Saturday, August 10, 2024

The Saturday Morning Post: A place to call home


There are a group of angry young people who are convinced that the reason they can't find an affordable home, is because we baby boomers insist on aging in homes that we love and enjoy.  To some extent baby boomers are responsible for the difficulty in affordable housing, but the objection is to the result, not the cause of a widespread shortage of housing for sale in the United States (and Great Britain.) 

Part of the cause, is a social reform movement before the baby boomers were born to eliminate substandard housing in cities.  Crowded urban housing was often unsafe and unsanitary, but rather than address the health and safety issues, the reformers pushed the idea that the only "proper" home was a free standing home, with a garden space around it.  The reformers posited that crowding led to drunkenness and immoral behaviour.  Somehow the reformers thought that living 30 feet from your neighbor would prevent adultery.  Higher density housing was seen a breeding ground for crime, and immoral behaviour. This belief mated well with racism, leading to housing codes that made housing unaffordable for many. 

There are three aspects of housing codes that drive up housing prices. 

First is limiting land available for development. Yes green space is pretty, but limiting land available for development, drives up the price of the land that is available. The economic law of supply applies here.  If we increase the supply, and demand remains constant, prices will drop to meet demand.  We need to allow higher density and mixed use development (the community above has been high density and mixed use for over 1,000 years - and I would move there in a heartbeat.) 

The next set of factors are minimum lot sizes and minimum home size. The larger the minimum lot size, the higher the cost. The larger the home, the higher the cost. These factors have been misused for decades to make housing unaffordable. 

The third factor is costs added onto land, bricks and mortar to build new housing.  These include utility connection costs, and in many communities "impact fees" charged for the issuance of a building permit to fund building community infrastructure such as roads, schools, parks, water and sewer facilities.  These can add tens of thousands of dollars to the cost of each new home built.  

How to lower housing costs and promote home ownership: 

  • Increase the land available for development 
  • Allow higher density development and mixed use development
  • Let the market determine home size 
  • Tax all property to pay for needed community services such as schools, parks, streets, libraries, and utilities.  We all benefit from them.  We all benefit from growing healthy communities.  
Sorry to bore many of you, this was a rant that has been building for sometime and needed to get out. 


11 comments:

  1. No apology needed. It is quite interesting and the situation is much the same here. Unfortunately here, higher density in middle to inner suburbs generally means high rise buildings but I don't think you need high rise buildings to drastically increase density. EG Paris, New York, London. Melbourne's sprawl just keeps growing, with fertile farmland being covered in cheap and nasty free standing housing without much land. You could almost commit adultery by climbing out one side window into your neighbours side window without touching the ground. It all makes me quite cross. Why are black roof tiles used when we can have upper temperatures of 44/111. I am sure developer profits are behind that. I could go on, but I won't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I heard one county commissioner describe the minimum lot size as too much to mow and too little to farm.

      Delete
  2. I enjoyed the rant. Lots of things I'd never thought about as far as housing goes.
    I lived in apartments in college but on my own I have always had a stand-alone house; I sort of like the sense of space. But then how much space and for what?
    And of course everyone vents about the taxes and "Why do I have to pay for .... "

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Taxes, we share the costs of living in a civilized society. I drove to Cleveland the other day, there is no way I could build a road there for my use when I needed it. We all benefit from roads, schools, libraries, parks, utilities.

      Delete
  3. It didn't seem like a rant to me. Your tone was logical. Everybody deserves to have somewhere to live that's safe and warm in the wintertime with water and sewage connections. It seems to me that this should be the principal goal of all governments.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That was a very intelligent rant!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Naperville has been tearing down a lot of sweet, affordable homes and building giant "McMansions" here. I don't know where the people are coming from that can afford these $1million homes but it is forcing some longtime residents out.
    I have a single family home in a subdivision (built about 50 years ago) and it was the right size when my kids lived at home. I sometimes think about downsizing but I own this home and can't afford a lot of the choices out there for me.
    I would be happy to see some development with more density and affordable housing. Right now, I don't see another home that I think will work for me but I hope to some day when I can't handle this place anymore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As long as you like living there, stay there.

      Delete
  6. I recently heard a podcast on this topic. It is fascinating as well as a downer.

    ReplyDelete