5 ms·

Affordable housing has little to do with the cost of building the house.

by thereddaikon 4y ago

SideQuark 4y ago
So the cost of a house doesn't factor into affordable housing? Care to explain?
- NegativeLatency 4y ago
  I suspect they're talking about how single family zoning results in only having more expensive places to live. Even if you build a "cheap" single family house that's still going to be more expensive than some equally cheaply built townhomes, or apartments because of stuff like parking requirements and minimum setbacks.
HEmanZ 4y ago
In Manhattan or San Francisco? Probably not. But in most of the gigantic, sprawling USA, I suspect affordable housing absolutely has everything to do with cost of building a house.
- ericmay 4y ago
  If I had to guess it's not so much the actual cost of building the house as it is the profit margin of those who are building homes. Why build a $200,000 "starter home" when you can build a $478,000 home with gigantic margin on "luxury" trim like cheap granite countertops and "hardwood" floors for roughly the same cost? And then once you get the ugly design down you can just copy and paste it with few adjustments and save even more money. Unfortunately we have bad incentives aligned here versus stated goals. Manhattan and San Francisco are like Japan and Argentina in economics. They're just not the same market as most places. In Manhattan in particular the value really is the land.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- monocasa 4y ago
  Most of the places where houses are already so cheap that the price of actually building a house is a blocker for affordable housing typically have a large glut of unwanted property from population drained to other areas.
- dr-detroit 4y ago
  [dead]
- rtkwe 4y ago
  Cities still hold a large portion of the population of the US and a lot of jobs can't just be done remotely even if employers actually adopted remote work which many really really don't want to. Housing isn't just a problem in Manhattan and SF it's hitting cities and suburbs everywhere.
- mindslight 4y ago
  Go tour some unincorporated land in the Southwest and you'll see how cheaply homes can be built. The problem is that once you're spread out enough to be able to do that, the resources required for daily living have gone up significantly because they're no longer amortized over population density and time. And surburbs/ruralish areas are just in the middle of that gradient. Building a bunch of housing in the middle of nowhere for unhoused people isn't going to work unless you also provide them heating, utilities, transportation, etc. The least expensive way of doing that is to make it dense like a city. At which point you're just building a planned city for indigent people, which is not particularly in the purview of the US on a few axes.
- thereddaikon 4y ago
  In my modestly sized city nowhere near California or New York the problem has nothing to do with building costs and predates the rising costs of building materials. It has everything to do with poor city planning and a lack of building permits for middle income housing. Plenty of over priced McMansions and plenty of half occupied apartments. Not enough normal houses. So the market became irrational. People buying houses site unseen even before COVID. And property values going way up. Another contributor to the problem was outside speculators buying residential properties. Specifically Berkshire Hathaway and Zillow come to mind. But I'm sure others were doing it too. It should be illegal.
autokad 4y ago
I am pretty sure it does. Lets assume an income of 32,000$ (~median US income) and 30% to pay for housing. That gives them 9,300$/year for a mortgage or 775$. with a 7% interest rate, that means the person would not be able to easily afford to buy a new home > 175,000$. There are lots of levers that determine if a person can afford a home. income, interest rates, % income that goes towards housing, etc. But its obvious cost of building the home plays a factor.
- ethanbond 4y ago
  In all high cost of living areas, the cost of land is the much more relevant factor. Even when people say, "oh no it's the cost of goods or the labor," they're talking about land. Go compare the costs of identical pieces of plywood from the Home Depot on West 23rd Street in Manhattan and the Home Depot in Jersey City, directly across the river. Manhattan: $76; Jersey City: $37 Is that the cost of shipping a piece of plywood an additional 3-10 miles? Is it taxes? It's the rent.

Affordable housing has little to do with the cost of building the house.

SideQuark 4y ago

So the cost of a house doesn't factor into affordable housing? Care to explain?

NegativeLatency 4y ago
I suspect they're talking about how single family zoning results in only having more expensive places to live. Even if you build a "cheap" single family house that's still going to be more expensive than some equally cheaply built townhomes, or apartments because of stuff like parking requirements and minimum setbacks.

HEmanZ 4y ago

In Manhattan or San Francisco? Probably not. But in most of the gigantic, sprawling USA, I suspect affordable housing absolutely has everything to do with cost of building a house.

ericmay 4y ago
If I had to guess it's not so much the actual cost of building the house as it is the profit margin of those who are building homes. Why build a $200,000 "starter home" when you can build a $478,000 home with gigantic margin on "luxury" trim like cheap granite countertops and "hardwood" floors for roughly the same cost? And then once you get the ugly design down you can just copy and paste it with few adjustments and save even more money. Unfortunately we have bad incentives aligned here versus stated goals. Manhattan and San Francisco are like Japan and Argentina in economics. They're just not the same market as most places. In Manhattan in particular the value really is the land.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
monocasa 4y ago
Most of the places where houses are already so cheap that the price of actually building a house is a blocker for affordable housing typically have a large glut of unwanted property from population drained to other areas.
dr-detroit 4y ago
[dead]
rtkwe 4y ago
Cities still hold a large portion of the population of the US and a lot of jobs can't just be done remotely even if employers actually adopted remote work which many really really don't want to. Housing isn't just a problem in Manhattan and SF it's hitting cities and suburbs everywhere.
mindslight 4y ago
Go tour some unincorporated land in the Southwest and you'll see how cheaply homes can be built. The problem is that once you're spread out enough to be able to do that, the resources required for daily living have gone up significantly because they're no longer amortized over population density and time. And surburbs/ruralish areas are just in the middle of that gradient. Building a bunch of housing in the middle of nowhere for unhoused people isn't going to work unless you also provide them heating, utilities, transportation, etc. The least expensive way of doing that is to make it dense like a city. At which point you're just building a planned city for indigent people, which is not particularly in the purview of the US on a few axes.
thereddaikon 4y ago
In my modestly sized city nowhere near California or New York the problem has nothing to do with building costs and predates the rising costs of building materials. It has everything to do with poor city planning and a lack of building permits for middle income housing. Plenty of over priced McMansions and plenty of half occupied apartments. Not enough normal houses. So the market became irrational. People buying houses site unseen even before COVID. And property values going way up. Another contributor to the problem was outside speculators buying residential properties. Specifically Berkshire Hathaway and Zillow come to mind. But I'm sure others were doing it too. It should be illegal.

autokad 4y ago

I am pretty sure it does. Lets assume an income of 32,000$ (~median US income) and 30% to pay for housing. That gives them 9,300$/year for a mortgage or 775$. with a 7% interest rate, that means the person would not be able to easily afford to buy a new home > 175,000$. There are lots of levers that determine if a person can afford a home. income, interest rates, % income that goes towards housing, etc. But its obvious cost of building the home plays a factor.

ethanbond 4y ago
In all high cost of living areas, the cost of land is the much more relevant factor. Even when people say, "oh no it's the cost of goods or the labor," they're talking about land. Go compare the costs of identical pieces of plywood from the Home Depot on West 23rd Street in Manhattan and the Home Depot in Jersey City, directly across the river. Manhattan: $76; Jersey City: $37 Is that the cost of shipping a piece of plywood an additional 3-10 miles? Is it taxes? It's the rent.