ADUs legal everywhere?

Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes

FACT SHEET: Biden-⁠Harris Administration Announces Immediate Steps to Increase Affordable Housing Supply

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/09/01/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-immediate-steps-to-increase-affordable-housing-supply/

Will local governments change zoning to allow for ADUs/bypass existing zoning variance processes? ——- I could see it happening in Philadelphia, where the new progressive city council has their eyes on housing and tenants rights.

At some point will it come from the Fed, similar to how California did nationwide. ——— I don’t know if the current administration has the political capital to pull it off, but it seems like they have the will.

What do you think?

If it happens near you will you pivot your business to take advantage of it? How would that look for you? ———- for me I think it means I would convert my primary into a duplex, but wait until my family is ready to move (5+ years). It is the only SFH I have that is big enough to split.

1 Reply

47 views

Most Popular Reply

Nathan GesnerBusiness Member

Moderator

Real Estate Broker · Cody, WY · Member since 2010 · 28k+ posts · 41k+ votes

Manufactured homes are the #1 solution to the affordable housing issue, but government won't allow anyone to build more manufactured home parks. It's already extremely difficult to find a place to park one, especially a nice one.

More four-plexes for "black and brown people"? Guess which investors are most likely to be hurt by government policies? I think the majority of mom-and-pop Landlords that are losing their shirts due to the eviction moratorium are minorities.

I didn't read the whole thing but I can tell you this: there is a major disconnect between what they put on paper and what happens in reality. I wouldn't bet on any helpful changes in the near future.

The DIY Landlord Book4.7248 Reviews

Website View Page

7 Reply

See this reply in the discussion

44 Replies

Jump to latestLatest

Sort by

Gary L Wallman
Rental Property Investor · Beavercreek OH · Member since 2018 · 422 posts · 970 votes
5y
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Nathan Gesner:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Most people can barely afford what they've got, so it's typically only people with money that can afford to build an ADU and then they'll rent it for a high price.
I'm a fan of less-restrictive laws, but have reservations about the long-term impact. When you double the number of residents on 25% of the lots, that's a big increase in parking. How does it impact traffic flow? Pollution? Landfill? Water and electric demands? Wastewater treatment? And it may work well in an upper-class community where people are better citizens. Population density and low-income do not produce good results.
Anway, I hope it works.

Nathan as for the new ADU rules Portland is the poster child for this as well as most of Oregon.. I can do an ADU here in Lake Oswego and if I put a covenant on it that its a true granny unit direct relative going to live in it then NO permit fee's If I am going to rent it permit for a ADU is about 50k in our market so thats before you put a spade in the ground. Portland Metro has very high density rules and has had for years so its already here.. I built 3 homes in city of Portland in 2019/2020 it was a 40X100 lot and I put 3 SFR's on it 2 were attached and one was free standing.. zoning did NOT ALLOW for any off road parking.. I wanted to go under and have parking below but that was not allowed the city planners want people to take metro and ride bikes .. so yes you look at the street and its a mess when those 3 units bring 3 to 6 cars with them and no place to park .. the laws are changing now to get even more density in these areas of SFR.. Every lot now can have a duplex.. So you can imagine in areas were you have stately 1 to 3 million dollar homes and someone all of a sudden wants to build a duplex LOL.. not popular.. I just sold one in the Historic district close to downtown and the investors is putting ADU in Basement building a garage with ADU above then on the side lot another ADU.. and that house was basically a tear down I sold for 700k.. so to make the math work he is going to be in this 1.2 at least and now you have the main house an adu above garage an Adu in basement and the other adu.. so rents will all be well over 2k per door to make that work.. so affordable Na planners and city fathers puff their chest out about how great they are doing proving additional housing YA..

