPR... "The zoning reforms made apartments feasible. They made them less expensive to build. And they were saying yes when builders submitted applications to build apartment buildings. So they got a lot of new housing in a short period of time," says Horowitz. That supply increase appears to have helped keep rents down too. Rents in Minneapolis rose just 1% during this time, while they increased 14% in the rest of Minnesota.
Horowitz says cities such as Minneapolis, Houston and Tysons, Va., have built a lot of housing in the last few years and, accordingly, have seen rents stabilize while wages continue to rise, in contrast with much of the country... Now, these sorts of changes are happening in cities and towns around the country. Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley built a zoning reform tracker and identified zoning reform efforts in more than 100 municipal jurisdictions in the U.S. in recent years.
Other cities reforming their codes include Milwaukee, Columbus, New York City, Walla Walla, and South Bend, Indiana, according to the article — which also includes this quote from Nolan Gray, the urban planner who wrote the book Arbitrary Lines: How Zoning Broke the American City and How to Fix It.
"Most American cities and most American states have rules on the books that make it really, really hard to build more infill housing. So if you want a California-style housing crisis, don't do anything. But if you want to avoid the fate of states like California, learn some of the lessons of what we've been doing over the last few years and allow for more of that infill, mixed-income housing."
Although interestingly, the article points out that California in recent years has been pushing zoning reform at the state level, "passing lots of legislation to address the state's housing crisis, including a law that requires cities and counties to permit accessory dwelling units. Now, construction of ADUs is booming, with more than 28,000 of the units permitted in California in 2022."
"To ramp up supply, cities are taking a fresh look at their zoning rules and the regulations that spell out what can be built where and what can't." And many are finding that their old rules are too rigid, making it too hard and too expensive to build many new homes. So these cities, as well as some states, are undertaking a process called zoning reform. They're crafting new rules that do things like allow multifamily homes in more neighborhoods, encourage more density near transit and streamline permitting processes for those trying to build... Minneapolis was ahead of the pack as it made a series of changes to its zoning rules in recent years: allowing more density downtown and along transit corridors, getting rid of parking requirements, permitting construction of accessory dwelling units, which are secondary dwellings on the same lot. And one change in particular made national news: The city ended single-family zoning, allowing two- and three-unit homes to be built in every neighborhood.
Researchers at The Pew Charitable Trusts examined the effects of the changes between 2017 and 2022, as many of the city's most significant zoning reforms came into effect. They found what they call a "blueprint for housing affordability." "We saw Minneapolis add 12% to its housing stock in just that five-year period, far more than other cities," Alex Horowitz, director of housing policy initiatives at Pew, told NPR... "The zoning reforms made apartments feasible. They made them less expensive to build. And they were saying yes when builders submitted applications to build apartment buildings. So they got a lot of new housing in a short period of time," says Horowitz. That supply increase appears to have helped keep rents down too. Rents in Minneapolis rose just 1% during this time, while they increased 14% in the rest of Minnesota.
Horowitz says cities such as Minneapolis, Houston and Tysons, Va., have built a lot of housing in the last few years and, accordingly, have seen rents stabilize while wages continue to rise, in contrast with much of the country... Now, these sorts of changes are happening in cities and towns around the country. Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley built a zoning reform tracker and identified zoning reform efforts in more than 100 municipal jurisdictions in the U.S. in recent years.
Other cities reforming their codes include Milwaukee, Columbus, New York City, Walla Walla, and South Bend, Indiana, according to the article — which also includes this quote from Nolan Gray, the urban planner who wrote the book Arbitrary Lines: How Zoning Broke the American City and How to Fix It.
"Most American cities and most American states have rules on the books that make it really, really hard to build more infill housing. So if you want a California-style housing crisis, don't do anything. But if you want to avoid the fate of states like California, learn some of the lessons of what we've been doing over the last few years and allow for more of that infill, mixed-income housing."
Although interestingly, the article points out that California in recent years has been pushing zoning reform at the state level, "passing lots of legislation to address the state's housing crisis, including a law that requires cities and counties to permit accessory dwelling units. Now, construction of ADUs is booming, with more than 28,000 of the units permitted in California in 2022."
Ya know (Score:5, Insightful)
If corporations weren't allowed to buy up housing stock and keep it off the market, a large portion of this problem would go away.
