Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage • Hacker News Board

Re: Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage

#321

Post by silverlyra » Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:50 PM UTC

akira2501 wrote: post #245

MattGrommes wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google 'missing middle'. There are tons of laws restricting what kind of homes can be built so we end up with whole swaths of cities being a single kind of home that is unaffordable and doesn't work for a lot of people.

We no longer build the types of urban homes that were popular when this was primarily an agrarian country, and this only happened because of zoning laws?

> when this was a primarily agrarian country

it sounds ironic, but much of the shift to suburban development patterns in the USA was indeed driven by the Great Migration into cities – specifically, the migration of formerly-enslaved Black Americans out of the rural south and into cities. US public policy was very explicit about disinvesting in cities and destroying vibrant urban neighborhoods, replacing them with freeways and parking lots.

today, large portions of US cities are zoned for exclusively single-family homes, and other zoning requirements like parking minimums, and minimum setback and lot sizes continue to slow urban, transit-oriented redevelopment.

Re: Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage

#322

Post by majormajor » Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:51 PM UTC

novok wrote: post #311

majormajor wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't sit on the train for an hour. In properly designed large cities the metro beats the car by a huge time margin unless they made cars so expensive by policy that nobody has a car and there is no traffic at that city as a result. You should meet some of my old coworkers in large cities in Asia... (you don't SIT on the train at all in rush hour!) In a smaller city it can work great! But in a small NA city, ev…

In China right? You know they are the equivalent of people in LA who live so far away from their job and have 2 hour car commutes right?

Not just in China. China is maybe the most interesting point of comparison with big cities in the US, though, since its cities are both much denser than most AND more sprawling than most.

And I don't follow your second question. If the trains OR freeways are full of people who can't afford to live closer to their jobs and have hours-long commutes, isn't that bad? And if it can happen even with extensive public transit, what does that tell us about fundamental assumptions about "city should grow forever, number must always go up!"?

Re: Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage

#323

Post by ProfessorLayton » Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:52 PM UTC

akira2501 wrote: post #244

foxyv wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To Start: Zoning laws, land use restrictions, parking minimums, property covenants and restrictions, traffic flow requirements, and minimum offsets.

Do these laws serve no other purpose other than to prevent building? Which of these laws can be discarded to 'solve' the housing problem? Which should we keep?

Actually yes they do more than just prevent building, they were also implemented to keep "undesirables" out of more affluent areas by making it too expensive for them. This is covered extensively in the book The Color of Law by Richard Rothstein, and is a great read.

Specifically:

- Huge min lot sizes

- Offsets

- Covenants*

We can start by removing/revising those.

(*Certain covenants are no longer enforceable today)

Re: Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage

#324

Post by hindsightbias » Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:52 PM UTC

tpmoney wrote: post #221

foxyv wrote: post #177

It takes significantly less materials to build a multi-dwelling apartment/condo/townhouse structure than a single family home. In addition, the required square footage per person drops by huge amounts when people can walk to nearby community centers, restaurants, kitchens, theaters, and bars. We are building massive 3-4k sq. ft. homes for families of four because all of their food, entertainment, and social needs are…

I would argue more than that the housing crisis is an “urban crisis” and a “fraying of the social fabric” crisis. By the first I mean the continued destruction of smaller towns and semi-rural areas. Even if single family homes are more expensive to build than multi family apartments, the fact is we have ridiculous amounts of space in this country. But most people for various reasons don’t want to live where the space…

> By the first I mean the continued destruction of smaller towns and semi-rural areas.

Self-destruction. They are not victims.

Re: Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage

#325

Post by namdnay » Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:52 PM UTC

WheatMillington wrote: post #271

foxyv wrote: post #177

It takes significantly less materials to build a multi-dwelling apartment/condo/townhouse structure than a single family home. In addition, the required square footage per person drops by huge amounts when people can walk to nearby community centers, restaurants, kitchens, theaters, and bars. We are building massive 3-4k sq. ft. homes for families of four because all of their food, entertainment, and social needs are…

What a dystopic vision, living in 50sqm pods and having our basic needs attended to by market participants, eschewing all self-reliance.

> eschewing all self-reliance

that's the thing though, the suburban/rural individual house lifestyle is a a bit of a cosplay self-reliance - it's completely dependent on someone else providing you with staggering quantities of fossil fuels

Re: Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage

#326

Post by trgn » Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:53 PM UTC

BytesAndGears wrote: post #283

sandworm101 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Everyone has their own bar, restaurant, theatre, and community center. As opposed to all the "urban lifestyle" people who readily offload their basic needs onto others. Some people are happy cooking their own basic foods. Others want them to be prepared, and their dished cleaned, by a team. Some people are happy with a beer fridge. Others want to go to a bar and pay a young person to smile and flirt while concocti…

What a weird straw-man. I live in a 600sq ft 2-bedroom apartment with my wife, and we cook nearly every meal at home, we rarely go out to bars, or spend much money in the city. But we have 6-7 cute cafes within a 5 minute walk, so we stop in for a coffee now and then. We have a big park that we can picnic in, three blocks away. There are a ton of fun things to do for cheap or free nearby. We don’t need a ton of space…

It's impossible to explain this qualitative difference in life to somebody who hasn't experienced it.