Jay,
A 50,000 dollar permit fee for an ADU is freaking obscene. Why do taxpayers tolerate this nonsense?
Then our politicians wonder why there are homeless people on the sidewalk in front of their businesses.
Give me a break. Throw these people out of office immediately!
Gary

2 Reply
Jay HinrichsBusiness Member
Real Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes
5y
Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Nathan Gesner:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Most people can barely afford what they've got, so it's typically only people with money that can afford to build an ADU and then they'll rent it for a high price.
I'm a fan of less-restrictive laws, but have reservations about the long-term impact. When you double the number of residents on 25% of the lots, that's a big increase in parking. How does it impact traffic flow? Pollution? Landfill? Water and electric demands? Wastewater treatment? And it may work well in an upper-class community where people are better citizens. Population density and low-income do not produce good results.
Anway, I hope it works.

Nathan as for the new ADU rules Portland is the poster child for this as well as most of Oregon.. I can do an ADU here in Lake Oswego and if I put a covenant on it that its a true granny unit direct relative going to live in it then NO permit fee's If I am going to rent it permit for a ADU is about 50k in our market so thats before you put a spade in the ground. Portland Metro has very high density rules and has had for years so its already here.. I built 3 homes in city of Portland in 2019/2020 it was a 40X100 lot and I put 3 SFR's on it 2 were attached and one was free standing.. zoning did NOT ALLOW for any off road parking.. I wanted to go under and have parking below but that was not allowed the city planners want people to take metro and ride bikes .. so yes you look at the street and its a mess when those 3 units bring 3 to 6 cars with them and no place to park .. the laws are changing now to get even more density in these areas of SFR.. Every lot now can have a duplex.. So you can imagine in areas were you have stately 1 to 3 million dollar homes and someone all of a sudden wants to build a duplex LOL.. not popular.. I just sold one in the Historic district close to downtown and the investors is putting ADU in Basement building a garage with ADU above then on the side lot another ADU.. and that house was basically a tear down I sold for 700k.. so to make the math work he is going to be in this 1.2 at least and now you have the main house an adu above garage an Adu in basement and the other adu.. so rents will all be well over 2k per door to make that work.. so affordable Na planners and city fathers puff their chest out about how great they are doing proving additional housing YA..

Jay,
A 50,000 dollar permit fee for an ADU is freaking obscene. Why do taxpayers tolerate this nonsense?
Then our politicians wonder why there are homeless people on the sidewalk in front of their businesses.
Give me a break. Throw these people out of office immediately!
Gary

Gary they hit us from every angle.. ON my phase 3 of the current project 30 of 90 new builds. we have to build a 1200 foot pedestrian path that hooks up to nowhere.. just in case sometime in the next 50 the trails go through but thats probably 100k.. And now the Fire Marshall again after the fact.. wants 1000 feet of 8 inch water main outside of our project there would be zero homes protected with this water line. thats 100k.. so right there on 30 lots about 8k a lot increase.. then in this city add 30k for permits and other 50k per lot to put in sewer water power etc to their standards and well you have 88k per lot round up to 100k because its always more.. Before you even bought the dirt.. so how are we to build 200k affordable homes in our area.. add in 150 a foot for vertical and now cost is right at 400k or a little more per house. add in carrying costs and builder profit and you can see why a 2k sq ft home needs to sell for about 600k in our market to have a reasonable return on risk .
In charleston SC permits are 5k per house total although they just hit us with some extension stuff we never had to do a few years back but still. so 500k is starter in the inner city..
I am building in N. FLA right now and we can put out a dinger 1200 sq ft 3 2 brand new and make a profit at 225k. investors are buying these up from us.. as they are nice rentals.. really bullet proof houses with very little wood .. and modern codes. strong demand and I can see why given other markets.
Its why this whole RE game is so very market specific one size simply does not fit all. And U folks that have a sand box filled with homes you can buy for far less than replacement cost your in the drivers seat when you choose correctly.. If I lived there thats what i would be doing :)

