Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Affordable Housing

[Chris Poch (chris]

We have a couple of factors that are causing housing affordability issues
nationwide that don't get as much air time as they should. Since World War
II, we've tried to regulate ourselves into better houses. While many of the
regulations were well intended, we ended up with things like minimum square
footage requirements, large setbacks from neighboring properties, and
extensive review processes. One of the big negatives that these
requirements have caused is they've eliminated one of the traditional ways
Americans built houses.

For most of the country's history, people built or bought houses that met
their current needs, usually with cash. As their needs and fortunes
increased, they built on additions or sold and built a new house - all done
in cash. My great grandparents followed this model just outside Washington,
DC just after WWII. In their case, they bought a house and then later built
an addition, doubling the size. It turned out that they wanted to be in a
different neighborhood, so they sold that house and did the exact same
thing about two miles away - buy the house they had the cash for and then
turn it into the house they wanted as time went on. Amazingly, both houses
are still standing but neither has been further expanded, probably the
result of much more restrictive modern rules.

On the other side of my family, my grandparents did something similar. They
owned a decent amount of land on a lake in rural Minnesota. They built a
small cabin on the lake (without running water) before they were mairried.
They could afford a nicer cabin a few years later so they built one with
plumbing and sold the first one. They had kids, so they built a larger one
down the lake. When they went to retire and wanted to spend half the year
at the lake, they intended to build their fourth house. The rules had
changed - houses needed to be 130 feet from the lake instead of the
previous 40. They didn't have the land to set back a house that far, so
they added on to their existing cabin instead, even though the compromises
that required were far from ideal. They didn't need loans to build the
houses even when they were young - they saved and built when and what they
could afford.

While a fairly different environment than most of us are dealing with, the
same kinds of rules get us. Instead of building an addition, it makes more
sense to move most of the time today. Many neighborhoods are fairly
similar, so if you want an extra bedroom for a larger family, you probably
end up in a different neighborhood. The result of people moving more often
means that neighborhood bonds aren't as strong as they once were. When I
moved into my current neighborhood 9 years ago, I had at least 5 original
owners within a block of me. The houses were built in 1960. We still have
two left, and one of the others is owned by the son of the original owner.
Neighbors disagree on whether I'm the 7th or 8th owner of mine. Most of the
houses on my block have turned over at least once since I've been there and
several 2-3 times.

Another side effect of many of our regulations is that we have essentially
outlawed many types of housing. On the spectrum from high rise apartments
to single family homes, historically there were many types in the middle.
Today, we have single family homes, townhouses, and condos/apartments.
Traditionally there were dwellings like duplexes and fourplexes that were
in the middle, some were even single family homes where someone added on a
second unit. It was easier to move up between types of housing and made
better use of land. More people closer together = easier to build
community. In most places today, most of the housing types between
apartments and single family homes are illegal, whether intentionally or as
a side effect of other rules. The result has been termed the "missing
middle". My own observations show that the values on the no longer built
types that still exist are often times high relative to their size, showing
that many people want something between a single family home and an
apartment.

While I can't vouch for the organization behind this site, I've seen the
top graphic republished several times: http://missingmiddlehousing.com/.
It's amazing to realize how many types that we used to build don't get
built anymore. I think we'd be a lot closer to having affordable housing
for all if we didn't cater just to the two ends of the spectrum.

Chris
Hopeful future cohousing resident
https://www.fairfaxcohousing.com/


On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 4:07 PM Brian Bartholomew via Cohousing-L <
cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org> wrote:

>
> Seems to me, tiny houses on wheels are a way to avoid zoning, which
> bans small houses of a more affordable size.  A downside of tiny
> houses is they have weight and size restrictions due to road
> transport, and they can't be built to normal building code strength or
> durability.  I wouldn't want to be in one during a hurricane.
>
> Remove that zoning, and you'll see smaller, more affordable houses
> reappear.  Then only move the people, not the houses.  Remove other
> mortgage/real estate red tape, and these smaller houses could be
> bought and sold as people move, without losing a large chunk of
> accumulated equity each move in overhead.
>
> Brian
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
>
>
>