Zoning costs

Something to muse about!

formatting link
/excerpt

A central reason why housing is so expensive in Portland (and most other Oregon cities) is that the government has created an artificial shortage of homes through zoning and other types of land-use regulation.

A recent study by the Brookings Institution found this to be true on a national scale as well. The authors examined land-use polices among the nation's 50 largest cities, and found that those cities with the least amount of zoning - Dallas, San Antonio and Houston - had the cheapest rents and the lowest home prices of all cities. Not only that, the three Texas regions had lower concentrations of poverty, higher home ownership rates, and larger concentrations of college graduates than cities with strict growth controls such as urban growth boundaries.

/end

Reply to
Matt Barrow
Loading thread data ...

The basis (2.05MB):

formatting link
Austin is the city with all the college graduates, its not a region.

Population growth has to stop. The San Antonio and surrounding areas, rely on the Edwards Aquifer for its only adequate water supply Between the year long drought and sprawling residential areas eating into where rainwater would normally enter the aquifer from the surface, its getting dangerously low. West of Austin, some wells have run dry.

In fat times of rainfall, this isn't a problem, and hasn't really been a serious problem till now. As populations eat away at the aquifer's source of water by covering it with buildings, houses, roads and parking lots; and increasingly continue to use its waters, the next drought will be dire for all the inhabitants in the area.

Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth, and San Antonio all have the surburbanite mindset of moving to the new housing developments always on its fringes or just outside their city limits. Later to all be incorporated into their cities shortly afterwards. Its a vicious cycle. This is not urban growth, its incorporated new housing development with maximum taxable and income growth to go with it for the city. Barely developed land or undeveloped land for housing and commercial buildings has no realized money return. Older housing is typically very run down almost inhabitable, very inexpensive to rent or buy by middle income standards. There is no need to regulate this if the money return for the municipality is there. That's the bottom line, population growth (tax base) and uncontrolled land usage.

Reply to
Jonny

Jawohl, mein furher!

[remainder of clueless bureaucrat sniveling snipped]
Reply to
Matt Barrow

Reply to
Steve

Wrong; try again.

Wrong, I suspect you have virtually ZERO clue what capitalism is.

Confirmed the above.

Come back after you're done kissing your professors testicles, and you get half a clue and we'll discuss.

Reply to
Matt Barrow

I might add that everything "Steve" posted so far is just a barf-back from our current goofball academia and the MSM. EVERYTHING! Not a single piece of substance, just barfback.

Reply to
Matt Barrow

I never went anywhere. I am not an academic and graduated from a major U about 23 years ago.

I had to take some lame Sociology class to graduate. I received a C because I strongly advocated allowing gentrification to run its course unrestricted. The prof. Dr Horowitz said that I had no facts and gave me a C. She just did not agree.

Back to the issue at hand. I have worked in City Planning in two cities. I have seen the effects of both adequate zoning and inadequate zoning. So, I do have a degree and a professional background in this issue. Oh yea, I lived in Mexico City when I was young. Talk about unrestricted whatever. You could taste the air and smell the water. We had to get the house rewired just to make it safe to live in and this was a nice house in an exclusive area. No zoning, no building codes and thousands die in an earthquake when only several dozen would die in this country.

Reply to
Steve

Everyone better listen to everything Steve says because he was already smarter than his college professor when he was still a teenager. And he didn't need any facts back then, either.

Reply to
JerryD(upstateNY)

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.