Podcast Guest on Show #222
JLH Capital Partners51 Review
Website View Page
2 Reply
Fernan Nava
Rental Property Investor · Barstow, CA · Member since 2015 · 131 posts · 102 votes
5y
@Max T.pardon my French Max. Give me a problem of this magnitude that the government has fixed in say the last 30 years n m with you. California is the epicenter for homelessness in the country there has been a one new party rule they have the resources and still can’t fix the problem. The states can’t even give out the money provided by the federal government for rent assistance. Can you imagine not knowing how to give out money! That’s bananas. In almost any problem that we have the more the government gets involved they make the problem worse.
1 Reply
Gary L Wallman
Rental Property Investor · Beavercreek OH · Member since 2018 · 422 posts · 970 votes
5y
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Nathan Gesner:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Most people can barely afford what they've got, so it's typically only people with money that can afford to build an ADU and then they'll rent it for a high price.
I'm a fan of less-restrictive laws, but have reservations about the long-term impact. When you double the number of residents on 25% of the lots, that's a big increase in parking. How does it impact traffic flow? Pollution? Landfill? Water and electric demands? Wastewater treatment? And it may work well in an upper-class community where people are better citizens. Population density and low-income do not produce good results.
Anway, I hope it works.

Nathan as for the new ADU rules Portland is the poster child for this as well as most of Oregon.. I can do an ADU here in Lake Oswego and if I put a covenant on it that its a true granny unit direct relative going to live in it then NO permit fee's If I am going to rent it permit for a ADU is about 50k in our market so thats before you put a spade in the ground. Portland Metro has very high density rules and has had for years so its already here.. I built 3 homes in city of Portland in 2019/2020 it was a 40X100 lot and I put 3 SFR's on it 2 were attached and one was free standing.. zoning did NOT ALLOW for any off road parking.. I wanted to go under and have parking below but that was not allowed the city planners want people to take metro and ride bikes .. so yes you look at the street and its a mess when those 3 units bring 3 to 6 cars with them and no place to park .. the laws are changing now to get even more density in these areas of SFR.. Every lot now can have a duplex.. So you can imagine in areas were you have stately 1 to 3 million dollar homes and someone all of a sudden wants to build a duplex LOL.. not popular.. I just sold one in the Historic district close to downtown and the investors is putting ADU in Basement building a garage with ADU above then on the side lot another ADU.. and that house was basically a tear down I sold for 700k.. so to make the math work he is going to be in this 1.2 at least and now you have the main house an adu above garage an Adu in basement and the other adu.. so rents will all be well over 2k per door to make that work.. so affordable Na planners and city fathers puff their chest out about how great they are doing proving additional housing YA..

Jay,
A 50,000 dollar permit fee for an ADU is freaking obscene. Why do taxpayers tolerate this nonsense?
Then our politicians wonder why there are homeless people on the sidewalk in front of their businesses.
Give me a break. Throw these people out of office immediately!
Gary

Gary they hit us from every angle.. ON my phase 3 of the current project 30 of 90 new builds. we have to build a 1200 foot pedestrian path that hooks up to nowhere.. just in case sometime in the next 50 the trails go through but thats probably 100k.. And now the Fire Marshall again after the fact.. wants 1000 feet of 8 inch water main outside of our project there would be zero homes protected with this water line. thats 100k.. so right there on 30 lots about 8k a lot increase.. then in this city add 30k for permits and other 50k per lot to put in sewer water power etc to their standards and well you have 88k per lot round up to 100k because its always more.. Before you even bought the dirt.. so how are we to build 200k affordable homes in our area.. add in 150 a foot for vertical and now cost is right at 400k or a little more per house. add in carrying costs and builder profit and you can see why a 2k sq ft home needs to sell for about 600k in our market to have a reasonable return on risk .
In charleston SC permits are 5k per house total although they just hit us with some extension stuff we never had to do a few years back but still. so 500k is starter in the inner city..
I am building in N. FLA right now and we can put out a dinger 1200 sq ft 3 2 brand new and make a profit at 225k. investors are buying these up from us.. as they are nice rentals.. really bullet proof houses with very little wood .. and modern codes. strong demand and I can see why given other markets.
Its why this whole RE game is so very market specific one size simply does not fit all. And U folks that have a sand box filled with homes you can buy for far less than replacement cost your in the drivers seat when you choose correctly.. If I lived there thats what i would be doing :)

