18 ms·
Article's conclusions are dubious. > We need ... different housing tech that can lower construction costs If you're paying ~$1,600 a month for a shoebox apart
by fennecfoxen 7y ago
Article's conclusions are dubious.
> We need ... different housing tech that can lower construction costs
If you're paying ~$1,600 a month for a shoebox apartment, it's not because you need construction technology. It is a housing-policy problem.
- scythe 7y agoTo add to this, I stayed in a family apartment in Wuhan for a month last year. The place had three bedrooms, a washing machine & a full kitchen in about 100 m^2. Wuhan metro is about the size of Los Angeles (20M) and the cost was maybe an eighth of LA’s price for that kind of thing. Some of that can be explained by labor cost and legitimate environmental regulations, but Americans don’t make 8x what Chinese make.
- TylerE 7y ago> Americans don’t make 8x what Chinese make. You're right, they make "only" 7x as much. US Median Income: $43,585 China M.I.: $6,180 http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/median-income-by-country/ http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/median-income-by-...
- avinium 7y agoEven the median income comparison is probably too favourable - Wuhan and LA are apples to oranges. I'm sure LA is one of the higher-income cities in the US, and Wuhan is one of the lower.
- TylerE 7y agoLA actually isn't super high. Median income is only about 2/3rds of the real top cities (DC suburbs have a median of almost $100k, LA is more like $60)
- Amygaz 7y agoWuhan median is $34k and $65k in LA.
- bpicolo 7y ago34k CNY, each of which is .14 USD
- icsllaf 7y agohttps://www.averagesalarysurvey.com/wuhan-china https://www.averagesalarysurvey.com/wuhan-china In USD really. Unsurprisingly, people living in a large city in China are not dirt poor as you would expect.
- bpicolo 7y agoYou need government data sources to get decent information here. China reports Shanghai as the highest income city with an average salary of 9,700 yuan/month. https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201904/10/WS5cad86f7a3104842260b565c.html https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201904/10/WS5cad86f7a3104842...
- PhasmaFelis 7y agoThat probably doesn't accurately reflect the income difference between LA and Wuhan. Large parts of China are still effectively the third world. Urbanites in America make more than rural folks, but the difference is less drastic.
- Consultant32452 7y agoTo put some perspective on this number, in my mid-sized city a temperature controlled 15x20 storage unit goes for $175/mo. Obviously a living space has different needs, but that's the kind of bar we should be thinking about when we consider affordable housing.
- asah 7y agoum, natural light and two means of egress in a fire? (which severely limits density) Also, plumbing incl waste, trash service, etc.
- rohit2412 7y agoWe very well know that is not what costs money. Houses with everything you can suggest cost 200k$ in rural areas, but cost 2 million in metropolitan. Rent just follows the price.
- DoreenMichele 7y agoWe've torn down more than a million SROs. SROs would be the closest thing to just giving people a room. They typically have shared bathroom facilities down the hall, a shared kitchen and the ability and permission to use a microwave, hot plate or similar to cook within the room. They typically have their own sink. They may have a private bath of their own in some cases, but generally have no kitchen. If you add a kitchen, it's now a studio apartment. I suspect the organizations promoting the concept of Missing Middle housing aren't for bringing back SROs. One site used to describe "residential above commercial" as fitting the definition of Missing Middle housing, but they seem to have changed it to "live-work." This excludes the idea of small units, like SROs, above a rental office or other commercial space in a downtown area. Maybe they did that to intentionally exclude SROs or maybe they aren't aware the change has this impact. Regardless of the logic, it suggests they aren't including SROs in their agenda. Reintroducing SROs and boarding houses would be one way to provide genuinely affordable spaces for small households, such as single individuals, childless couples and single parents. I think we could even improve on what typically gets provided in our remaining SROs which tend to be in old buildings. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_room_occupancy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_room_occupancy
- WalterBright 7y agoDormitories solved this problem.
- cscurmudgeon 7y agoWhat about families?
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y agoAnd zoning laws won't let you build dormitories anywhere, which reinforces that it's a policy problem.
- gleapsite 7y agoI assume you're using hyperbole, but there are zones you can build dormitories in. There are also a few places without zoning regulations.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y agoLet's expand to make it clear: Dormitories are typically built on college campuses, and they are zoned for that sort of thing. In the middle of a large, populous city --on land that is not part of a postsecondary institution-- you can't just build a dormitory on it. You can rarely build anything over 2 stories on the coast in California. There's no political will for it, so nothing happens.
