|
Making cheap housing is a solved probelm. Making cheap housing while conforming to zoning, height, design, parking minimum and community reviews is the problem that still needs solving.
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:11 |
|
|
crazypeltast52 posted:Making cheap housing is a solved probelm. Making cheap housing while conforming to zoning, height, design, parking minimum and community reviews is the problem that still needs solving. Yeah, people are weirdly reluctant to have a shantytown spring up next door. loving NIMBYs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
There is a good amount of space between 'shantytown filled with hoodlums selling drugs to MY CHILDREN' and 'single family mansion on two to four city plots' and yet people always want the second and then housing prices go through the roof and no one can afford to live in decent places any more! Which means the lovely areas of town get shittier and people use that as a justification to never ever build anything less than mansions. Because the only people who deserve happiness are those who can afford it, and we're gonna make that number higher every single year until the guilotines come out because god forbid we should do anything at all that does not make a return of at least a hundred thousand dollars.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
And oddly enough you don't need any of those to prevent a "shanty town." The only state interest in a shanty town should be if the buildings are constructed safely with running water and such, and that's what building codes are for! Everything else is about keeping "those people" out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 05:29
|
|
|
Benagain posted:There is a good amount of space between 'shantytown filled with hoodlums selling drugs to MY CHILDREN' and 'single family mansion on two to four city plots' and yet people always want the second and then housing prices go through the roof and no one can afford to live in decent places any more! Which means the lovely areas of town get shittier and people use that as a justification to never ever build anything less than mansions. Because the only people who deserve happiness are those who can afford it, and we're gonna make that number higher every single year until the guilotines come out because god forbid we should do anything at all that does not make a return of at least a hundred thousand dollars. Imma take a controversial position here and say a house should have bedrooms. The suburbs are weird enough without people just plopping down a one room bunker in the middle of a lot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 05:51
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:Imma take a controversial position here and say a house should have bedrooms. The suburbs are weird enough without people just plopping down a one room bunker in the middle of a lot. They only need bedrooms if they have a hall already
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:Imma take a controversial position here and say a house should have bedrooms. The suburbs are weird enough without people just plopping down a one room bunker in the middle of a lot. Oh whoops, I missed that you were specifically responding to that lovely floor plan house last page. Yeah that's dumb. I'm just mad because I keep seeing poo poo like this in my city: https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20170203/jefferson-park/jefferson-park-mixed-income-affordable-apartments-full-circle-communities where people in a neighborhood that's 40% renters are fighting a new apartment proposal by saying everything up to and including 'black people might move in.'
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 07:02
|
|
|
So I'm pretty sure "hall" means entry hall, not hallway, based on what little of the overall layout we can see in that video. And who cares if that doesn't have a dedicated bedroom, presumably the living room turns into a sleeping area somehow. It's no different from a studio apartment or a tiny house. Why should the state prohibit someone building that on their own land, as long as it meets building codes?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 07:23
|
|
|
Benagain posted:where people in a neighborhood that's 40% renters are fighting a new apartment proposal by saying everything up to and including 'black people might move in.' 
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 07:23
|
|
|
Benagain posted:There is a good amount of space between 'shantytown filled with hoodlums selling drugs to MY CHILDREN' and 'single family mansion on two to four city plots' and yet people always want the second and then housing prices go through the roof and no one can afford to live in decent places any more! Which means the lovely areas of town get shittier and people use that as a justification to never ever build anything less than mansions. Because the only people who deserve happiness are those who can afford it, and we're gonna make that number higher every single year until the guilotines come out because god forbid we should do anything at all that does not make a return of at least a hundred thousand dollars. Are mcmansions really a problem in cities? Mine keeps building high density housing in the form of condos no one can afford. I guess there are a lot of people buying up the old craftsman houses to knock down and build some ugly behemoth that fills 3/4s of the lot. And then they get upset that they can't sell it for $500,000+.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 08:36
|
|
|