Jay,
It's such a shame people who have never built a freaking thing run our government. Why we put up with it, I'm sure I don't understand.
As an aside, where are you building in North Florida? Sold a beachfront home in Panama City Beach last year, Beautiful beach, wonderful tourists and terrible infrastructure and local populace. Couldn't wait to run away.
I'm in the rental business and I would never consider a STR there.
Gary
0 Reply
Max T.
OP
Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
5y
The root of the affordability crisis is lack of supply.
It’s not by accident. It is due to decades of exclusionary zoning policy, almost always rooted in racism.
The same policies also encouraged suburban sprawl - many of the problems @Nathan G. Mentioned.
In my opinion if you own a home you should get to do with it what you want (within reason). Splitting into 2 units is within reason. Preventing your neighbors from splitting theirs is not within reason. And If an owner doesn’t like the changing character of their neighborhood they can move.
As for the comment about forcing people onto public transit. That’s dumb. Right now cars impose a lot of costs, externalities on society that car owners themselves are not directly paying for. Public transit is much cheaper and better for the environment.
1 Reply
Bruce WoodruffPro Member
Contractor/Investor/Consultant · San Diego / Phoenix · Member since 2021 · 12k+ posts · 15k+ votes
5y
Originally posted by @Max T.:

It is due to decades of exclusionary zoning policy, almost always rooted in racism.

Oh pulleeez. Stop .

Public transit is much cheaper and better for the environment.

That's not always the point. I'm not interested in cheap, and the environment is fine.
0 Reply
Max T.
OP
Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
5y
Denying fact doesn’t contribute to the discussion but thanks for playing @Bruce Woodruff
1 Reply
Bruce WoodruffPro Member
Contractor/Investor/Consultant · San Diego / Phoenix · Member since 2021 · 12k+ posts · 15k+ votes
5y
Originally posted by @Max T.:
Denying fact doesn’t contribute to the discussion but thanks for playing @Bruce Woodruff

Sorry but you're mistaking your opinions for fact....
1 Reply
Max T.
OP
Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
5y
@Bruce Woodruff
climate change and racism in housing policy are well documented.
I could recommend some books for you but I get the feeling you wouldn’t read them.
3 Reply
Roarke Van Brunt
Contractor · Portland OR · Member since 2021 · 39 posts · 24 votes
5y
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Nathan Gesner:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Most people can barely afford what they've got, so it's typically only people with money that can afford to build an ADU and then they'll rent it for a high price.
I'm a fan of less-restrictive laws, but have reservations about the long-term impact. When you double the number of residents on 25% of the lots, that's a big increase in parking. How does it impact traffic flow? Pollution? Landfill? Water and electric demands? Wastewater treatment? And it may work well in an upper-class community where people are better citizens. Population density and low-income do not produce good results.
Anway, I hope it works.

Nathan as for the new ADU rules Portland is the poster child for this as well as most of Oregon.. I can do an ADU here in Lake Oswego and if I put a covenant on it that its a true granny unit direct relative going to live in it then NO permit fee's If I am going to rent it permit for a ADU is about 50k in our market so thats before you put a spade in the ground. Portland Metro has very high density rules and has had for years so its already here.. I built 3 homes in city of Portland in 2019/2020 it was a 40X100 lot and I put 3 SFR's on it 2 were attached and one was free standing.. zoning did NOT ALLOW for any off road parking.. I wanted to go under and have parking below but that was not allowed the city planners want people to take metro and ride bikes .. so yes you look at the street and its a mess when those 3 units bring 3 to 6 cars with them and no place to park .. the laws are changing now to get even more density in these areas of SFR.. Every lot now can have a duplex.. So you can imagine in areas were you have stately 1 to 3 million dollar homes and someone all of a sudden wants to build a duplex LOL.. not popular.. I just sold one in the Historic district close to downtown and the investors is putting ADU in Basement building a garage with ADU above then on the side lot another ADU.. and that house was basically a tear down I sold for 700k.. so to make the math work he is going to be in this 1.2 at least and now you have the main house an adu above garage an Adu in basement and the other adu.. so rents will all be well over 2k per door to make that work.. so affordable Na planners and city fathers puff their chest out about how great they are doing proving additional housing YA..

