Home Page link

The real housing crisis is one of quantity

Home| Search | About
Login Password
Register Now! Lost Password?

Building Construction - Building Construction Industry Discussions. 

Page 4 of 14       < 1 2 3 > last >> Bookmark this page:  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
The real housing crisis is one of quantity Enough Already 04-19-2008
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Posted by george conklin on May 4, 2008, 6:00 am

wrote:
> Can you support your points below, or are you just throwing out you
> opinion?
>

Oh no!
I hope you don't think I'm ranting... (9_9)

My points are an empircal observation. I'm involved in
urban planning and local governing affairs

I occassionally testify at government hearings as well....


Locally builders have been able to opt out of building
affordable housing units ( until recently) by paying into
Affordable housing Fund.

----

Developers have prices artifically raised by governmental rules which limit
"sprawl" and thus force housing prices up to many times replacment costs.
This is what makes housing unaffordable to start with.



Posted by drydem on May 5, 2008, 4:14 am
>
> wrote:
>
> > Can you support your points below, or are you just throwing out you
> > opinion?
>
> Oh no!
> I hope you don't think I'm ranting... (9_9)
>
> My points are an empircal observation. I'm involved in
> urban planning and local governing affairs
>
> =A0I occassionally testify at government hearings as well....
>
> Locally builders have been able to opt out of building
> affordable housing units ( until recently) by paying into
> Affordable housing Fund.
>
> ----
>
> Developers have prices artifically raised by governmental rules which limi=
t
> "sprawl" and thus force housing prices up to many times replacment costs.
> This is what makes housing unaffordable to start with.


Zoning restriction can actually reduce the overall cost of
making new housing available by limiting the cost of
infrastructure and required services (roads, mass transit,
utilities, sidewalks, schools, libraries, fire/rescue services,
polices )
necessary to support the additional housing and businesses. One of
the major reasons for the support of "Smart Growth" policies
is to reduce the need for additional roads and schools -
major infrastructure cost to the local/state government. This
makes a more far more efficient use of current infrastructure
and should help control local taxes (e.g. property tax, income
tax, and other associated fees charged by local governments.


While limiting the region where new housing construction can
take place doesn't necessarily increase the cost of housing per unit
or per capita - the economic does dictate the type of housing that
can be built - so instead of building single family mansion with a
three car garage, luxury townhomes or condos are built.


The cost per housing unit starts to go when a multi-family dwelling
unit goes over five stories high and must use concrete and steel.
In addition, the cost per housing unit also increases if there is
any type of structure parking facility built for it.


While governments may set requirements that increase the
cost of building residential home, e.g. requiring a developer
to build a community center or public library, that doesn't
mean the developer ends up meeting those requirements.
This is exactly what happen in Clarksburg, Maryland inwhich
several developers had failed provide/build the things
they promised. So not only did residents pay a premium
to live there but the developers left them with a bunch of
empty promises.


I agree that government regulations can incraease the
up front cost of housing. New local laws just passed
now require new single family houses to be more
energy efficient ( Energy Star/LEED ) - while this would
decrease the cost of operating a home given the rise
in energy cost - it would make the initial cost of owning a
new home more expensive.


Posted by Matt W. Barrow on May 5, 2008, 7:38 pm

>
> wrote:
>
> > Can you support your points below, or are you just throwing out you
> > opinion?
>
> Oh no!
> I hope you don't think I'm ranting... (9_9)
>
> My points are an empircal observation. I'm involved in
> urban planning and local governing affairs
>
> I occassionally testify at government hearings as well....
>
> Locally builders have been able to opt out of building
> affordable housing units ( until recently) by paying into
> Affordable housing Fund.
>
> ----
>
> Developers have prices artifically raised by governmental rules which
> limit
> "sprawl" and thus force housing prices up to many times replacment costs.
> This is what makes housing unaffordable to start with.


*** Zoning restriction can actually reduce the overall cost of
*** making new housing available by limiting the cost of
*** infrastructure and required services (roads, mass transit,
*** utilities, sidewalks, schools, libraries, fire/rescue services,
*** polices ) necessary to support the additional housing and businesses.

On what planet?


*** One of
*** the major reasons for the support of "Smart Growth" policies
*** is to reduce the need for additional roads and schools -
*** major infrastructure cost to the local/state government. This
*** makes a more far more efficient use of current infrastructure
*** and should help control local taxes (e.g. property tax, income
*** tax, and other associated fees charged by local governments.