Benagain posted:Oh whoops, I missed that you were specifically responding to that lovely floor plan house last page. Yeah that's dumb. I'm just mad because I keep seeing poo poo like this in my city: https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20170203/jefferson-park/jefferson-park-mixed-income-affordable-apartments-full-circle-communities Apartment buildings are cool and good.  Studio apartments should definitely be in apartment buildings, though even then I'd prefer one bedrooms, because living in tiny boxes long-term seems to make some people crazier. But overall, apartments and condos make much more sense for city life than suburban sprawl. Heating, traffic, and infrastructure are all much more efficient with high density housing.FISHMANPET posted:So I'm pretty sure "hall" means entry hall, not hallway, based on what little of the overall layout we can see in that video. And who cares if that doesn't have a dedicated bedroom, presumably the living room turns into a sleeping area somehow. It's no different from a studio apartment or a tiny house. Why should the state prohibit someone building that on their own land, as long as it meets building codes? It would be pretty silly though, even if it meets building code. Are people going to be building 400 square foot concrete 'houses' on normal size lots? Or would this be a new sort of trailer park, a sea of tiny shame circles for poor people to live in? And if we're going to make tiny spaces for poor people, stacking them in apartment buildings just makes more sense than individual huts. You can get a single story 2 bedroom/1 bathroom house in under 900 square feet. Presumably if it was made using the same construction method as this house it would only cost about twice as much (a little less, since you wouldn't need to build two kitchens or two bathrooms) and would suit a much wider variety of family compositions over its 175 year projected lifespan. I'm not saying it should be illegal, but the use case presented in the video looks dumb as hell.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 09:54
|
|
|
What if.... we took a bunch of 400 square foot houses and sort of compacted them all together and removed the useless space between them. And then we stacked them on top of each other to make the best use of the land.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 10:19
|
|
|
MisterOblivious posted:What if.... we took a bunch of 400 square foot houses and sort of compacted them all together and removed the useless space between them. And then we stacked them on top of each other to make the best use of the land.  You are a friggin genius!I think what bugs me most about them is they remind me of the tiny shame cube you build for Sims when you want to spend the very least possible without driving them insane. Example: 
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
My companies 3d printer can't build those so it's a stupid idea. No, how about a glorified concrete pipe, that's a much better idea. Wait, how much do those massive precast concrete pipes go for? I might be about to start a new tiny
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 10:35
|
|
|
MisterOblivious posted:What if.... we took a bunch of 400 square foot houses and sort of compacted them all together and removed the useless space between them. And then we stacked them on top of each other to make the best use of the land. That’s commie talk.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 10:36
|
|
|
Uncle Enzo posted:Yo, is this house bothering you? Cause it looks like it's... leaning I see you. I watch that movie every year at Christmastime.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 13:57
|
|
|
Blindeye posted:"Why make a spacious precast concrete building when we can make the most inefficient floorplan possible and take the factory to the construction site, set it up, then move it to its next job. Surely this will be more efficient!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 15:09
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Are mcmansions really a problem in cities? Mine keeps building high density housing in the form of condos no one can afford. I guess there are a lot of people buying up the old craftsman houses to knock down and build some ugly behemoth that fills 3/4s of the lot. And then they get upset that they can't sell it for $500,000+. In the suburbs of D.C., yeah. There's a ton of planned communities in the western D.C. Suburbs that sprung up in the 50s/60s/70s with cookie cutter single family homes (around 1200-1600sft) on .25 acre lots. Flash forward to today, rich people buy up grandmas house (or better yet, grandmas house and the lot next door) when she kicks the bucket, bulldoze the house, and build a 2 or 3 story monstrosity that sticks out like a sore thumb and has 4' of clearance on three sides between the outside walls and the property line. Or grandma was lucky enough to have a house on a 1 acre lot, in which case a developer buys it and builds 4 mini McMansions on .25 acre lots after mowing all the trees down. Or grandma had a farm which is now being turned into "Beechwood Hills: New Single Family Homes Starting From $1.2 Million!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:Apartment buildings are cool and good. OK yes I agree, that building is stupid, I just don't think it should be illegal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 15:16
|
|
|
30 Goddamned Dicks posted:In the suburbs of D.C., yeah. There's a ton of planned communities in the western D.C. Suburbs that sprung up in the 50s/60s/70s with cookie cutter single family homes (around 1200-1600sft) on .25 acre lots. Flash forward to today, rich people buy up grandmas house (or better yet, grandmas house and the lot next door) when she kicks the bucket, bulldoze the house, and build a 2 or 3 story monstrosity that sticks out like a sore thumb and has 4' of clearance on three sides between the outside walls and the property line. Or grandma was lucky enough to have a house on a 1 acre lot, in which case a developer buys it and builds 4 mini McMansions on .25 acre lots after mowing all the trees down. Or grandma had a farm which is now being turned into "Beechwood Hills: New Single Family Homes Starting From $1.2 Million!" This is me and my neighborhood exactly. 20 min South of DC. I live in a neighborhood built in the early 1950s, brick and block homes of about 1000 sq ft on .25-.35 acre lots. Local builders buy out grandma for 400k. Raze her house and replace it with two snout nosed things at 850k each that are at the legal setback limits on all sides. I will try and get some pics of it. Raises our tax assessment quite a bit too when the median home value goes up so much in your zip code.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:The whole "3d printing a house" isn't a terrible idea, but the design they used to showcase it is stupid as gently caress. Curved walls suck. My guess is that is the maximum reach of their portable concrete printer. I am with everyone else; make good apartments rather than shame cubes (or cylinders).