When the outside environment is attractive, apartment living is glorious. When the outside is gnarly (e.g. no amenities, bad neighbors, ...), apartment living is hell.

There's a weird tipping point, where all the negatives of living in an apartment evaporate. But it's hard to put it into numbers. You just "know", experience it.

Similar for houses, there's a weird tipping point where all the negatives of a home just congeal, and it's a drag and anchor, and the house starts to own you more than the other way around.

Re: Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage

#327

Post by majormajor » Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:54 PM UTC

foxyv wrote: post #310

majormajor wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We are building massive 3-4k sq. ft. homes for families of four because all of their food, entertainment, and social needs are not met by their community. You assume it's a necessity thing instead of a desire+wealth thing. Yet the history of the wealthy and powerful "escaping" to large estates goes back centuries (millenia!). Additionally, the housing affordability crisis is also happening in European cities with 4…

If I can walk less than a mile to a theatre and pay $10 to watch a movie on a giant screen, I won't want to pay $10k to create a home theatre. If I can get food from around the world by walking 10 minutes to 20+ restaurants, I won't want to pay $20k to have an 800 sq.ft. kitchen. If I can entertain my guests at a community center or beer garden, I won't need to have a $15k patio and outdoor bar area. People pay absur…

> If I can walk less than a mile to a theatre and pay $10 to watch a movie on a giant screen, I won't want to pay $10k to create a home theatre.

What theater are you used to that lets you pick what's shown for $10, vs just a dozen or two movies at once?

> If I can get food from around the world by walking 10 minutes to 20+ restaurants, I won't want to pay $20k to have an 800 sq.ft. kitchen.

What restaurants are you going to where it's cost-effective to eat every meal out instead of doing some of your cooking at home?

> If I can entertain my guests at a community center or beer garden, I won't need to have a $15k patio and outdoor bar area.

What community center are you going to where there's never scheduling conflicts or events? Where you can choose your own landscaping and plants to grow, and do whatever hobbies you want? Where your pet can bask in the sun all day?

Get a bigger imagination about why people want personal space!

(You might also be suprised by how many people in the US can already drive <=10minutes to all the things on your list - and wouldn't see that as a big hindrance compared to walking - and STILL get versions of them in their own home too, to point at some existing evidence to the contrary.)

Re: Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage

#328

Post by creer » Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:54 PM UTC

creer wrote: post #258

Much of the conversation here derails the original post: we desperately need less expensive construction processes (overall, including permitting etc). Even when the local community makes it not-worthwhile to build affordable housing.

The article points out a range of tradeoffs for mass timber (and I'm not arguing that mass timber should by itself solve the construction cost issue - it's more interesting as one more very different direction). More directions will be helpful for finding more cost effective solutions for different buildings.

For one thing mass timber allows far more floors than current "5 over 1" construction - because of better fire behavior. In current cities that is certainly a useful feature. At least in cities that do grant construction permits...

That should be helpful even in cities that grant ENOUGH construction permits for that to influence unit affordability.

Re: Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage

#329

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:55 PM UTC

PheonixPharts wrote: post #160

tptacek wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Upzoning is a win-win for existing homeowners. Land doesn't get expropriated to build multifamily; it's purchased. Multifamily is a more efficient use of a lot than SFH, so it's purchased at a premium. NIMBYs worry that the mere existence of nearby multifamily will decrease their home value. In rare and unsympathetic cases (places like Winnetka in Illinois) that may be true. But in the bedroom neighborhoods of big ci…

> NIMBYs worry that the mere existence of nearby multifamily will decrease their home value. In rare and unsympathetic cases ... that may be true. It's not rare. I've known multiple people, myself included, who have decided not to make an offer on a single family home because it neighbors a gross apartment building. The vast majority of home buyers want single family homes . I don't know where HN obsession with verti…

[deleted]

Re: Mass timber is great, but it will not solve the housing shortage

#330

Post by yitianjian » Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:55 PM UTC

majormajor wrote: post #306

novok wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't sit on the train for an hour. In properly designed large cities the metro beats the car by a huge time margin unless they made cars so expensive by policy that nobody has a car and there is no traffic at that city as a result. Americans often think the shitty experience they have in their country applies universally. Ex: The bus & light rail is bad and slow, so therefore it will always be bad everywhere. Am…

> You don't sit on the train for an hour. In properly designed large cities the metro beats the car by a huge time margin unless they made cars so expensive by policy that nobody has a car and there is no traffic at that city as a result. You should meet some of my old coworkers in large cities in Asia... (you don't SIT on the train at all in rush hour!) In a smaller city it can work great! But in a small NA city, ev…

The traffic in a medium sized NA city like Atlanta or Dallas can be a lot better than it is now, and it's definitely not comparable to Shanghai, London or Tokyo.