[HN Gopher] The U.S. Needs More Housing Than Almost Anyone Can I...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The U.S. Needs More Housing Than Almost Anyone Can Imagine
        
       Author : paulpauper
       Score  : 44 points
       Date   : 2022-11-24 16:54 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theatlantic.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theatlantic.com)
        
       | andrewmcwatters wrote:
       | The full picture gets worse the more you look into it.
       | 
       | The largest home builders in the nation aren't building homes at
       | budgets that most can afford.
       | 
       | So you'd say to yourself, well clearly they're targeting the
       | affluent then. Except there are only so many high income
       | Americans you can sell to, and not all of them want expensive
       | homes.
       | 
       | So what do these builders do? They build-to-rent! Yep. Those
       | single-family homes you see in many large developments you can
       | just think of as so-called "luxury" apartments by a different
       | name.
       | 
       | I suspect most developed nations experiencing this issue are
       | effectively stuck and growth capped markets.
       | 
       | Truly only dedicated policy targeting this problem will make a
       | change, because the capital required to obtain land, rezone it
       | for traditional residential building, then sell it requires
       | either institutional capital, or small builders doing one-offs
       | for select clients.
        
         | jimrandomh wrote:
         | This is a misunderstanding of how pricing works. The homes that
         | are beig built aren't expensive because they're fancy, they're
         | expensive because they're scarce and people need them, so they
         | bid against each other. Every building markets itself as
         | "luxury", but this is in fact just marketing. In principle you
         | could make units cheaper by dividing them up into units with
         | less floor space, but that people are already renting the
         | larger units in groups.
        
           | theGnuMe wrote:
           | Agree. The luxury finishings are in fact quite cheap.
        
         | pydry wrote:
         | >So you'd say to yourself, well clearly they're targeting the
         | affluent then. Except there are only so many high income
         | Americans you can sell to
         | 
         | They're targeting high net worth individuals looking for a
         | store of value (or, in some cases, a foothold/bolthole from
         | their repressive government).
         | 
         | High income Americans are to these flats what
         | jewellery/smartphones are to gold - the underlying use value
         | that, combined with natural scarcity, drives the hoarding
         | instinct.
         | 
         | It's quite possible to pull the rug out from under the feet of
         | the ultrawealthy by instituting a steep land value tax. This
         | would kill the hoarding instinct, kill the NIMBY instinct and
         | drive more efficient use of land.
        
         | zbrozek wrote:
         | It's a stifling regulatory environment that's landed us here.
         | Zoning is restrictive, planning commissions are slow and
         | restrictive, councils are slow and restrictive. All of the
         | agencies involved want to capture value from construction
         | projects.
         | 
         | The net result is that very few projects pencil out, and the
         | ones that do are expensive. We need to fix the root cause,
         | which is lack of property rights.
        
           | froggychairs wrote:
           | Zoning for who? America has no issue with single family
           | zoning.
           | 
           | I'm assuming you're speaking about middle and high density
           | zoning. Since the issues you're describing are extremely
           | common for those zoning projects.
        
             | zbrozek wrote:
             | If you're the property owner it should be easy for you to
             | build whatever level of residential density you want and
             | think the market will make profitable. Why is it illegal
             | for me to build townhouses on my land?
             | 
             | I'm in an area where it takes, on average, 1.8 acres per
             | single family home. The next town over would put 18 single
             | family homes in that same space. Zoning is restrictive even
             | for single-family homes.
        
               | rsj_hn wrote:
               | I don't think that's a particularly representative
               | example. Zoning is determined locally in the U.S., and
               | taking the most extreme locality doesn't really shed
               | light on what's going on in the country as a whole, and
               | isn't a useful avenue to approach this problem. Try
               | instead to work with averages and representative
               | localities. The U.S., like any area, has urban, suburban,
               | and rural areas, with a continuous gradient in between.
               | No point in discussing rural or near-rural areas when
               | complaining about zoning, since the real issue is that
               | people in urban areas need access to jobs. People living
               | on the horse farms or rural ranches are not the problem
               | here, and liberalizing zoning in Asheville isn't going to
               | make housing more affordable in Austin or San Francisco,
               | which is where the pain of restrictive zoning is felt.
        
