Keeping North Carolina’s Housing Affordable

[Safiel]

https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/keeping-north-carolinas-housing-affordable

This is a rather lengthy white paper from Cato Institute.

North Carolina is about to enter the same sort of housing crisis that has engulfed the rest of the nation and for much the same reason.

More people coming in, but not enough housing being built to contain all those people.

The issue begins, of course, with overly restrictive zoning. Large areas zoned to low density single family residential, which forbids the building of desperately needed medium density and high density housing.

But it is not just zoning. It is also overly strict requirements in regards to property square footage, house square footage, set backs and parking spaces.

Unfortunately, as the article suggests, it may not be politically possible to expect municipalities to embrace this reform. Not in my backyard is obviously a powerful political restrain on politicians who might be open to zoning reform. This might have to go to the State. The State could mandate that areas experiencing a housing shortfall convert a requisite portion of their R-1 zoning to medium or high density. They should also loosen square foot, set back and parking requirements.

At the same time, the should not inadvertently "fix* things that are not broken. Zoning reform should fall only where it is needed.

Out here in Surry County, we have plenty of housing for all, with reasonable rents and house prices. Our population is slightly decreasing and if anything, we have a small surplus of housing. Reform is neither needed nor desirable here.

Reform should be targeted to those areas actually experiencing housing shortages, i.e. the overall Triangle Area, the cities of the Triad Area, Charlotte (and its associated metropolitan area), Asheville and other cities that are actually struggling in this regard.

The 51 counties of North Carolina experiencing a population decline, including Surry, should be left alone.

[GWH]

I’d say the local municipalities and elected officials have a better feel for what is and isn’t needed in these areas. Asheville has seen this type of boom that lead to catastrophic failure. It took them 50+ years to recover. I’d trust them to build at their own speed.

Asheville’s bond fears: The legacy of a financial nightmare

[Auto129]

@Safiel

Unfortunately, as the article suggests, it may not be politically possible to expect municipalities to embrace this reform. Not in my backyard is obviously a powerful political restrain on politicians who might be open to zoning reform. This might have to go to the State.

It’s so politically impossible that I believe that the federal government will have to resort to building levittowns on its own land to bypass the challenges of rezoning entirely.

Sounds extreme now, but I don’t expect the issues to get any better in the next half century. That suggestion will be moderate by 2050.

[Safiel]

@Auto129

@Safiel

Unfortunately, as the article suggests, it may not be politically possible to expect municipalities to embrace this reform. Not in my backyard is obviously a powerful political restrain on politicians who might be open to zoning reform. This might have to go to the State.

It’s so politically impossible that I believe that the federal government will have to resort to building levittowns on its own land to bypass the challenges of rezoning entirely.

Sounds extreme now, but I don’t expect the issues to get any better in the next half century. That suggestion will be moderate by 2050.

California banned single family zoning altogether in 2021. Given the desperate state that California is in, that was pretty much the only alternative they had.

Hopefully, North Carolina and other States will act BEFORE it comes to that last desperate solution.

[Eagle-Keeper]

@Safiel

North Carolina is about to enter the same sort of housing crisis that has engulfed the rest of the nation and for much the same reason.

More people coming in, but not enough housing being built to contain all those people.

Not all growth is necessarily good. Overwhelming communities with people leads to various overcrowding issues that affect commuting, schools, taxes, plumbing/sewer limitations, power supply, etc.

[Toll_Collector]

@Eagle-Keeper

@Safiel

North Carolina is about to enter the same sort of housing crisis that has engulfed the rest of the nation and for much the same reason.

More people coming in, but not enough housing being built to contain all those people.

Not all growth is necessarily good. Overwhelming communities with people leads to various overcrowding issues that affect commuting, schools, taxes, plumbing/sewer limitations, power supply, etc.

There’s a reason people move to or live in low density large areas. In some cases, pay a lot to do it. They’re trying to avoid the crap you’re mentioning.

[Safiel]

@GWH

I’d say the local municipalities and elected officials have a better feel for what is and isn’t needed in these areas. Asheville has seen this type of boom that lead to catastrophic failure. It took them 50+ years to recover. I’d trust them to build at their own speed.

Asheville’s bond fears: The legacy of a financial nightmare | Mountain Xpress

They may have a better feel, but also political imperative not to do anything about it. A lot of our situation is politicians too afraid to stand up to NIMBYism.

[Safiel]

@Eagle-Keeper

@Safiel

North Carolina is about to enter the same sort of housing crisis that has engulfed the rest of the nation and for much the same reason.

More people coming in, but not enough housing being built to contain all those people.

Not all growth is necessarily good. Overwhelming communities with people leads to various overcrowding issues that affect commuting, schools, taxes, plumbing/sewer limitations, power supply, etc.

The growth is occurring. People are moving in. That is not going to stop or reverse itself just because an area refuses to grow. Refusing to build is not going to stop population growth. It WILL contribute to high housing costs, homelessness and crime.

The growth is happening. What is needed is for home building to keep up with the growth.

And medium and high density require less infrastructure building that does single family housing, which by its nature spreads over a wide area.

[Eagle-Keeper]

@Safiel

The growth is occurring. People are moving in. That is not going to stop or reverse itself just because an area refuses to grow. Refusing to build is not going to stop population growth. It WILL contribute to high housing costs, homelessness and crime.

The growth is happening. What is needed is for home building to keep up with the growth.

And medium and high density require less infrastructure building that does single family housing, which by its nature spreads over a wide area.

I couldn’t find in the article the reasons for the oversupply of people moving in. Is it people going there to retire? Is it new businesses going there? Is it a popular destination for illegal immigrants? Not all growth in and of itself is good and as far as I’m concerned speaking as a person in an overcrowded state I’m perfectly fine with the people in the communities not wanting loads of high density residential housing in their communities. There’s plenty of less densely populated areas of the country that can accommodate growth.

[Eagle-Keeper]

@Toll_Collector

There’s a reason people move to or live in low density large areas. In some cases, pay a lot to do it. They’re trying to avoid the crap you’re mentioning.

Typically the politicians that want all this high density residential housing built in various communities live in multimillion dollar homes in exclusive neighborhoods. They sure as hell don’t want this near them!

[Toll_Collector]

@Eagle-Keeper

@Toll_Collector

There’s a reason people move to or live in low density large areas. In some cases, pay a lot to do it. They’re trying to avoid the crap you’re mentioning.

Typically the politicians that want all this high density residential housing built in various communities live in multimillion dollar homes in exclusive neighborhoods. They sure as hell don’t want this near them!

Of course not. But they have the money and means to stay clear of it no matter what they do. Another concern is property value.

[Eagle-Keeper]

@Eagle-Keeper

@Toll_Collector

There’s a reason people move to or live in low density large areas. In some cases, pay a lot to do it. They’re trying to avoid the crap you’re mentioning.
[/quote]

Typically the politicians that want all this high density residential housing built in various communities live in multimillion dollar homes in exclusive neighborhoods. They sure as hell don’t want this near them!

Of course not. But they have the money and means to stay clear of it no matter what they do. Another concern is property value.

As far as I’m concerned as a member of a community or a country for that matter, high density residential low income housing is not a good form of growth. There’s many people that talk very favorably about Norway and Denmark for example, they need to really look at how those countries grow.