Jay,
A 50,000 dollar permit fee for an ADU is freaking obscene. Why do taxpayers tolerate this nonsense?
Then our politicians wonder why there are homeless people on the sidewalk in front of their businesses.
Give me a break. Throw these people out of office immediately!
Gary

Gary they hit us from every angle.. ON my phase 3 of the current project 30 of 90 new builds. we have to build a 1200 foot pedestrian path that hooks up to nowhere.. just in case sometime in the next 50 the trails go through but thats probably 100k.. And now the Fire Marshall again after the fact.. wants 1000 feet of 8 inch water main outside of our project there would be zero homes protected with this water line. thats 100k.. so right there on 30 lots about 8k a lot increase.. then in this city add 30k for permits and other 50k per lot to put in sewer water power etc to their standards and well you have 88k per lot round up to 100k because its always more.. Before you even bought the dirt.. so how are we to build 200k affordable homes in our area.. add in 150 a foot for vertical and now cost is right at 400k or a little more per house. add in carrying costs and builder profit and you can see why a 2k sq ft home needs to sell for about 600k in our market to have a reasonable return on risk .
In charleston SC permits are 5k per house total although they just hit us with some extension stuff we never had to do a few years back but still. so 500k is starter in the inner city..
I am building in N. FLA right now and we can put out a dinger 1200 sq ft 3 2 brand new and make a profit at 225k. investors are buying these up from us.. as they are nice rentals.. really bullet proof houses with very little wood .. and modern codes. strong demand and I can see why given other markets.
Its why this whole RE game is so very market specific one size simply does not fit all. And U folks that have a sand box filled with homes you can buy for far less than replacement cost your in the drivers seat when you choose correctly.. If I lived there thats what i would be doing :)

Gary,

If you think what Jay is saying is scary, let me tell you it's the tip of the iceberg. Rock climbing gym project derailed because planners want sidewalk ramp up to building for wheelchair accessibility form street level on elevated site, Bend OR. Only way to do it was eat up property with switchback or elevator. Project tips over budget, doesn't get built. Hillsboro OR adopts development code requiring 3/4 street improvements or 20 year warranty of existing street/sidewalks on development. Good luck proving that it has 20 years of lift left. Hope you owned a flag lot, and not something that's narrow against a street. Kills projects left and right. How do you build less than 50k square feet and not get destroyed by the half mil in public improvements you have to do? They built the city out, increased their tax base, and now just want to let the big whales in. Dundee OR, 3/4 street installed from intersection to railroad behind building that has no crossing. I mean project still went because the business expanding was booming, but that was 125k of useless pavement. I think the only use it has is when the city parks vehicles on it...

The fire/life/safety (aka fire marshal) games that Jay is talking about area a universal constant in OR.

There were some earlier comments in this thread regarding local vs federal, and lets be honest, incentives are what matter local or not. Cities/Counties can be as inviting or not inviting as they want and the average person has no idea.

2 Reply
Jay HinrichsBusiness Member
Real Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes
5y
Originally posted by @Roarke Van Brunt:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Nathan Gesner:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Most people can barely afford what they've got, so it's typically only people with money that can afford to build an ADU and then they'll rent it for a high price.
I'm a fan of less-restrictive laws, but have reservations about the long-term impact. When you double the number of residents on 25% of the lots, that's a big increase in parking. How does it impact traffic flow? Pollution? Landfill? Water and electric demands? Wastewater treatment? And it may work well in an upper-class community where people are better citizens. Population density and low-income do not produce good results.
Anway, I hope it works.