               | BuckyBeaver wrote:
               | For several reasons. First of all, you may destroy the
               | value of neighboring properties, for people who opted NOT
               | to live in a high-density area. The vilification of
               | zoning laws is bullshit. People should be able to select
               | the type of area they want to live in. If you want high
               | density, then live in a downtown area or similar. If you
               | want a single-family house with a bit of yard, go to that
               | kind of neighborhood. Why should people be able to
               | arbitrarily ruin others' standard of living? The country
               | is not "full."
               | 
               | There are also environmental and infrastructure reasons.
               | Oft-cited California exists in a crushing permanent
               | drought. Now you want to pack MORE people in, and allow
               | even more ground to be covered up with concrete and
               | prevent water absorption? You want MORE trees to be cut
               | down, increasing heat? Not to mention the lack of public
               | transportation in most areas, so now you're creating more
               | traffic.
               | 
               | Meanwhile, dying malls and their anchor stores sit
               | vacant. Boarded-up Macy's and AMC theaters are surrounded
               | by vast, weed-infested parking lots... but developers
               | have been handed free rein to replace one house and yard
               | with 10 UNITS. That's right, 10. Meanwhile the commercial
               | hulks sit empty, after the area has already suffered the
               | density consequences of their construction (tree loss,
               | concrete plains, traffic potential).
               | 
               | The whole premise of the caterwauling about this "housing
               | crisis" is fundamentally bankrupt: "How many homes must
               | the United States' expensive coastal cities build to
               | become affordable for middle-class and working-poor
               | families again?"
               | 
               | Why even ask? From where does the mandate come from to
               | make scarce, sought-after real estate cheap? Who decreed
               | that everyone has a right to live in resort communities?
               | It's ridiculous. Why not ask what's it's going to take to
               | make Manhattan affordable to working-class families?
               | 
               | This "housing crisis" refrain is beyond tired at this
               | point, and it's distracting everyone from the real
               | problem: massive corporate buy-ups of entire
               | neighborhoods, making home ownership IMPOSSIBLE across
               | growing swaths of the USA. If that is not stopped NOW,
               | the "American dream" of home ownership is gone forever.
        
               | theGnuMe wrote:
               | Denser cities use less water.. Biggest consumer of water
               | is agriculture. There are natural places to increase
               | density as traffic increases. So think of a main road,
               | along that main road and some of the nearer side streets
               | can be densified. You see a lot of this along El Camino
               | for example in the Bay area.
               | 
               | Take a bunch of these 1950s and earlier small 2bdrm
               | houses and build multifamily housing.
        
               | manfre wrote:
               | Zoning density is based partially on supporting
               | infrastructure. If low density suddenly becomes higher
               | density, will the roads be able to handle the additional
               | vehicles/trips? Probably not, so who will cover costs to
               | improve the roads so individuals can build multiple
               | townhomes in their property?
        
         | davidf18 wrote:
        
       | neilwilson wrote:
       | Not just the USA
       | 
       | The housing situation in the UK is beyond critical.
        
         | LatteLazy wrote:
         | The UK's problems are about distribution not supply. We
         | subsidise OAPs to sit alone in 4 bed houses in areas that need
         | workers, then there is no space or money left for working
         | families...
        
           | davidf18 wrote:
        
         | chrisseaton wrote:
         | I think it's still possible to actually get housing in the UK,
         | it's just more expensive than you'd like. (There's lots on the
         | market near me.) Look at somewhere like Ireland where it's
         | getting to the point where there almost literally just isn't
         | _any_ housing available at all. Lines of hundreds of people
         | applying to get any property that comes onto the market.
        
       | freddymilkovich wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/2pfx8
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-11-24 23:02 UTC)