Not to mention if there were fewer people this also wouldn't be a problem.
Re:Ya know (Score:5, Interesting)
Asset acquisition is a side effect of ultra-low interest rates. People borrow money cheaply, use it to buy assets, and then borrow against the assets as they appreciate to buy more assets.
https://fortune.com/2023/05/05... [fortune.com]
"...But it isn't just about home prices: Interest rates on âoefloatingâ loans offered to firms like Yieldstreet are still in the 7% to 8% range, Joshi says. Those high interest rates, coupled with frothy home prices, mean that buying new single-family rentals doesnâ(TM)t make a lot of sense right now for some institutional investors.
Joshi says Yieldstreet is waiting for either house prices to take another leg down or interest rates to come back down. Or both.
âoeIf short-term [interest] rates came down around 4%, and if home prices were about 15% lower than the peak last year, that is a valuation that supports the equity return that investors need to make,â Joshi tells Fortune...."
I mean, you could specifically come out and say, it is against the best interests of public policy for hedge funds to purchase starter homes, and build in penalties/subsidies to help re-balance the distribution of homes. However, you'd probably get push back from existing homeowners who want to sell for a higher price, if such policies dampened investor demand, and thus real estate appreciation. You'd also probably get push back from states and local governments who want the higher property assessments so they can collect more in property taxes...
I mean, seriously, there's a reason that real estate traditionally turned a blind eye to dirty money and the use of real estate for money laundering. If the criminals stop buying real estate... the prices don't rise as fast, and realtors/brokers stop getting fat commission checks.
https://www.reuters.com/world/... [reuters.com]
"If finalized, the new rule would replace a patchwork system that anti-corruption advocates have said has allowed bad actors to hide the proceeds of illicit activity by buying homes through legal entities or trusts, without financing.
Last year, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that criminals for decades have anonymously hidden such ill-gotten gains in real estate, estimating $2.3 billion was laundered through U.S. real estate between 2015 and 2020.
Financial institutions have long been expected to flag suspicious activity to regulators, but cash real estate transactions generally have not been subject to such rules. The new requirements would demand real estate professionals involved in such transactions collect and report data to FinCEN about the property being sold, the seller and the beneficial owner of any legal entity receiving the property."
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting links, but...
The first link [fortune.com] you give says that institutional buying of homes is stopping: "It's all over now. Institutional homebuyers are pulling back-- fast."
The second link [reuters.com] you give says criminals laundered "$2.3 billion in U.S. real estate from 2015 to 2020." That's 400 million dollars a year. Real estate spending is 3 trillion [corelogic.com] dollars a year. The amount spent by criminals is too small to have any effect on real estate prices.
Re: (Score:2)
Correct. Institutional buyers use leverage. If rates are high, they can't use the cheap money conveyor belt to leverage up.
I suspect that criminals (like institutional buyers) buy where the return is higher. Instead of spreading their money out across the US, they're going to purchase in areas of high demand to make sure their "investment" doesn't go down. While I cannot give specific examples in the US real estate market, a similar market across the border in Vancouver gives one indication:
https://news [gov.bc.ca]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We already have that.
It's called property tax. The rate is based on the original purchase cost plus increases over time, regardless of occupancy.
Re:Ya know (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Ya know (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Then your wife is almost certainly lying to your taxing authority.
This depends on state laws. I live in Illinois, and rental properties can still claim the "homestead exemption" of $6,000 because of a loophole in the state property tax laws. All landlords need to do is put a clause in their rental contract that states "the tenant is liable for the payment of real estate taxes and the tenant's liability for the taxes is paid through their monthly rent payments." By the letter of the law, if the current resident is liable for payment of real estate taxes the owner can claim
Re: Ya know (Score:2)
What a horrible idea.
Will they start charging taxes on cars that aren't used for unpaid gasoline taxes for miles not driven in a year?
A vacant dwelling still generates property tax revenue, that's the only tax burden a homeowner/landlord owes on a housing unit.
Curious if they will extend this collection scheme to collect extra funds from low income housing, since they don't pay sufficient local income and sales taxes compared to wealthier tenants?
Just such a horrible idea.
It's very expensive to carry a vaca
Re: (Score:2)
It perfectly normal for govts to introduce financial incentives to alleviate crises.
