N'joy your unaffordable housing in CA?

[Holeshot]

From a friend in the in same industry as us:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/12/1...ting-middle-class-most-its-broken-system.html

"California has a housing crisis. We can't provide housing to our citizens," said Rita Brandin, with San Diego developer Newland Communities. "In Georgia, Texas and Florida, it can take a year and a half from concept to permits. In California, just the process from concept to approvals, is five years – that does not include the environmental lawsuits faced by 90 percent of projects."

I've preached for years here on BARF why housing is so costly. Looks like news organizations may be figuring it out too...

CA's intense building code requirements and permit/ regulatory environment are what has made the current housing, unaffordable. Your regulators know this. Your county and city politicians know this. They don't give one care about it.

Try to find one new mobile home/ manufactured housing park built in CA in the last 20 years....

It's your state. What are YOU going to do about it, now that the reasons for the problem have been brought to light.

 

[Brokenlink]

I don't disagree. However in twenty plus years doing environmental permitting and whatnot, I have yet to see a housing project that considers environmental issues without being forced.

One problem is that the areas preferred by developers are also those with environmental issues. But rather than try and work within these parameters and attempt to do the right thing, over and over and over again we see developers either do little to nothing, the bare minimum, or downright illegal bullshit.

Think Seeno Homes. http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/1-million-victory-for-red-legged-frog-2821387.php

How about the conveniently named developer "Wildlife Management"? http://criverwatch.org/wordpress/2016/03/14/%EF%BB%BFdeveloper-to-pay-1-million-for-damaging-salamander-habitat/

You think these costs aren't passed on to the consumer? How about being on the forefront and asking upfront: "How can I develop a property without fucking shit up?" instead of "What's the bare minimum I have to do (and then not do?)"

 

[byke]

Permits are crazy, but it's not like labor and materials and everything else are unchanged. Fixing any one thing means un-fixing another. This is what happens when you try to have your cake and eat it too. Want fair wages? Check. Want to be environmentally friendly? Check. Want to stop sourcing materials from slave labor countries? Check. Whoops, now we can't afford it.

I say tough shit, because otherwise you have another welfare farming industry where people say, "you want lettuce to cost $50 a pound??", when really what they're saying is that it *already* costs $50 a pound, it's just that you're paying for it indirectly even when you're not eating it. I'd rather save for a few months and buy the $300 toaster. So, no, the righty in me doesn't want to pay for what ends up being subsidized housing throughout all the various economic classes which think they deserve affordable housing.

We couldn't afford to buy a house in Davis, the town we lived in for decades and do you know how we dealt with it when we *wanted*...not needed...but *wanted* to buy a house..? We went somewhere that we could afford. What's next, move to Beverly Hills and expect the market to adjust to our needs? Can't afford to live someplace? Leave, or rent, but don't un-fix everything else until you can afford it.

 

[gnahc79]

New housing developments have been building non stop down in Morgan Hill for years now. A huge development is still under way near my work. Condos, townhouses and a large shopping center.
None of these homes are remotely affordable for the middle class. Haven't been even back in 2008.

 

[MysterYvil]

Add in the multiple-property owners who keep jacking up rents "because that's what the market will bear."

Greedy profiteering.

Ms. Bad Example's illegal studio in the Sunset went from $900/month to $1,900/month in two years. Because of "the market."

Soulless excuses for human beings.

 

[Reli]

Percentage-wise, we have a larger amount of undeveloped land than most other states.....But there's a legitimate reason for that. We are one of the most environmentally complex and "at risk" states in the union. And also, it's more beautiful than other states, so of course there's more interest in protecting it.

You want loose requirements, go build in Iowa where there's no water shortage, no beaches to protect, very little fire risk, fewer endangered species, and a shorter list of banned chemicals. Just buy out someone's farm and you're good to go.

 

[m_asim]

Here is another take on this housing brouhaha.

California is already the most populate state in the country. Adding multiple millions of people to the state population, in a time when we are heading into a multi-decade drought is idiotic.

The only people to benefit from erecting more and more housing are the developers who erect these monstrosities and the politicians that benefit from their largesses.

Where such monstrosities are allowed, the quality of life has dwindled. I shudder every time I have to drive to West LA. The infrastructure is still the same - but the population has quadrupled. The surface streets are slower than even 405!
Do the developers who erected these apartment buildings care about the issues of the neighborhoods when they demolished SFRs and put apartments in their place instead? Heck no.

You just can't have unchecked population growth and expect the quality of life not to suffer. I understand that the developers have to keep on erecting new housing in order to make money but that is no longer sustainable in California.

 

[KrustyKruser]

Hmm, one of the most environmentally complex and "at risk" states in the union, and some of you wonder why permit requirements would be strict?

You want loose requirements, go build in Iowa where there's no water shortage, no beaches to protect, very little fire risk, and not much in the way of unique species. All you have to do is buy out someone's farm.

+1. We have the most amazing diversity of species and great farmland. People keep wanting to build on top of it. Of course it will be pricey.

 

[mlm]

The problem is that the whole suburban housing model doesn't scale well. Developers aren't interested in selling efficient or affordable houses.

 

[rsrider]

Build up, not out. People don't want sky scrapers, but that is the only way to go in urban areas. Keep building suburbs further and further away, and you'll get more congestion, more wasted time, and more waste of resources. You want a view, then just put a nice screen saver on your 4K TV. Building single family units in high population areas is just going to make living un-affordable at every level.

