6 ms·

In places were housing is expensive, land will be the majority of the cost. In places where land is cheap, housing is already not expensive. The way to afforda

by baursak 10y ago

In places were housing is expensive, land will be the majority of the cost. In places where land is cheap, housing is already not expensive. The way to affordable housing is high density, mid-to-high rise condos.

fnl 10y ago
Isn't that precisely the way cities are built in Europe? If so, housing isn't necessarily cheap/affordable there, either.
- baursak 10y ago
  It should be relatively cheaper in places with lots of mid-to-high rise development. For example, Berlin is relatively cheap as I understand it. London is expensive, but if you randomly click around it on Google StreetView, you'll see there's way more 1-2 story townhouses there than 5-10 story residential buildings.
  - fnl 10y ago
    Berlin has become a lot more expensive recently, the cheap housing there is mostly historical now. And, income in Europe is much lower on average than in the US (except London, most parts of Switzerland, and such places), so you first have to correct for that, too. Yes, high rises make housing cheaper, but that comes at a price: Hearing what the neighbors around you are doing and often even saying (or their TVs/music/...!) at all times, not having some "green space" or yard of your own (and in most cases not even a shared green space), having to come to terms with all co-owners when you want to change something outside your flat. Etc. For the price you (don't) pay, the European model sucks. (Disclaimer: I'm European... :-))
maxsilver 10y ago
> The way to affordable housing is high density, mid-to-high rise condos. How though? Density sounds good on paper, and has tons of side benefits, but (as the blog post explains) the cost of land + construction jumps significantly. I know here in the US, there basically is no such thing as "affordable high density condos". High density urban housing is expensive, by definition. So much so that there isn't a single unsubsidized affordable high-density urban housing unit in my entire state. The only place I'm aware of that has affordable urban housing is Japan. And that's mainly due to a combination of having no meaningful population growth, and having excellent public transit literally everywhere. Two things the US simply can't have in our lifetime
- baursak 10y ago
  > the cost of land + construction jumps significantly Per person? I don't see how. For a 16-floor building, you can easily fit 120 comfortable condos on a plot of land that would otherwise only fit 2-4 single family homes. Yes, the building cost would definitely be higher, but not per household. On top of that, it would be made of steel and concrete, and not plywood, which generally rots and needs to be torn down every 50 years or so. > High density urban housing is expensive, by definition. By definition? I'm not sure about that. There must be some middle ground between glitzy new condo projects and "the projects", which were also high-rise and affordable. Much of Eastern Europe, lots of Western Europe, former USSR, etc., all have relatively affordable housing.
  - kchoze 10y ago
    The construction cost of steel and concrete buildings is significantly higher per square foot of floor space than that of low-rise timber-framed buildings. In Canada, the cost of concrete and steel buildings is around 80% more per square foot than the cost of timber-framed walk-up low-rise buildings, and the cost of condos in skyscrapers is a whooping 150% higher than low-rise walk-ups. Here is a source for construction costs for major metropolitan areas in Canada: https://t.co/18FwgkSlWY https://t.co/18FwgkSlWY And here are some figures. For Toronto: House (medium quality): 120-240$/sf Walk-up low-rise apartment (medium quality): 100-150$/sf Residential condos (medium quality): 180-240$/sf Point towers, 40-80 stories (medium quality): 230-310$/sf For Vancouver House (medium quality): 165-225$/sf Walk-up low-rise apartment (medium quality): 155-180$/sf Residential condos (medium quality): 205-250$/sf Point towers, 40-80 stories (medium quality): 270-355$/sf For Montréal House (medium quality): 125-180$/sf Walk-up low-rise apartment (medium quality): 100-155$/sf Residential condos (medium quality): 150-180$/sf Point towers, 40-80 stories (medium quality): 250-355$/sf So if you can afford a 400 000$ housing unit, and you assume half of it goes to pay for the land, you could get a house with about 1 500 square feet of space, a similar sized condo in a low-rise, a 1 000 square foot condo in a concrete mid-rise or a 650 square foot condo in an high-rise. Yes, high-density housing options lower the amount of land per unit, but at the same time, zoning for higher density tends to rise the cost of land. A lot zoned for an high-rise building will be worth many times what a lot zoned for single-family houses is worth even if the two lots are adjacent, since the land value is proportional to the potential revenue of development, so the bigger the development, the higher the potential revenue, the higher the land value.