Additionally, leaving dwellings empty leaves them vulnerable to squatters, illegal renting, etc., which is an additional cost for legal enforcement. You want the courts to process your claim of illegal occupancy & for the police to supervise their eviction? Sure, pay the f**king taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
That penalizes someone for replacing a house with a 10-unit apartment building and then only renting out 8 units, when they've done far more to relieve the housing crisis than the neighbor with just 1 housing unit on the same size plot of land.
So a better idea is to tax just the land [wikipedia.org], to encourage people to use it more efficiently, instead of taxing by the number of floors.
Re: Ya know (Score:2)
(And remove zoning restrictions)
Free men, Free land, Free Markets
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The issue, as pointed out by the article, is *over* regulating the housing market. Adding more regulations doesn't make things more affordable, it makes them more expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
Vacancy rates are near historic lows [managecasa.com].
bought up and kept off the market [Re:Ya know] (Score:2)
If corporations weren't allowed to buy up housing stock and keep it off the market, a large portion of this problem would go away.
Would be interested in seeing numbers here. What fraction of housing stock is "bought up and kept off the market" by corporations?
Re: (Score:2)
If corporations weren't allowed to buy up housing stock and keep it off the market, a large portion of this problem would go away.
No. A small portion of the problem would go away. To be clear it still is a problem, but the amount that corporate ownership of realestate is distorting the market is a small fraction of the problem. Sure you'll hear big statistics like there being more housing units owned by corporations than are currently listed on the market, but that ignores that this ownership has always existed - largely driven by construction of large apartment complexes. But what has contributed to the housing problem in the past fe
Re:Ya know (Score:5, Interesting)
Not to mention if there were fewer people this also wouldn't be a problem.
US population would be slowly declining, if the borders weren't wide open.
You get what you vote for.
Know what declining population looks like? Detroit.
Pretending any of this is simple is silly. Housing costs have skyrocketed in the last fifteen years, and some of it has purely been self-inflicted. Where I live, home prices have (more than) doubled. The population has grown maybe 10% in that time. It's not solely the influx of new people here. Some of it is that buyers started flinging larger and larger offers at sellers, competing with one another and driving average prices way up. Sure, there aren't enough houses, but the actual price tag on them is nuts.
I don't have the answers, but being insular isn't one of them.
Re: Ya know (Score:2)
Re: Ya know (Score:2)
Housing demand is also inelastic. Better than housing supply, because people are mobile and housing is not. But just "move to another city" isn't exactly like picking a different brand of cereal.
The actual solution is to mak
Re: (Score:2)
Housing supply is extremely inelastic.
That's essentially the point of TFA. We've made the supply inelastic through zoning rules. If we relax the rules, the supply ought to increase to match demand. But to your point, it's a long term process. The supply will take years to adjust, not weeks.
I've got two canonical examples. First is rent control in New York City. Apparently there are a number of rent controlled apartments where the renter moves out but keeps the apartment vacant so as to not lose the rent controlled rate. Second is myself. I'm an
Re: (Score:2)
"I'd be very interested in downsizing but even if I buy a smaller house, my property tax is likely to go up so I'm not going anywhere."
So three assumptions I could infer from that under the old Prop 60/90 rules:
1. Not old enough to bring your current property tax with you. (https://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/prop60-90_55over.htm)
2. Doesn't matter if you bring your current property tax with you, a smaller place would cost more than your current place, thereby negating some (all?) of the benefits of retainin
Re: Ya know (Score:5, Insightful)
public high schools have been graduating millions of such individuals each year,
So those are kids and not potential homeowners, where are they living now?
And more important to the whole question, people are coming to America to work, so where are they working? Are there jobs available for people or not? Despite what the perception is there's actually not really a welfare state in the US, if you come here the state really isn't really going to give you much and chances are you're gonna pay in taxes you won't get services for. People come here for work and the work is available.
Are you good with massive employer crackdowns on the places that hire the people? I am talking jailtime and big fines for small and medium business owner. You support this right? You have to create a deterrent right and why do they get off the hook?
even small communities can struggle to accommodate just a couple dozen new families with existing housing inventory.
Why do we conflate these issues as if they are actually related. If this is the reality of your town then something systemically has failed in your town and what the point of this article is, it's usually zoning. This is America where we have nothing but space, ability and materials and we can't just build homes? And we just accept this reality and say "no more people, countries full" even when we keep knocking against full employment numbers? What happened to any American pride? Are we just a bunch of lazy cowards now?
housing got more expensive as current homeowners are reluctant to move due to inflated borrowing cost.
