CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, JULY 2, 2019 OR THEREAFTER
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, JULY 2, 2019 OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
“INVENTORY SHOWS HOUSING SOLUTION WON’T BE EASY OR CHEAP”
Build
3.5 million new dwelling units by 2025 and California’s housing shortage will
be solved, Gov. Gavin Newsom prescribed during his campaign last year and
several times since.
Dense building near transit
lines and light rail stations is the best way to reach that goal, others
contend, claiming that will also cut gridlock on many streets and freeways.
Californians have been told
all this for more than two years by vocal officials like San Francisco’s
Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener, author of the proposed zoning-override law
known as SB 50, who rails against single-family residences and the local zoning
that protects them.
No one doubts this state has a
severe housing crisis, with at least 100,000 homeless individuals living on the
streets and millions more unable to buy homes even at “affordable” prices.
But the
simple formulae peddled by many state politicians may not hold water.
That’s
the startling upshot of statistics reported the other day by the Irvine real
estate information firm MetroStudy. First-quarter data from the usually accurate
company showed 3,750 newly-built homes went unsold in Orange, Los Angeles,
Riverside and San Bernardino counties during the first quarter of this year.
That
left unsold housing inventory up 22 percent from last year and 37 percent above
the five-year average. It is causing a slowdown in construction, with new home
development down 18 percent from last year.
This
will hardly let California achieve any rise from last year’s level of 77,000
new housing units, let alone get to the annual level of 350,000 or more so
eagerly anticipated by Newsom and others.
The
reasons for this are varied, but clear. One is economics. When it costs more
than $425,000 to build an average apartment or condominium in a 100-unit
project (the 2016 cost), most units must be sold for more than $600,000 apiece
in order to push the price of so-called “affordable” units within each project
down to $350,000 or less, if developers are to make any profit. That’s simple
math. And if developers don’t profit, they won’t build anything, no matter what
Newsom urges.
The
current surplus of new housing shows there may not be enough qualified
potential buyers and renters today who can afford the desired new units, even
“affordable” ones. The obvious question: without buyers and renters, who’s
going to build all that expensive new housing?
It
might have to be government, if things continue as they are. But government
would need about $200 billion to reach Newsom’s long-term housing goals if
development costs remain steady. How likely are voters to okay that much in new
bonds or taxes?
Then
there’s the steady increase in the number of existing homes listed for sale, up
this spring by about 23 percent from last year as owners try to cash in on
boomtime real estate prices. Older homes often draw more potential buyers than
new housing because they generally cost a bit less than comparable new ones
with ultra-modern appliances and solar panels.
All
this leads to questions about who would put up the four- and eight-story
buildings in Wiener’s stalled plan for dense housing.
With
today’s inventory levels, why would developers help that effort, especially if
denser, smaller new urban units begin competing for buyers and renters with new
housing in the far suburbs?
Then
there’s the Newsom/Wiener theory that denser housing can lessen traffic because
virtually all new residents will ride mass transit.
This
has never happened in California, but the idea nevertheless persists. It will
soon get a major test in both Northern and Southern California, where big new
apartment and condo developments are nearing the sales and rental stage very
near Bay Area Rapid Transit stations in Oakland and Metro Rail stops in Los
Angeles.
Will
buyers and renters for most of those new units appear quickly? With
parking-space requirements reduced from prior levels, will the new units take
traffic off the streets and freeways, or will things just get more crowded?
And if
things don’t work out according to the Wiener/Newsom theories, will they change
their approach and look for something that might really work?
-30-
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough, The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough, The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net
No comments:
Post a Comment