by baursak 10y ago

fnl 10y ago

Isn't that precisely the way cities are built in Europe? If so, housing isn't necessarily cheap/affordable there, either.

baursak 10y ago
It should be relatively cheaper in places with lots of mid-to-high rise development. For example, Berlin is relatively cheap as I understand it. London is expensive, but if you randomly click around it on Google StreetView, you'll see there's way more 1-2 story townhouses there than 5-10 story residential buildings.
- fnl 10y ago
  Berlin has become a lot more expensive recently, the cheap housing there is mostly historical now. And, income in Europe is much lower on average than in the US (except London, most parts of Switzerland, and such places), so you first have to correct for that, too. Yes, high rises make housing cheaper, but that comes at a price: Hearing what the neighbors around you are doing and often even saying (or their TVs/music/...!) at all times, not having some "green space" or yard of your own (and in most cases not even a shared green space), having to come to terms with all co-owners when you want to change something outside your flat. Etc. For the price you (don't) pay, the European model sucks. (Disclaimer: I'm European... :-))

maxsilver 10y ago

> The way to affordable housing is high density, mid-to-high rise condos. How though? Density sounds good on paper, and has tons of side benefits, but (as the blog post explains) the cost of land + construction jumps significantly. I know here in the US, there basically is no such thing as "affordable high density condos". High density urban housing is expensive, by definition. So much so that there isn't a single unsubsidized affordable high-density urban housing unit in my entire state. The only place I'm aware of that has affordable urban housing is Japan. And that's mainly due to a combination of having no meaningful population growth, and having excellent public transit literally everywhere. Two things the US simply can't have in our lifetime

baursak 10y ago
> the cost of land + construction jumps significantly Per person? I don't see how. For a 16-floor building, you can easily fit 120 comfortable condos on a plot of land that would otherwise only fit 2-4 single family homes. Yes, the building cost would definitely be higher, but not per household. On top of that, it would be made of steel and concrete, and not plywood, which generally rots and needs to be torn down every 50 years or so. > High density urban housing is expensive, by definition. By definition? I'm not sure about that. There must be some middle ground between glitzy new condo projects and "the projects", which were also high-rise and affordable. Much of Eastern Europe, lots of Western Europe, former USSR, etc., all have relatively affordable housing.
- kchoze 10y ago
  The construction cost of steel and concrete buildings is significantly higher per square foot of floor space than that of low-rise timber-framed buildings. In Canada, the cost of concrete and steel buildings is around 80% more per square foot than the cost of timber-framed walk-up low-rise buildings, and the cost of condos in skyscrapers is a whooping 150% higher than low-rise walk-ups. Here is a source for construction costs for major metropolitan areas in Canada: https://t.co/18FwgkSlWY https://t.co/18FwgkSlWY And here are some figures. For Toronto: House (medium quality): 120-240$/sf Walk-up low-rise apartment (medium quality): 100-150$/sf Residential condos (medium quality): 180-240$/sf Point towers, 40-80 stories (medium quality): 230-310$/sf For Vancouver House (medium quality): 165-225$/sf Walk-up low-rise apartment (medium quality): 155-180$/sf Residential condos (medium quality): 205-250$/sf Point towers, 40-80 stories (medium quality): 270-355$/sf For Montréal House (medium quality): 125-180$/sf Walk-up low-rise apartment (medium quality): 100-155$/sf Residential condos (medium quality): 150-180$/sf Point towers, 40-80 stories (medium quality): 250-355$/sf So if you can afford a 400 000$ housing unit, and you assume half of it goes to pay for the land, you could get a house with about 1 500 square feet of space, a similar sized condo in a low-rise, a 1 000 square foot condo in a concrete mid-rise or a 650 square foot condo in an high-rise. Yes, high-density housing options lower the amount of land per unit, but at the same time, zoning for higher density tends to rise the cost of land. A lot zoned for an high-rise building will be worth many times what a lot zoned for single-family houses is worth even if the two lots are adjacent, since the land value is proportional to the potential revenue of development, so the bigger the development, the higher the potential revenue, the higher the land value.