If the rates didn't go up everyone would be hopping mad about inflation also. Do you want the current administration to produce pink unicorns as well, I think you would blame them for the outcome no matter what, neverminded that interest rates as a standard were higher than today just a mere 30 years ago or so, check what the mortgage rates were in the 70's and 80's. Wages and home prices due to lack of stock are the primary issues here.
Also why are you blaming the admin for interest rates? That's up to the fed right? Are you advocating for the President to be able to set interest rates unilaterally? Are you a monarchist?
Re: (Score:2)
neverminded that interest rates as a standard were higher than today just a mere 30 years ago or so
I find this is a stupid comparison to make. We can't look to the past for interest rates without also looking to the past about housing affordability. Based on the few things I've read about the USA the average family income would need to be 60% higher to break even with housing affordability 30 years ago, and if we had that much more money we wouldn't be complaining about higher interest rates.
The median house now requires close to 40% of the household income to go into mortgage repayments. That is a start
Re: (Score:2)
That sorta exactly my point? Interest rates are not the primary driver of housing affordability issues and focusing on them is not addressing the real problems and really rates should ideally be somewhere in the 3-6% range during non-recession times. Before the 2008 crisis rates were still around 5-7%, the days of super low rates is a historical anomaly.
I think back to my anecdote of my parents house, they purchased I believe in 1975 in NYC. The interest rates then were around 9% but they paid in 1975 dol
Re: (Score:2)
>housing got more expensive as current homeowners are reluctant to move due to inflated borrowing cost.
As apposed to the scheme that caused the money crash in the first place?
Re: Ya know (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, with mortgage rates more than doubling since this administration came into office...
Ah yes, "everything bad that happens is because of the political party I don't like".
You're thinking maybe that if the other guys had been in power interest rates wouldn't've been raised to combat worldwide crippling inflation? I mean, maybe the price of everything in America would have stayed low despite almost every other country charging more for the components required to make the everything, right?
Some problems are beyond the blue/red divide that has turned American politics into a Stupidbowl rivalry.
Re: (Score:2)
So should we start sending asylum seekers to Detroit?
Do we really need millions of low skill workers that hardly speak the language
What does it say on the Statue of Liberty? Do you need those tired, poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free for anything at all?
Re:Ya know (Score:5, Interesting)
Along with declining pop., the America First crowd will be among the first to get their SS and Medicare cut. Mind you they will eventually get cut regardless because the budgets are unsustainable, but they will get cut sooner now. Reasonable reform of those programs will never pass muster with the AF crowd who view anyone taking their money as part of the "Deep State" of the former alleged president's dreams...although he got that idea from the Turkey of Turkey, Erdogan.
Re: Ya know (Score:2)
Anyone that wants to reform SS or Medicaid/medicare is vilified by the opposing party as trying to "throw grandma over a cliff" or "deny you the benefits you paid for."
I think SS has about 10-15 years of solvency left, when we can still draw down the SS "lockbox" (a big drawer full of IOUs from the gov't that make up a significant share of our $34T in national debt), and once that's depleted SS will start requiring government to borrow money to supplement SS to be able to meet its obligations. Right now, an
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong, wrong and wrong.
The SS *Trust Fund* which is separate from the *General Fund* is set to go empty in the next 15 years which means likely a cut in benefits by around 15-20%. Now this isn't good but it's far from SS going "insolvent"
It's also an issue that can be solved completely for many decades by simply lifting the SS contribution caps.
Social Security is probably the most successful example of a government service, it accomplishes it's goal very well which is keeping old people from being broke an
Re:Ya know (Score:5, Informative)
Not to mention if there were fewer people this also wouldn't be a problem.
US population would be slowly declining, if the borders weren't wide open.
You get what you vote for.
And yet, in the weak state of Texas, they don't bother enforcing existing laws [texastribune.org] which make it illegal to hire illegal immigrants. In fact, Republicans in Texas have gone full big-government by preventing local governments for having stricter laws [forbes.com] regarding hiring criminals.
