Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

centerforbuilding.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 215 posts

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#201

Post by xboxnolifes »

fusslo wrote: post #197
xboxnolifes wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can't help but wonder if this is really a trend people are interested in, OR is there some effort to sway public opinion into deregulating housing. Is there a difference? I mean, if public opinion is swayed, then does that not mean they are now interested in it?

Do you think it would make a difference if it was revealed that tobacco companies paid doctors to smoke and endorse smoking to make the public feel like smoking is safe? Yes. Found the shill! You working for Blackrock??

If it was found out that people are lying then yes, it's a problem. I was assuming the claim was less "these articles are lies" and more "these articles aren't grassroots".

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#202

Post by foofie »

tempsy wrote: post #124
foofie wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People just want detached houses to be cheaper. Most aren’t dreaming about affording a 3 or 4 bed apartment. I'm skeptical of your claim. From what I read in social networks, newer generations of Americans don't even believe they will ever afford an apartment, let alone a detached house. I seriously doubt that there's a generation of choosing beggars who only accept living in a type of home they can't possibly even…

I don’t know what you mean by this at all. I don’t think there’s any connection between what someone wants and what someone can afford. And the point is a 4 bedroom condo or apartment in an expensive urban city is going to be significantly more expensive than a house in some cheaper suburb. Lots of people do choose to move out of cities into suburbs for this reason. That isn’t a new thing.

> And the point is a 4 bedroom condo or apartment in an expensive urban city is going to be significantly more expensive than a house in some cheaper suburb.

You're making hypothetical claims comparing "expensive urban city" with "cheaper suburbs". Your hypothetical scenario would only be valid if there are no affordable urban areas and there is no tradeoff in living in the boonies, and the only way that people could conceivably live is in >3bedroom mansions. The whole world does not live like this, including the US. It sounds like the real estate version of "let them eat cake".

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#203

Post by bobthepanda »

foofie wrote: post #61
bobthepanda wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing to keep in mind is that in the US there are often things like setback restrictions and distance separation requirements such, so a small increase in square footage can be the difference between a building fitting on a lot, and not. You can of course buy more lots to combine but that takes more money, and more time, because you have to wait for a bunch of adjacent lot owners to sell.

> One thing to keep in mind is that in the US there are often things like setback restrictions and distance separation requirements such, so a small increase in square footage can be the difference between a building fitting on a lot, and not. Any country with urban planning and building codes imposes this sort of restrictions.

I didn’t really say that as in only the US does it, but more in case I got an HN “well ackshually” about some other place.

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#204

Post by wolverine876 »

bluGill wrote: post #176
wolverine876 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That misstates the issue in two ways: > If you need to live in NY ... If you can move to New Jersey ... That assumes people live in NY because they must, and move to NJ if they can. IME, it's usually quite the opposite! But of course many do prefer - well, they'd prefer Westchester. :) > The cost of living makes it possible to own a large house in town near everything there is to do, so would they continue to live in…

> including midtown Manhatten. If someone could afford a nice ranch house with a yard there, they'd buy it! :) That is the point: people are living in small places in NY not because they prefer small places, but because overall that is the best compromise for their current life situation. Change something about your life situation and the best compromise changes.

> people are living in small places in NY not because they prefer small places

Right, who said otherwise?

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#205

Post by nottorp »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #193
nottorp wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the kitchen has a refrigerator smaller than the one my American best friend uses for beer It's possible that you can walk 5 min to get more beer while he has to drive 30 minutes?

The idea that the average US city/suburb is a 30 minute drive from everything is a serious strawman built up (seemingly) by the collective internet. There are a lot of issues I personally have with car dependence and road infrastructure in the US, but the average/median drive is reasonable. Like, 5-15 minutes to get to most things.

Well, no one noticing the walk vs drive part only reinforces the strawman...

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#206

Post by criddell »

mperham wrote: post #96
criddell wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could just put a staircase in the middle of the apartment and have two or three levels, no? That's how lots of homes are built, is there some reason reason why some apartments couldn't be like that as well.

Those are called townhomes.

That’s not the kind of home Fijan or Elias are talking about. Those don’t generally have the problem of the hallway cutting the building in half.

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#207

Post by nojvek »

throwway120385 wrote: post #57
pwb25 wrote: post #10

basically everything I read about the USA housing market seems so weird, especially in SF/Silicon Valley. They makret themselves as being this "tech area" yet they have 100 year old houses with limits of 2 floors. or big suburbs without anything in them. Where is the uber, airbnb and doordash for housing?