Moving to Montana soon...
going to be a dental floss tycoon....

 

[byke]

California is already the most populate state in the country. Adding multiple millions of people to the state population, in a time when we are heading into a multi-decade drought is idiotic.

Drought? Infrastructure projects would indicate a massive surplus. We have so much extra water that we're way beyond supplying communities and into the secondary needs of supplying private business owners wanting to farm in the desert.

 

[Junkie]

Here is another take on this housing brouhaha.

California is already the most populate state in the country. Adding multiple millions of people to the state population, in a time when we are heading into a multi-decade drought is idiotic.

The only people to benefit from erecting more and more housing are the developers who erect these monstrosities and the politicians that benefit from their largesses.

Where such monstrosities are allowed, the quality of life has dwindled. I shudder every time I have to drive to West LA. The infrastructure is still the same - but the population has quadrupled. The surface streets are slower than even 405!
Do the developers who erected these apartment buildings care about the issues of the neighborhoods when they demolished SFRs and put apartments in their place instead? Heck no.

You just can't have unchecked population growth and expect the quality of life not to suffer. I understand that the developers have to keep on erecting new housing in order to make money but that is no longer sustainable in California.

What do you suggest we do with all the new people who are born? Force them to either live a dozen to a house or move out of state?

 

[Kestrel]

CA's intense building code requirements and permit/ regulatory environment are what has made the current housing, unaffordable.

To be fair, regulation on construction is just a small part of the whole. Population density and huge demand has driven this real estate bubble to its current unsustainable magnitude. Until the people stop coming, this problem won't be going away.

 

[byke]

What do you suggest we do with all the new people who are born? Force them to either live a dozen to a house or move out of state?

Those are the only options?

 

[jt2]

It's your state. What are YOU going to do about it, now that the reasons for the problem have been brought to light.

No easy solution when there is so little will to do anything about it, especially in the political class.

What am I doing? Seriously considering moving out of state for the first time in my life because it isn't just housing costs that are out of control, it is everything that is getting more expensive. Then there's the traffic and overcrowding.

Permits are crazy, but it's not like labor and materials and everything else are unchanged. Fixing any one thing means un-fixing another. This is what happens when you try to have your cake and eat it too. Want fair wages? Check. Want to be environmentally friendly? Check. Want to stop sourcing materials from slave labor countries? Check. Whoops, now we can't afford it.

I say tough shit, because otherwise you have another welfare farming industry where people say, "you want lettuce to cost $50 a pound??", when really what they're saying is that it *already* costs $50 a pound, it's just that you're paying for it indirectly even when you're not eating it. I'd rather save for a few months and buy the $300 toaster. So, no, the righty in me doesn't want to pay for what ends up being subsidized housing throughout all the various economic classes which think they deserve affordable housing.

We couldn't afford to buy a house in Davis, the town we lived in for decades and do you know how we dealt with it when we *wanted*...not needed...but *wanted* to buy a house..? We went somewhere that we could afford. What's next, move to Beverly Hills and expect the market to adjust to our needs? Can't afford to live someplace? Leave, or rent, but don't un-fix everything else until you can afford it.

Great post and excellent points made.

Add in the multiple-property owners who keep jacking up rents "because that's what the market will bear."

Greedy profiteering.

Ms. Bad Example's illegal studio in the Sunset went from $900/month to $1,900/month in two years. Because of "the market."

Soulless excuses for human beings.

While I feel for anyone pinched by high rents it isn't fair to blame the property owners. There isn't any collusion or market manipulation going on, it is simply supply and demand.

People aren't generally in the business of renting property for altruistic reasons, they are there to make a profit. Would you turn down a raise if it were based on a scarcity of people in your line of work? Didn't think so. :laughing

If you want to blame someone, look to the shortage of housing for the reasons Berto mentioned, and in particular in SF, the loony Board of Supes and voters exacerbating the problem by further restricting the supply.

 

[Nucking Futs]

I’m moving to Perth, Australia.

 

[Hooli]

I’m moving to Perth, Australia.

I heard Melbourne is better.

 

[Junkie]

Those are the only options?

What other options are there?

 

[russ69]

...What am I doing? Seriously considering moving out of state for the first time in my life because it isn't just housing costs that are out of control, it is everything that is getting more expensive. Then there's the traffic and overcrowding...

California has elected people that love taxes and regulation. Most of you guys love taxes and regulation. Tiered licensing, gun control, non-fossil energy, etc. The housing market is just one aspect that is affected by those decisions. Gas, food, home prices, energy, insurance and taxes are reflecting the political environment. I personally think they have reached critical mass and living in California is going to be very expensive in the coming years. They have lost my income forever and I pump a lot of money into local economies. I had no plans on leaving California but over time they made that decision much much easier.

 

[bojangle]

Add in the multiple-property owners who keep jacking up rents "because that's what the market will bear."

Greedy profiteering.

Ms. Bad Example's illegal studio in the Sunset went from $900/month to $1,900/month in two years. Because of "the market."

Soulless excuses for human beings.

You really didn't expect someone renting out an illegal studio to be an altruistic person now, did you? :laughing

They're going to charge as much as they can get away with, while keeping it occupied. Though, that amount of increase is pretty outrageous.