Sure, if they catch you you'll get arrested, but if you hire an illegal, eh, so what. It's what keeps businesses running.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Ya know (Score:3)
You seriously over-estimate the percentage of housing units that are being bought and kept off the rental market. Do you have any idea how expensive it is to buy a housing unit and not collect any income from it? There's the cost of the unit, the interest on the loan used to purchase it, the property taxes & upkeep/security costs to 'protect' your investment, all so that your other investment properties can be rented out for a bit more money?
Only a person that's never owned rental properties can believe
Re: (Score:2)
The economics of rental properties is such that 90-100% of rent collected goes towards paying off the loan and property taxes of the property, the payoff for the landlord is in the appreciation of the property over time and some tax savings thru depreciation.
This. My in-laws recently passed away. We'd have loved to hold on to their home and rent it out. Property taxes and mortgage payments would have been roughly double what we could collect in rent so we could not. There's absolutely no way anyone is buying properties in San Jose, CA without doing something with them.
It's eerie. As prices go up, entities holding properties are guided, as by an invisible hand, to bring properties they were holding back to the market.
Re: (Score:3)
There are more houses, or at least cheap nasty cramped dogbox apartments, but less houses that people want to live in. So there's a desperate shortage of liveable houses, and lots of dogboxes that aren't selling.
Are the dogbox apartments empty? If not, I question your assertion that people don't want to live in them. Clearly the renters find them acceptable quality for the rent. I'd only believe you if there are a substantial number of vacant units.
I get it: I always want more value for my money. It's the great American passtime to complain about how we're getting ripped off by sellers and how they should be giving us more value for less cash. The sellers have the reverse conversation, about how how buyers want to
Re: (Score:2)
You seriously over-estimate the percentage of housing units that are being bought and kept off the rental market. Do you have any idea how expensive it is to buy a housing unit and not collect any income from it? There's the cost of the unit, the interest on the loan used to purchase it, the property taxes & upkeep/security costs to 'protect' your investment, all so that your other investment properties can be rented out for a bit more money?
Only a person that's never owned rental properties can believe that countless homes and apartments are being bought to be kept off the market - the finances will eat you alive.
The economics of rental properties is such that 90-100% of rent collected goes towards paying off the loan and property taxes of the property, the payoff for the landlord is in the appreciation of the property over time and some tax savings thru depreciation. If an apartment that used to rent out for $1,000/month is taken off the market, the landlord/owner still has $800-1,000 in monthly expenses for that unit that have to be paid.
Did you ever hear of a landlord reducing the rent when the loan was paid off?
Re: (Score:2)
All goods/services are sold at the market rate. To do otherwise would distort the pricing mechanisms that normally would encourage more supply, and thereby arrive at the appropriate price for any good/service. Of course in the case of housing in these localities, the real distortion of supply was purposeful and intentional by the elected officials who legislated/ruled on local and state laws and regulations...
Re: (Score:2)
All goods/services are sold at the market rate. To do otherwise would distort the pricing mechanisms that normally would encourage more supply, and thereby arrive at the appropriate price for any good/service. Of course in the case of housing in these localities, the real distortion of supply was purposeful and intentional by the elected officials who legislated/ruled on local and state laws and regulations...
not *really* answering the question... Once the loan/mortgage has been paid off, the landlords costs drop significantly. Shouldn't the market rate for the rent on a fully paid off home be lower than one which was still being paid off?
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, no. The rent should be comparable to the rents being paid for similar properties in a similar location, I.e. market rates. The owner has an asset, and that asset should provide a comparable rate of return.
Re: Ya know (Score:2)
But seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about. That's why the bank would laugh at you.
Re: (Score:2)
Hold on there now, are you honestly implying that the ~7m illegals who've invaded in the past 3 years (they aren't all mexican anymore for what it's worth, pretty much the entire 3rd world has figured out that with biden in office, if you can get to the border, you'll get in) would have any impact on housing costs at all? what kind of bigot are you?!
>yeah but without all of those illegals, who'd pick your fruit or work for shitty wages, i'm very clever.
i love flaccid "GOTCHA" arguments so much, they're g
Rent is high due to monopolization. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who are these developers? How many housing units are they holding off market?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There absolutely is a supply shortage. You can estimate the housing demand by dividing the population by the average family size and compare that to the actual housing supply. Here in California, the supply is short of demand by 2-3 million homes. We need a massive amount of home building to get back in balance. It simply isn't possible to meet demand within our existing metropolitan areas without completely revamping our zoning system.
