There are several ways in which the cost of housing and transportation got jacked up. The most important of these is the deliberate creation of suburban sprawl. But before I go into that, what is the reason people want to live in the burbs as compared to the city? I suspect the reason is that they want space - a yard to grow flowers and vegetables, to have barbecue parties and for some, a swimming pool. Can't blame anyone for wanting space, seems a natural enough desire. But must the need for a yard be met only in the present wasteful and therefore costly way?
In a contemporary suburb at least half the lot is unnecessary. Houses are plunked in the middle. If they were near the street as most older houses are, you could have the same size back yard on a lot maybe one-third the length. Ranch style houses make no sense in a climate that is either cold or damp, but look at how many of these sit lengthwise, parallel with the street, making the lots wider than need be. Build one and a half or two stories if you want floor space and your lot can be that much smaller. Suburban streets are now as wide as what highways were back in the 1950's. The larger the lot - the more it costs. The greater the sprawl, the more it costs for municipalities to install utilities and therefore the greater the taxes.
There is also the tendency to overbuild. The big families of the late '50's-early '60's were raised in 1100 sq. foot dwellings. This was jacked to 2000 sq ft in the 1980's. Today you have the imbecility of the mini-mansion. People with one child are rattling around in 4000 sq. ft. barns. Every addition square foot is at least another $150 added to the cost. Smaller, older houses are often bulldozed to make room for these future white elephants.
The insane way these new "communities" are designed also makes for expense. Work and consumption are separated from living space - often by many miles. Shopping centers are surrounded by acres of parking lots, as are the "technoparks".
Rather than integrating apartment buildings and condos into the street along with the duplexes and SFD's, they are set down in the middle of vast windswept lawns, and the inevitable parking lots. Sprawl makes it too expensive for municipalities to run an efficient bus system, so people must rely on cars, which accounts for the high cost of transportation. Much of the wealth spent on transit is wasted. Rather than expensive expressways, rather than unnecessary tunneling for rapid transit, they could run light rail at ground level, but don't.
Consider an alternative - much denser, integrated villages outside of the city connected to the center by light rail. One car per family and dwellings at half the price. If you wanted to put a "house and a yard" into virtually everyone's hands, you could factory built 1000 sq. ft. two story plus basement row houses having a 1000 sq. ft yard. This works out to 22 houses per acre, rather than 5 to 7 in your typical burb.
Everyone knows that if you buy a house for $200,000, you will end up shelling out at least twice that before your mortgage is up. The unnecessarily high cost of mortgages is another feature which jacks up the price of housing. If you artificially inflate housing costs, as mentioned above, then slap on a 4-10% interest rate, it will be difficult for most people to afford housing. There is no reason why loans for a primary residence for the average income person should not be granted at cost - say a maximum of two percent. (1)
1. This figure would break down to one percent to cover handling costs and one percent to help build the fund for future loans. Wealthy people and the purchasers of secondary dwellings would get bank rate. Average income and below would get loans at cost. Those between the average and the wealthy would be assisted on a graduated income scale. To stop speculators no one could sell a dwelling purchased at cost loan for five years without a financial penalty. The Canadian Mortgage and Housing Association, a government institution, already assists mortgages, a more radical or “Proudhonian Peoples Bank” type institution, could put dwellings in everyone’s hands.
For further reading see: "Room For Thought - Rethinking Home And Community Design" by Avi Friedman
No comments:
Post a Comment