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Mercury Ballistic posted:This is me and my neighborhood exactly. 20 min South of DC. I live in a neighborhood built in the early 1950s, brick and block homes of about 1000 sq ft on .25-.35 acre lots. Local builders buy out grandma for 400k. Raze her house and replace it with two snout nosed things at 850k each that are at the legal setback limits on all sides. I will try and get some pics of it. Raises our tax assessment quite a bit too when the median home value goes up so much in your zip code. Sounds like they're adding housing stock by replacing houses on inefficient lots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
knowonecanknow posted:This can't be the correct answer for coax cables. Did y'all miss the part where the coax is plugged into something shaped like an electrical outlet?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:
That looks like my first apartment only with a bigger bathroom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Did y'all miss the part where the coax is plugged into something shaped like an electrical outlet? That's completely normal in the days before keystone jacks became popular. There's really nothing wrong with any of this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Sounds like they're adding housing stock by replacing houses on inefficient lots. I think the implication is that the new construction is still a single-family home, just a grotesquely huge one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:I think the implication is that the new construction is still a single-family home, just a grotesquely huge one. Two houses where one used to be?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Did y'all miss the part where the coax is plugged into something shaped like an electrical outlet? That's a panduit low voltage quickport-like setup, so institutions only need to stock one kind of outlet faceplate
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
As much as I love the idea of apartments, the past three I've lived in have had a half inch of drywall as sound insulation between the units.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Sounds like they're adding housing stock by replacing houses on inefficient lots. With houses no one wants to buy and too expensive to rent unless you pack 10 college students into them and good luck with your neighbors putting up with a frat next door. And apartments are great in theory, but as far as I can tell they're replicating the same problem as the mcmansions. Not enough people can afford to live there so you've just wasted a ton of needed space on a largely empty structure.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Builders that build houses no-one wants to buy go out of buisiness very quickly. I bet those houses still sell for significant profits, if they're being built in quantity and you're not just talking about a single, boondoggle development somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Yeah this idea that developers are so stupid that they just keep sinking money into empty houses, condos, or apartments is just so ludicrous.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
The houses near me sell because it is a nice area not too far from the jobs in DC. My issue is it ups the density of people in an area where no measures are being taken to expand the the transportation infrastructure. Schools are already maxed, traffic is objectively worse each year, but home builders can keep cramming em in, cause they will sell and the county gets 2.5x the tax revenue for the lot. Also, the people who buy are in a completely different income demographic than the ones in the current homes. Rich vs middle class, and they attract rich people shops and prices, furthering the cost of living climb. I am not a social engineering type, but when your neighborhood is altered in many ways by a developer looking to make a buck, it is hard not to notice. Also, the build quality is generally questionable, and they get them up in like 3 months. Edit:. This neighborhood is the rare one where the big yards are used, kids roam on bikes all year, I know every neighbor for 300', and we all talk and drink together. Being outside a lot and interacting is part of being in the neighborhood, but a huge home with no yard, does not foster that mindset at all. Mercury Ballistic fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Mar 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:Yeah this idea that developers are so stupid that they just keep sinking money into empty houses, condos, or apartments is just so ludicrous. Clearly you need to spend more time observing what the developers actually do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Mercury Ballistic posted:Also, the bud quality is generally questionable Sorry you live in an area with lovely weed, but I don't think that's the developers' fault
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
The worstest weed, terrible. But DC has weed I guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:Yeah this idea that developers are so stupid that they just keep sinking money into empty houses, condos, or apartments is just so ludicrous. Yeah, because it's not like we just had a big old bubble which resulted in just that a few years ago...
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
I hear that about every project in my city, but the rent rolls in the new buildings are full of names that pay rent, with investors buying the apartment buildings not long after they get built, so I'm not sure exactly where the empty buildings are that no one can afford to live in, but maybe they are somewhere else? Honestly I can't pull FRED data from before 92, but our port-recession permit numbers for the MSA are below any point pre-recession.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
China has the empty buildings. Everywhere. They are building to keep the economy afloat and people employed, but it is all slowly falling apart and anyone who could sent their money to Vancouver or other such places.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:11 |
|
|
there wolf posted:Yeah, because it's not like we just had a big old bubble which resulted in just that a few years ago... That is definitely a thing that happened but I think it's pretty crazy to think the same thing is happening in the core cities and first ring suburbs in metro areas with growing economies and low unemployment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2017 20:17
|
|