New cities aren't a real solution because they would be so far awa
Re: (Score:2)
Moreover, that 2-3 million unit shortage is over 10% of total units. ADUs can optimistically provide 30-50% of that (by screwing up on-street parking), but after that is where you have huge impacts. Even cities that had huge transit-oriented development pushes over the past 10-15 years have only been able to increase housing stock by ~5%. Many of the new units are corporate-controlled apartments and they maximize rents to target 7% vacancy levels. You can't add enough land area to make single family homes w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not lack of real estate supply. Letting the same handful of developers build more units won't do shit. Cities need to create antitrust rules about ownership.
Please. Rent is high due to inflation making everything high. We’re spending plenty on food and insurance too. Rezoning or antitrust debates isn’t going to do shit until you address the damn price of homes. If we think rent prices are crippling, that 20% down payment is on a product with 250% markup at 7% interest, is considered impossible. And still is for too many. Building out more overpriced homes just because we rezone dirt, doesn’t fix shit.
Re: (Score:2)
I got mixed feelings... (Score:5, Insightful)
Turning commercial zone into housing zone - yes...
Turning single-family zone into 'do whatever you like' zone - no...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you listen to the people who want to end single family zones, their idea is high density housing for the poor. Usually in area with insufficient streets, parking, nearby shopping, schools, etc for a dramatic increase in local population.
That's how you get ghettos. Who wants to live in an area with crowded schools, no parking, jammed streets and insufficient shopping? Only people who can't afford better. Section 8.
Re: (Score:2)
Usually in area with insufficient streets, parking, nearby shopping, schools, etc for a dramatic increase in local population.
And why are those things insufficient? Did you also guess zoning and things like single family only zoning and minimum parking requirements that ensure a lack of shopping and infrastructure in areas where people demand to live.
We have two very clear cut examples just in the US alone, both with different methods of results:
Chicago has overbuilt housing and continues to even add more and rents are pretty stable and affordable for a major city there. Having mroe housing supply works.
Houston is far more spread
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If the large employers are cutting headcounts what is driving all the demand? And if the supply is being taken up by the demand who are the people taking the housing getting their money?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Single family zoning are stupid. The alternative isn't a free for all.
I'm good you an example from London. I'll pick the house that Boris Johnson was assumed to be moving into in the news a year ago. I'm picking it because it was in the news and is amazingly illustrative.
It's a bigass detached house. Here in fact:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/arVQH8... [app.goo.gl]
Go a few doors up v and you reach a low rise block of flats, followed by some light industrial units under the rail arches and a sports club. Then you pass an array
Le Corbusier (Score:3, Interesting)
Most people from north America don't really "get it" until they've experienced it first-hand & then they often sound like newly converted evangelists for this urban planning model. Most of those who haven't experienced it first-hand are often derogatory & come off sounding hostile & anti-social towards it.
All over Europe, tens of millions of people enjoy living in high-density, "Le corbusier" style housing & urban areas.
Re:Le Corbusier (Score:5, Insightful)
When I visit family in Europe that is one of the things I find 'kind of neat, but wouldn't want to live there'. With too much noise and the inability to escape it. Everyone is on top of everyone else. Even they know the nice places are the 'Villas'. Though just walking a few minutes to get a gyro was pretty awesome. The beeping, motorcycle engines, and the guy selling watermelon from the back of his truck with a megaphone were turn offs though. Not being able to sleep until 4AM because parties, etc... Humans aren't supposed to live like ants.
Re:Le Corbusier (Score:4, Interesting)
You visited the whole of every European city?
Of course not, hyperbole there, but you visit tourist destinations right in the middle, not areas which are good to live but not to visit. Suburban London is not like central London with bustling loud nightlife at all hours. And yet I live 5 minutes walk to the closest shops, restaurants and of course pub. 8 minutes groom one train station, 15 minutes to the next (at a different area of shops and pubs), parks at both areas, etc etc etc.
It's absolutely dead quiet at night.
Re: (Score:2)
With too much noise and the inability to escape it.
Noise is a subject of city planning. It's not equal in all placed in Europe. One of the things I've noticed is that where I live now, in relatively high density apartments in Europe the place is *quieter* than the suburbs of Australia, and a *FUCKTON quieter* than all American cities I've ever visited.