- gamblor956 7y agoThere are no zoning laws in California that prohibit dormitories but allow other multitenant or multi unit housing. And construction on the coast is specifically restricted by law because that is the political will and has been for decades.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y agoDormitories don't usually have kitchens, and there are usually minimum things that must be present in rental housing. There absolutely are zoning restrictions that would prevent you from building a dormitory anywhere. Let me go buy a $10 million plot in La Jolla farms and try and put a dormitory on it. "Oh, but it's so close to UCSD", you might think... but the surrounding properties are all $20m+ single family homes (that's how it's zoned, after all) and the dorms would ruin the "community vibe".
- spoiledtechie 7y agoIts actually a regulation problem. City councils, local govts create this problem with restrictions on buildings and what type of things can go into their city. These people should rise up and realize their living in something created by govt.
- vippy 7y agoIt’s a problem of property rights, markets, and regulation. If we wanted to solve this problem, we could use eminent domain to secure public land, and taxes to construct additional units of housing.
- ianai 7y agoThose policies are influenced at the local level. Unfortunately they’re also often basically controlled by special interests. If anything could change it, it would be people en masse taking an interest in local elections at significant rates. There’s no voting power larger, in the US, than the people who sit out. It’d also mean going to meetings, probably.
- calvinmorrison 7y agoAlso by neighbors. I don't think it's unreasonable for neighborhoods to have a say in what zoning exist
- mhluongo 7y ago> Its actually a regulation problem. That's another way of saying "a housing policy problem"
- casefields 7y agoPublic policy is enacted through regulations. The housing shortage is a regulation problem, that must be addressed through public policy.
- docbrown 7y ago> Its actually a regulation problem. This response is a common issue we run into when discussing policy. When people do not understand that policy is the absolute bedrock foundation for any and all subsequent law or regulation, they tend to not be able to visualize how wide of a net “policy” is and what falls underneath it. Example: Policy simplified: No more than X number of multi-family homes allowed. Regulations and zoning laws are second: We only have room for X, so we can have no more than X number of multi family homes in Y sq miles. As you can see, a decision does not start as a law nor regulation, it is broad policy. So with your claim that it’s a regulation issue, how would changing the inferior part of the policy ensure it promotes change from the bottom-up? It will not change the issues that are created as a result of the original base policy (i.e. X number of MFHs allowed). All regulations and laws must have a basis which can help explain the what, how, and why of implementation to ensure it falls within the boundaries of the initial policy decision.
- jijji 7y agoalot of times its also a zoning issue... Most cities won't let you build a room that is less than 150 square feet in dimension. Then you need one bathroom per four bedrooms. And then the city tries to regulate the length of time that someone can sign a lease for, i.e. anti-airbnb zoning rules... Another zoning issue is parking, the FAR (parking ratio) in most areas is 1.0 parking spots per room, and 1.5 parking spots for a 3 bedroom. It gets really restrictive, but they are trying to prevent unregulated "rooming houses", but it also seems to be the hotel industry lobbies to write these zoning rules as well.
- badfrog 7y agoMost of those rules seem pretty reasonable, tbh. Can you imagine an 8 bedroom house with only one bathroom? The bigger problems I think have to do with building height restrictions and anything else that explicitly restricts the density of a city.
- opportune 7y agoThey are unnecessarily restrictive in my opinion. Why can't developers build 100 sqft bedrooms with shared bathroom/kitchen areas? Or more communal living areas? I can assure you that if you built something like that anywhere between SF and San Jose, there is a price at which those places would have full occupancy, and it's almost certainly over $800/mo, probably even $1k/mo. I agree that height restrictions are a much bigger contributor to the lack of housing, but preventing dorm-style living seems to have little utility aside from preventing poorer people from living in your area.
- badfrog 7y agoI agree 150 square feet is a bit high for a minimum. Where does that apply? In NYC, the minimum is 80 square feet. Edit: according to this article, the regulations used by 90 percent of US communities allow 70 sq ft. https://www.hunker.com/13711464/building-code-requirements-for-bedrooms https://www.hunker.com/13711464/building-code-requirements-f...
- 7y ago
- orasis 7y ago...combined with a lifestyle choice problem. Hundreds of millions of other Americans do fine not living in the Bay Area.
- i_am_nomad 7y agoThis is a very valid point that almost nobody makes, and I still cannot understand why not. People screaming about how unaffordable the Bay Area is, seem to feel like living elsewhere would be some kind of death sentence.
- headsupernova 7y agoIt's because the brunt of the problem doesn't affect the people who have the choice to live wherever they want.
- smudgymcscmudge 7y ago“and give up on my dream of being a tech billionaire? no thanks”. Also popular is “the bay area has one of the greatest collection of minds ever assembled in the history of the world”. If they are really that smart and money flows so freely, then they should have no problem solving this little problem.
