Four the Future - Housing

  • Hailey council repeals affordable housing rules
    Source: Idaho Statesman; October 13, 2010
    Summary: In a report mentioned in my Foundations of Planning class last quarter, the resort town of Hailey, Idaho, repealed its affordable housing requirement due to fear of litigation. Prior to the repeal, 20% of new subdivisions were required to be deed-restricted community housing. This is a tool used nationwide. Annexations and planned developments will still have the requirement.
    Opinion: The comments on the article are telling. One person wants a reduction in all regulations (Somalia-style, apparently). Another (sarcastically, I hope) calls for "your kind" to live elsewhere, and just drive into town to "do our yard work, teach our children and protect us from fires and criminals." I could not have said it better. There's no better way to make a disgruntled working class by banishing them to the sticks each night.
  • CNU and NTBA's Reform of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and related housing programs
    Source: Congress for the New Urbanism; December 17, 2010
    Summary: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two federally chartered secondary mortgage agencies are implicated in the housing bubble. Part of the meltdown was precipitated by the distortionary effects of HUD, Fannie, and Freddie’s policies of limiting the amount of non-residential space included in mixed use developments. Mixed use developments have held their value, yet remain substantially excluded from the secondary mortgage market. Fannie Mae allows projects to be up to 20% non-residential; Freddie Mac allows 25%. HUD’s capital program restricts imputed non-residential rent to 20%. The Congress for the New Urbanism and the National Town Builders Association propose to raise these limits to 50%. This would allow the market to determine the mix, rather than federal policy.
    Opinion: When these loans are ineligible for the secondary mortgage market, banks must carry the note and they become unable to resell them in an efficient manner. And while I do believe that banks should be required to retain a portion of the project risk (after all, if they have no skin in the game, they can do whatever they want and have proven they will), I can see how these limitations could limit the availability of funding for mixed use projects. Alternatively, it could cause the residential uses to be exclusively high-rent in order to make the retail space a small percentage of the overall cost. Either way, it is bad for cities and causes sprawl through federal housing policy.
  • Tiny house movement thrives amid real estate bust
    Source: Yahoo! News; November 29, 2010
    Summary: Despite of the housing crisis, or perhaps because of it, one sector of the housing market is booming: that of the "tiny house." Tiny houses can be as small as the 89 square foot house mentioned in the article, but entire families can live in a 500 square foot house. They invite a comparison to trailers, but these are built with higher quality materials. They range in cost from $20,000 to $50,000.
    Opinion: You can visit the tiny house blog at tinyhouseblog.com. This concept could be useful for accessory dwelling units (also known as granny flats). Basically, you’d put this in your backyard, and you’d have a room for another (tiny) family. This allows the community to grow without sprawling further. The back of the envelope calculation ($25,000, 20-year, 6% loan) is only $179.11/month, which is affordable for all but the most destitute. And R. Buckminster Fuller would be proud (I’ll explain that statement in a later post!) This is unlikely to become a large segment of the housing market, but jurisdictions should be prepared to deal with them.
  • Homeownership stays at the lowest level in a decade
    Source: USA Today; November 2, 2010
    Summary: Prior to the Clinton and Bush administrations, home ownership rate was level at about 64%. Upon the deregulation of the investment banks, home ownership rose to 69% in 2004. With foreclosures and weak demand, home ownership has now dropped to 66.9%, the lowest since 1999. Housing vacancy is now at 18.8 million units, or 14% of all housing.


    A man rides a horse by an abandoned home in Las Vegas. Spencer Platt, Getty Images

    Opinion: This statistic would tend to indicate that we still have a bit lower to go to return to the levels before the unwise deregulation of investment banks. But, note, that the small percentage increase caused a massive increase in the cost of home ownership and shenanigans on the part of casino owners…I mean bankers. The increase in the ownership percentage was clearly not worth the worldwide pain being suffered now. Please let it be a lesson.

5 comments:

  1. Brian, I truly believe that not all people should be able to own a house. Do no misconstrue this as a racist or low income-biased statement. A large part of the current mortgage/loans/banking/housing crisis was due to the incorrect premise that EVERYONE is ENTITLED to own a home. Hence the development of the very irresponsible lending instruments such as ARM, 0%, home equity loans, etc. (Another very important part of the economic implosion was also the relaxing of key banking/investment laws that prevented banks from being investment companies and vice versa) Home ownership requires a very large degree of responsibility and sacrifice -- all people can wish to attain homeownership but not all people should own homes. You have to understand your lending instruments, you have to understand housing operating/maintenance costs and taxes and that truly appears to be lacking in a a very large number of people who subsequently obtained loans and then defaulted on said loans.

    ReplyDelete
  2. An entirely respectable opinion. Personally, I don't think that home ownership is right for everyone, either. But, having housing is essential. You'll never catch me saying that everyone should have a house. But you will find me saying everyone should have a home. Thank you for your comment!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Agreed -- homes come in many forms.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "And R. Buckminster Fuller would be proud"
    Yes, he would!
    If we all take time to promote responsible, sustainable, ergonomic growth, we can actually attain a modicum of self sufficiency. We will never discover the magic-bullet of development strategies, but new urbanism is an excellent start.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hey, Monarch: what do you think about the proposals that the Congress for the New Urbanism and the National Town Builders Association have made? Would that help loosen up funding for your kind of development?

    ReplyDelete

This is an interactive blog for people interested planning in the Spokane region or planning in general.