2 ms·
Something that isn't well-known in the popular discourse is that single-occupancy homes are the main thing that we lack. If you go to a city meeting, you will h
by jeffbee 1y ago
Something that isn't well-known in the popular discourse is that single-occupancy homes are the main thing that we lack. If you go to a city meeting, you will hear endless talking about how we need more "family-sized" homes. This is mostly repeated by senior citizens who have no idea what they are talking about because the last time they participated in the housing market was when Gerald Ford was new and exciting. What we actually lack is studios or 1-bedroom apartments. We have way too many 3 and 4-bedroom homes given our current households, and we are lacking, nationally, tens of millions of small homes for singles and couples without children.
- CalRobert 1y agoWhen I lived in Ireland it was full of people moaning about “family homes” but then they build nothing but 3bed 2 bath semi d’s only to watch them get filled by young roommates. Who would have preferred their own flat.
- euroderf 1y agoAs I understand it, Helsinki made this mistake. They wanted to attract families to the city, so they mandated a minimum portion of larger apartments in new construction. Unfortunately these apartments ended up being too expensive for their intended market, real-world families.
- Tiktaalik 1y agoUnfortunately amongst the few that genuinely are calling for family homes because they need one, there are plenty more disingenuously using "family homes" as a tool to keep "undesirables" of renters, single people, young people, new immigrants, homosexuals etc out of their established low density, wealthy communities.
- lotsofpulp 1y agoFamily homes and family apartments are not the same thing. You are referring to zoning restrictions only allowing detached single family homes to be built, which are more expensive per occupant, and hence keep poorer people away. There are multiple reasons for why dense areas only have 1 and 2 bedroom apartments, while less dense areas only have detached single family homes. One is, as you say, to keep the poorer people away. But another big one is also the change in household size due to people's preferences. And yet another is people's preference for detached single family homes once they do have kids (by and large).
- jeffbee 1y agoSo, to repeat myself, no. There is an overabundance of 3-4 bedroom homes in dense urban centers and we continue to build too many of these. There is a shortage of 0-1 bedroom apartment in dense urban centers.
- lotsofpulp 1y agoI should've been clearer, I meant development of new abodes is bifurcated, it's either a low density region with homes with multiple bedrooms, or a high density region with homes with 1 or 2 bedrooms. The 3-4 bedroom homes in dense urban centers were probably built a while ago, but I have never seen new homes built in dense urban centers (I'm referring to NYC/SF/SEA/etc). The low density suburb regions that border the dense urban center usually try to keep their low density status. You won't see an apartment building with units that have 3 and 4 bedrooms going up in Manhattan, and you won't see apartment buildings with 1-2 bedrooms going up in the Silicon Valley suburbs.
- jeffbee 1y agoThat's not really the case, though. We don't have detailed statistics for bedroom count in New York because a city of just 8 million people with the largest urban economy on the continent can't be expected to track building permits. However in my city, Berkeley, California, the densest city in California outside San Francisco, we get mostly larger apartments. For example I point to the nearly-completed 2587 Telegraph Avenue with 485 bedrooms across 4, 5, and 6-bedroom apartments but only 5 studios. This is a direct outcome of the zoning code that denominates "density" in terms of units, therefore incentivizing the construction of gigantic units with too many bedrooms and forcing people into roomate situations that they don't actually want.