Some countries / local municipalities consider volume in their city planning. But Europe is not a singular monoculture. Quite the opposite. There are backwards places, and there are great places, and you defin
Re: (Score:3)
He also appears to have confused the noisy, bustling city centre tourist area with general life.
I live in London in an old house with bugger all sound isolation (it has single glazing at the front, and I've had ice on the inside on really cold nights), but like most people I live in a more residential area (still with shops, trains etc nearby, I'm not a barbarian) and there's no problem with noise.
Re: (Score:3)
'but wouldn't want to live there'
So... don't? The thing about allowing dense areas to exist is that most people by definition will be in the dense areas and not bothering you in your non-dense area, and your non-dense area won't have to be that far away so you can quickly get into the city and get back out should the need or desire arise.
Re: Le Corbusier (Score:2)
There are places like that in the US, mostly in older cities. Boston/Brookline is like that, as is Center City Philadelphia and much of NYC.
I've lived in those places. It *is* nice to walk downstairs and down the street to get your groceries, and hop on the trolley to get to work and back (or just walk if it's good weather).
Where it stops being nice is the crowding, the street noise, the occasional drunks and hobos making a racket in the middle of the night, the pain in the ass of getting out of the city. A
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Nah it was ended by car companies who through relentless propaganda convinced politicians up bulldoze city centres to make them into car dependent seas of asphalt.
They tried that in London but the residents got smart and through massive local opposition prevented the London ring way project from doing immense lasting damage to the city.
Anyway, I've had lots of Americans tell me how I must be living (something to do with rats) over the years, but it never seems to occur to them that I know how I am living, a
Re:Le Corbusier (Score:4, Informative)
I've lived in the heart of several mid-sized and big cities, thanks. Your experience is not unique or strange to people who fled that hellscape and moved to suburbs to have some peace. It's fine when you're a kid and every night is party night. Few adults need that in their lives.
Maybe you're cool living like a rat, the rest of us are happy to avoid the filth, crazy people, loudness, crowds, bad transportation options, high prices and the rest. Living in the suburbs means having the option to go into the city for a specific event and get the fuck out after getting a good reminder why they left in the first place.
(Insert rat emoji here)
Re: (Score:2)
oooh excellent serviscope_minor fanfic incoming. One mo, let me get some popcorn... ... ok back! Right, so, we're in the slashdot cinematic multiverse and
It's fine when you're a kid and every night is party night.
Huh, so in this one, I'm something of a youthful party animal! Interesting! I do wonder what I've ever said that leads you to think that.
Maybe you're cool living like a rat,
Given your general level of accuracy, it's hard for me to know what you think rats live like. But I'll roll with what you giv
Re: (Score:2)
Tl;dr. I obviously triggered you. Apologies.
I've been to London many times. Enjoy the filth.
Other parts of the UK are quite pretty, though. I guess someone decided to smush all the ugly bits in one sacrificial pit.
Re: (Score:2)
glad I got my popcorn! I love your new definition of triggered meaning something like "has a laugh at my expense". Its new I'll grant you that.
Anyway I'll bet you've never been to the bit of London I live in. I expect you went to a couple of tourist traps and assumed the entire city is like that.
Re: (Score:2)
You wrote a full fucking book. Triggered.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean it's more words than a kid's picure book, sure. I think for most people 100 words wouldn't really merit complaint. But you do you!
Re: (Score:2)
Nice try. Take the L and move on. Triggered.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just here for your next self own. 100 words is a whole book! What next?
Re: (Score:2)
My neighbours don't seem to make any noise although the people coming out of the nightclub in the park across the street can be a bit loud sometimes. On the other hand, plenty of north American suburbs have their arsehole petrol-heads who insist on m
Re: (Score:2)
We had that in the US last century but ended it because most people don't want to live like rats in a tiny apartment with limited ability to leave their neighborhood.
LOL. Aren't you a good useful fool. No, it ended due to mass campaigns by the auto industry along with city planning defined by the auto industry telling you life would be better if you spent all day in your car. That's almost literally what they ads said. I saw a great black and white one from the 30s with the tag line "the American dream centered around the automobile" It was an advertisement for a development of a new suburb.
No Americans have been told that life is better in the suburbs, they didn't deci
Re: (Score:2)
I'm going to up my investment in tin.