Real Estate is a weird thing, because literally every lot is different. If you pick two lots of the same square footage and compare them, even in the same neighborhood or even with adjacent lot lines, things like soil conditions and presence or absence of subsurface water can dramatically change the cost of construction or make your lot totally unbuildable. Buildings are living things that are constantly being change…

My biggest lesson after visiting SV multiple times is that the companies are super forward thinking when it comes to software.

But the city council is pretty incompetent. It is a govt monopoly with no real incentive to be competent.

The zoning laws don’t allow building multi story apartments. The city council drags their feet for years to approve building permits.

People literally shit on the road. Crime is rampant. You’d be driving on the road, glass is smashed and someone takes your bag.

Trains don’t run on time. Some stink. You could spend a million and barely get a shack for a house.

Go to any of the modern Asian or European cities and there is a stark difference. They’re clean, trains run on time, they’re fast, low crime, little homelessness.

California governance is corrupt and incompetent. They earn the most from taxes compared to any other state. This is not a money problem. It is a “things are shit because we want them to stay that way.” problem.

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#208

Post by sspiff »

sandworm101 wrote: post #63
sspiff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Just everything in Europe is tiny. T i n y. And frankly, it's not that much cheaper over here either. I would argue the other way, as a European, I've been to multiple places Asia and the Middle East and everything is either the same size or smaller than in Europe. I haven't been to Africa or the Americas, but I'd say from my perspective, that things in the US are just extra large.

There are many reasons behind this. It isn't just a fashion for bigger things. I chalk much of it up to differences in work culture. My European friends often talk about pickup up food on the way home from work, dropping in at a store to buy ingredients for dinner. I don't have time to shop like that. My food run is once a week. That means more food in a bigger fridge. They also go out to eat far more than we in Nort…

Once a week food runs are common in Europe as well, going out for breakfast is a fairly rare luxury.

The difference is maybe that often times you can supplement your weekly food run with small trips to the corner store during the week.

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#209

Post by fusslo »

bluGill wrote: post #142
fusslo wrote: post #77

I keep seeing these articles pop up. The goal seems to be getting rid of regulations that hinder building European style apartments. I can't help but wonder if this is really a trend people are interested in, OR is there some effort to sway public opinion into deregulating housing. Why do the article ALWAYS mention Europe? Is it a marketing tactic designed to trigger our 'america-europe inferiority complex'? Is it an…

I'm not clear on that either. We know that in the US newer apartments with all those rules do better in fires than older apartments. We also know that overall housing in Europe does better in fires than housing in the US. The people pushing for this want you to think that the US would do better in fires to adopt European regulations - but a close reading of the above two facts makes it obvious that we are not compari…

Yeah. I dont have facts, just feelings. When i read these articles, i get the same feeling I get talking to those people in yhe mall who stop you trying to sell you hand cleaner, ya know

Yes, washing your hands is good

Yes, some soaps are better than others

But I wasnt looking to buy soap, and I really dont want to spend $20 on 8oz.

I think I also have been struggling with how we in the US have lost a lot of community spaces in the last 50 or so years

Arcades are gone, malls are dying, parks have few people in them, government buildings are fortresses, small town shops were killed by wallmart, restaurants are massive chains selling microwave meals, main streets are four lanes of traffic…

I long for interesting neighborhoods with shops and restaurants I can walk to.

But even after reading these articles I am still unconvinced deregulating apartments is the answer.

Maybe I just fear deregulation since I keep hearing how the deregulation of the 80s and of the housing market was not a good thing

Re: Why we can’t build family-sized apartments in North America

#210

Post by mperham »

mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #125
mperham wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Americans simply want a lot more space. I'm American and I don't. Stop stereotyping.

Its a generalization based on facts about median size. For single family homes in the 1960's it was 1500sqft and in the 2000's its around 2100-2200sqft https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/programs-surveys/a...

And that growth is due to US cities all jumping on single family zoning as method of segregation, post civil rights. If the only thing you can do with a lot is build a single house, you make it as large as the market will support to maximize sale price. When only rich people can afford houses in a neighborhood, it becomes white only. Also known as gentrification.

I live in a wealthy, 99% white zip code and that’s exactly how it happened.

Post reply on HN