- solveit 7y agoI understand the futility of reasoning against snark, but I still feel compelled to mention that no collection of minds in the history of anything has ever really succeeded in solving the problem of dysfunctional politics.
- smudgymcscmudge 7y agoThat’s quite true. And thank you for also recognizing that my snark can’t be reasoned with.
- wonderwonder 7y agoI think the real question is "Are the politics dysfunctional"? I would argue they are working exactly as intended. The people who already own property and who have influence are getting the exact results they desire. Good or bad depends on whether you are an owner or a renter. A very large portion of political outcomes can be traced to money and those who can apply it to get their desired outcomes. This is politics as normal for a large portion of the uS and the world.
- exabrial 7y ago$1,600 is a house payment in the vast majority of the country. You don't have a housing-policy problem, you have a personal finance problem.
- imtringued 7y agoI think it has more to do with the asymmetry of employment vs housing. Companies can reach any customer through shipping or the internet but workers cannot reach any company because they have to live in housing which has to be close to their job. If everyone worked remotely then Californians could keep their insane housing policies and people in "fly over country" could get access to jobs. Everyone would get exactly what they want. So either make it illegal for cities to have significantly more jobs than housing or give employees the right to work remotely. Of course both of these option haven't happened and I don't think they will ever happen.
- cam_l 7y agoIt may not be a construction problem, but it is also not primarily a housing policy problem. I see this argument time and again. But mostly this is just not the issue. In most places in the world housing supply far outstrips demand. I say that as an Australian, where despite reasonable laws and ample land, we have some of the most expensive real estate per income in the world. The issue is banking and tax law, which should weigh heavily on real estate capital gains, heavily on speculation and heavily on empty lots or tenancies. But go easier on rental income and losses. These same arguments about nimbyism and building just have the effect of dividing and conquering, while carefully avoiding scrutiny of the real issue.. finance.
- foobar1962 7y ago> I say that as an Australian, where despite reasonable laws and ample land... Another Aussie here. Sure we have lots of land, but no water. Our limiting factor is potable freshwater. Our major rivers are dying, rainfall is becoming less predictable. Right now politicians are pushing to build more dams to fix the problem (for agriculture, not population) but that's only going to lead to more negative environmental impact. Here in Australia we need more water recycling. It's energy intensive.
- rusabd 7y agoThe North has plenty of water. It is historically underdeveloped and still hasn't caught up with South- East
- Mountain_Skies 7y agoIsn't there also an issue with low nutrient levels in much of the soil which makes it unsuitable for agriculture even with access to freshwater?
- foobar1962 7y agoA huge problem is salinity caused by a combination of deforestation and irrigation. The ground water is saline, and trees keep the water level below the surface. Once the trees wearere removed, the groundwater rises, irrigation water sinks down and brings the salt to the surface. Once there it's impossible to grow anything.
- detail-oriented 7y agoIt's not a policy problem, stop blaming the government for the stupid decisions of individuals. It's a market problem, if renters said I'm not paying 1600 per month then the rent would be lower.
- brewdad 7y agoSo while they wait for the market to respond to decreased demand at current prices levels, prices are sticky in the downward direction, where exactly should they lay their head at the end of the day?
- oceanplexian 7y agoThis guy gets it. If you’re unhappy about expensive rent just talk to your employer and negotiate living somewhere else. Or quit, and find another company that will play ball. There are plenty. Presumably most people here work in tech and there is zero requirement that you work in the most expensive city in the world.
- WalterBright 7y agoGoogle is finishing up building a large facility in Seattle. With Amazon, Boeing and Microsoft here, too, there are plenty of tech jobs.
- lonelappde 7y agoAnd no affordable housing.
- zamfi 7y agoPretty sure “stupid decisions of individuals” includes older residents demanding that no new housing get built in their neighborhood lest it “turn into Manhattan” when the reality is that an extra unit on every block would house everyone who’s moved to the Bay Area in the last 10 years. Thus perpetuating a housing problem that prevents them from moving anywhere else in the Bay Area because now it‘s unaffordable.
- Robotbeat 7y agoShould pull a Minneapolis and legalize multi-unit housing on all lots. Also, remove height restrictions and build better transit.
- peterwwillis 7y agoI don't want to live in a tiny house, but I want the right to be able to.
- seppin 7y ago> $1,600 a month Yeah, keep going
- adele_peters 7y agoHi, I'm the tiny house dweller who wrote the article, and just saw this—I completely agree with you, and should have emphasized the need for better policy. I just updated the story.