Opinion: Solutions to California housing problems will not be dense, dense, dense
Palisades and Eaton Fires represent thousands of individual tragedies, but they also constitute a collective disaster, adding to the already huge shortage of new housing shortages in California – it’s not a disaster, it’s not It originates from natural behavior, but from human policy mistakes.
Gov. Gavin Newsom buys new $9 million house In November, too many of his Californians may never own a home or find affordable rent. Under Newsom, the state has tried reforms aimed at improving buildings and affordability, but there are few valuable changes.
House prices in coastal areas of California are 400% higher than the national average, and the median cost of housing is 2.5 times higher than the rest of the country across the state. California is the second lowest Home ownership rate nationwide56% (NYC’s lowest, 54%).
As for rent, the average cost of a two-bedroom apartment in Los Angeles is just $3,000 per month. According to Apartments.comabout $1,000 More than the national average.
Of course, these statistics are not bad news for everyone. Many of California baby boomers (buyed nearby a long time ago) are like gangsters by upgrading their housing prices. Together with Xers, they have similar home ownership rates as in the rest of the country. But for Californians under 35, half of Californians are national level, and they are groups that abandon the West Coast because of the “cost of living”.
The housing crisis in the state stems from Excessive building regulations and lawsuits against developers – too few residential units have been built for decades. Unfortunately, Sacramento’s treatment is pushing – the dense, apartment development policy is not helpful near the transit corridors of the state’s largest city.
For beginners, the high-density “fill” building of cities (some call it Yimby (“is my backyard”) development – is expensive. Urban land is expensive, materials are expensive, “prevalent wages” labor rates, and Heavy licensing, zoning and planning processes and expenses add to the bottom line. New multi-storey apartment buildings are packed along Sunset Boulevard or Wilhill Corridor, which may increase the total home inventory in Los Angeles, but even These buildings require affordable rental units, and the benefits of trick streams are also small.
As a professor at UCLA and London School of Economics Michael Storper’s research showsforced densification is a “blunt weapon” that has little to no significant cost savings for housing.
Rents and high-density living are also out of sync with what most people in California want. A recent public policy institute in California found that 70% Adults in the state prefer single-family homes. Not surprisingly, The vast majority According to a poll by former Obama campaign poll David Binder, a former Obama campaign poll, opposing the 2021 legislation signed by Newsom, the state actually bans single-family partitions in much of the state. (The ruling is being appealed last year, Senate Bill 9, Bill 9 was overturned in Los Angeles County Court.)
Climate goals have always been an important part of California’s policy preference for multi-story, multi-unit new buildings in cities. The idea is that more and more people living in taller buildings will be more energy efficient. It is encouraging that intensive developments near transit should reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But new research shows that the size of buildings is not necessarily related to more sustainability, and many Californians choose to endure longer commutes to buy homes rather than renting in towns. Or leave altogether. According to a new study by land use lawyer Jennifer L. Hernandez, climate-based housing rules lead to the cost of few homes being built at a high level.
What should the country do?
Some may wish we could subsidize the expansion of public housing and add more projects, such as the ambitious Jordan Downs contract renewal in South Los Angeles, but it will be difficult A nearly bankrupt city There is also a state with budget issues, which again doesn’t match the wishes of most Californians.
One way to get out of this crisis is to expand news and local leaders are rapidly tracking fire reconstruction, incentivizing rather than punishing townhouses and single-family home construction simplified licensing and regulatory processes. Sacramento does not specify high-density units (usually rents) in the state’s largest metropolis, rather than laws, but rather market-driven projects that need to be encouraged based on consumer preferences.
Peripheral development away from high-cost coasts can open up opportunities for first-time home buyers. Countries can leverage technological trends, such as remote working, to allow for greater population dispersion. The major planned communities in the Southern California interior or Central Valley, as well as local employers, can be part of the solution.
The problem of installing housing in California requires more alternatives, especially for people looking for lower rents and affordable single-family housing. If the state wants to maintain its upward moving ribs, it must reshape its housing policies.
Joel Kotkin is a presidential researcher in urban futures at Chapman University and a senior fellow at the Civitas Institute at the University of Texas at Austin, an opinion writer.