Roads and appurtenant items are built by the developer about 98% of the
time.

Try again.



Posted by george conklin on May 5, 2008, 8:01 pm

>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Can you support your points below, or are you just throwing out you
>> > opinion?
>>
>> Oh no!
>> I hope you don't think I'm ranting... (9_9)
>>
>> My points are an empircal observation. I'm involved in
>> urban planning and local governing affairs
>>
>> I occassionally testify at government hearings as well....
>>
>> Locally builders have been able to opt out of building
>> affordable housing units ( until recently) by paying into
>> Affordable housing Fund.
>>
>> ----
>>
>> Developers have prices artifically raised by governmental rules which
>> limit
>> "sprawl" and thus force housing prices up to many times replacment costs.
>> This is what makes housing unaffordable to start with.
>
>
> *** Zoning restriction can actually reduce the overall cost of
> *** making new housing available by limiting the cost of
> *** infrastructure and required services (roads, mass transit,
> *** utilities, sidewalks, schools, libraries, fire/rescue services,
> *** polices ) necessary to support the additional housing and businesses.
>
> On what planet?
>

Like New York City has low housing costs because of its zoning
procedures. Large cities have large taxes.




>
> *** One of
> *** the major reasons for the support of "Smart Growth" policies
> *** is to reduce the need for additional roads and schools -

You mean smart growth applies to sex too? Gosh, that is new one. Fewer
schools due to smart growth? Ok.



Posted by drydem on May 6, 2008, 9:02 pm
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Can you support your points below, or are you just throwing out you
> > > opinion?
>
> > Oh no!
> > I hope you don't think I'm ranting... (9_9)
>
> > My points are an empircal observation. I'm involved in
> > urban planning and local governing affairs
>
> > I occassionally testify at government hearings as well....
>
> > Locally builders have been able to opt out of building
> > affordable housing units ( until recently) by paying into
> > Affordable housing Fund.
>
> > ----
>
> > Developers have prices artifically raised by governmental rules which
> > limit
> > "sprawl" and thus force housing prices up to many times replacment costs=
.
> > This is what makes housing unaffordable to start with.
>
> *** Zoning restriction can actually reduce the overall cost of
> *** making new housing available by limiting the cost of
> *** infrastructure and required services (roads, mass transit,
> *** utilities, sidewalks, schools, libraries, fire/rescue services,
> *** polices ) necessary to support the additional housing and businesses.
>
> On what planet?


Yours.


>
> *** One of
> *** the major reasons for the support of "Smart Growth" policies
> *** is to reduce the need for additional roads and schools -
> *** major infrastructure cost to the local/state government. This
> *** makes a more far more efficient use of current infrastructure
> *** =A0and should help control local taxes (e.g. property tax, income
> *** tax, and other associated fees charged by local governments.
>
> Roads and appurtenant items are built by the developer about 98% of the
> time.


Who builds a road is irrelevant - so called Smart Growth
government policies is focusing on reducing the cost
and demands of economic development by making
more efficient use of current existing infrastructures and
services. Economic growth not has a capital
improvement cost component but an on-going operational
service cost component. Developers may come and go but
the government and the community remains.

Page 4 of 14       < 1 2 3 > last >>
Similar ThreadsPosted
The REAL housing crisis: TOO MANY PEOPLE August 16, 2007, 11:30 pm
Real Estate Europe June 2, 2007, 3:48 am
looking for real estate developments in need of funding December 10, 2006, 1:38 am
Invest in Real Estate or Stocks??? July 22, 2008, 6:27 am
FA: Carleton Sheets complete real estate course October 12, 2006, 11:41 am
FREE Real Architect 2007 for AutoCAD LT July 15, 2007, 6:57 pm
Head Construction Division Real Estate - INDIA October 13, 2007, 10:36 am
Move UP in the WORLD of real estate & building - www.Upworld.com December 17, 2007, 5:34 am
Move UP in the WORLD of real estate & building - www.Upworld.com December 17, 2007, 5:43 am
Real Architect 2008 compatible with AutoCAD LT2000 through LT2009 March 30, 2008, 12:40 am

Contact Us | Privacy Policy

XML SitemapXML Sitemap