It's funny how the same people who think the evil corporations run everything are the same people who believe everything the government says and support silencing those who question anything.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what kind of price fixing the EU requires but in the US this doesn't work.
None. You missed the point. You lived one mile from a Safeway because of poor town planning. I on the other hand live 0.6 miles from 5 separate supermarkets from 4 different brands. No price fixing needed. When you build functioning multipurpose buildings you don't end up in a situation where someone is able to price gouge because they *aren't* the only option.
Re: (Score:2)
Houston (Score:3)
Houston is the largest city in the US that does not have zoning laws, making it an illustration of what happens with less zoning.. The city looks and feels just like other large cities that do have zoning laws. Importantly, home prices have remained much lower than highly-regulated cities. It's still possible in Houston to buy a nice 5-bedroom house in a good neighborhood, for $400K. Good luck finding that kind of price in San Francisco! And more importantly, if you want to buy a house in Houston, you actually can do so.
It’s a good idea, which means (Score:2)
This is one of those ideas that should be great for both political sides. Republicans, at least traditional ones, tend to like pro-business, pro-growth, and zoning reform can really help that. Democrats want to help poor people, and more affordable housing can check both those boxes.
But we’re in a situation where neither party will give the other a win. The current southern border situation is a perfect example. Biden offered to LOCK THE BORDER DOWN AND SCREW THE D
Re: (Score:2)
Yup. How do we fix it?
Good idea (Score:2)
This is a good idea, and is being implemented in many Canadian cities too; the Federal government has basically told cities "relax zoning or we withhold funds from you" which is about the only way to do it to avoid NIMBYism.
However, it'll take a decade or two or maybe more for the zoning changes to have a real effect. But I hope there's a positive feedback loop where higher density makes efficient and frequent public transit more viable. Maybe eventually most Canadian cities will stop being car-dependen
Sorta but... (Score:2)
Worked out perfectly the last time we tried it. /s
No hope based on the comments here (Score:2)
...or.... (Score:2)
...rents in Minneapolis could have also been suppressed by a glut of demand as reasonable people (relatively) fled a deeply-woke metropolis that leaned hard into the "defund the police" movement after George Floyd (while spending ten$ of thou$and$ on private armed security for those city councillors clamoring for it the loudest....)?
It's not plummeting like Detroit or Chicago, but that fate looms on the medium term horizon, for the exact same reasons.
The usual suspects (Score:2)
This won't last long (Score:2)
I'm convinced professional politicians are the leeches of society and should be treated as such.
Re: (Score:2)
Not Around My Backyard or Local Area (NAMBLA)
Re: (Score:2)
There is a balance needed between residential and commercial zones. No one wants to live in an area too far from their job or shopping if they can avoid it.
Taken to the extreme, an urban area that converts to 100% residential would not be desirable. People need nearby places to go.
Re: You're delusional (Score:2)
Many parts of suburban America rely on water wells and septic fields on the property - turn a single family lot into a two or three family lot and water usage will increase to the point that municipal water and sewage systems need to be put in existing neighborhoods - that's a major infrastructure effort that doesn't come cheaply (when you dig up roads to run water/sewage pipes you have to repair the roads, something not needed in new construction.
I'd also imagine increasing home density will also require m
Sewers and septic tanks [Re: You're delusional] (Score:2)
Many parts of suburban America rely on water wells and septic fields on the property
The housing problem being discussed is cities, and to a lesser extent suburbs in easy driving distance of these cities. These don't have wells or septic tanks, they pretty much all have municipal sewage systems.
Wells and septic tanks tend to be semi-rural areas. These aren't the places where home prices are high.
...Doubling or tripling occupancy in existing neighborhoods will likely require significant investments in municipal infrastructure.
But will also come with an increase in tax revenue to pay for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, I was looking to move last year. And at the same house value, the mortgage payment between my current mortgage and what my new mortgage would be was about a factor of 2. I guess I'll keep my 2.x% mortgage for a long while.
Re: (Score:3)
Housing supply is a strategic long term policy issue and not a function of financing "today." Ultimately the problem with just building more is that we don't have the people and materials to do it economically. If you want to build 1,000 more housing units a year, you are going to need ~200 more plumbers, 1,000 rough carpenters, 300 electricians, and thousands of other specialists. You need 1,000 more refrigerators, washers, dryers, ovens, microwaves, TVs, beds, etc. All of those supply chains need to be bu