Nathan as for the new ADU rules Portland is the poster child for this as well as most of Oregon.. I can do an ADU here in Lake Oswego and if I put a covenant on it that its a true granny unit direct relative going to live in it then NO permit fee's If I am going to rent it permit for a ADU is about 50k in our market so thats before you put a spade in the ground. Portland Metro has very high density rules and has had for years so its already here.. I built 3 homes in city of Portland in 2019/2020 it was a 40X100 lot and I put 3 SFR's on it 2 were attached and one was free standing.. zoning did NOT ALLOW for any off road parking.. I wanted to go under and have parking below but that was not allowed the city planners want people to take metro and ride bikes .. so yes you look at the street and its a mess when those 3 units bring 3 to 6 cars with them and no place to park .. the laws are changing now to get even more density in these areas of SFR.. Every lot now can have a duplex.. So you can imagine in areas were you have stately 1 to 3 million dollar homes and someone all of a sudden wants to build a duplex LOL.. not popular.. I just sold one in the Historic district close to downtown and the investors is putting ADU in Basement building a garage with ADU above then on the side lot another ADU.. and that house was basically a tear down I sold for 700k.. so to make the math work he is going to be in this 1.2 at least and now you have the main house an adu above garage an Adu in basement and the other adu.. so rents will all be well over 2k per door to make that work.. so affordable Na planners and city fathers puff their chest out about how great they are doing proving additional housing YA..

Jay,
A 50,000 dollar permit fee for an ADU is freaking obscene. Why do taxpayers tolerate this nonsense?
Then our politicians wonder why there are homeless people on the sidewalk in front of their businesses.
Give me a break. Throw these people out of office immediately!
Gary

Gary they hit us from every angle.. ON my phase 3 of the current project 30 of 90 new builds. we have to build a 1200 foot pedestrian path that hooks up to nowhere.. just in case sometime in the next 50 the trails go through but thats probably 100k.. And now the Fire Marshall again after the fact.. wants 1000 feet of 8 inch water main outside of our project there would be zero homes protected with this water line. thats 100k.. so right there on 30 lots about 8k a lot increase.. then in this city add 30k for permits and other 50k per lot to put in sewer water power etc to their standards and well you have 88k per lot round up to 100k because its always more.. Before you even bought the dirt.. so how are we to build 200k affordable homes in our area.. add in 150 a foot for vertical and now cost is right at 400k or a little more per house. add in carrying costs and builder profit and you can see why a 2k sq ft home needs to sell for about 600k in our market to have a reasonable return on risk .
In charleston SC permits are 5k per house total although they just hit us with some extension stuff we never had to do a few years back but still. so 500k is starter in the inner city..
I am building in N. FLA right now and we can put out a dinger 1200 sq ft 3 2 brand new and make a profit at 225k. investors are buying these up from us.. as they are nice rentals.. really bullet proof houses with very little wood .. and modern codes. strong demand and I can see why given other markets.
Its why this whole RE game is so very market specific one size simply does not fit all. And U folks that have a sand box filled with homes you can buy for far less than replacement cost your in the drivers seat when you choose correctly.. If I lived there thats what i would be doing :)

Gary,

If you think what Jay is saying is scary, let me tell you it's the tip of the iceberg. Rock climbing gym project derailed because planners want sidewalk ramp up to building for wheelchair accessibility form street level on elevated site, Bend OR. Only way to do it was eat up property with switchback or elevator. Project tips over budget, doesn't get built. Hillsboro OR adopts development code requiring 3/4 street improvements or 20 year warranty of existing street/sidewalks on development. Good luck proving that it has 20 years of lift left. Hope you owned a flag lot, and not something that's narrow against a street. Kills projects left and right. How do you build less than 50k square feet and not get destroyed by the half mil in public improvements you have to do? They built the city out, increased their tax base, and now just want to let the big whales in. Dundee OR, 3/4 street installed from intersection to railroad behind building that has no crossing. I mean project still went because the business expanding was booming, but that was 125k of useless pavement. I think the only use it has is when the city parks vehicles on it...

The fire/life/safety (aka fire marshal) games that Jay is talking about area a universal constant in OR.

There were some earlier comments in this thread regarding local vs federal, and lets be honest, incentives are what matter local or not. Cities/Counties can be as inviting or not inviting as they want and the average person has no idea.

I had a project in Dundee tied up a number of years ago and exactly at that time could no way make it work given the improvements to the existing roads plus build the infrastructure through the project.. It did finally sell and develop once lot prices got high enough. But what you see is affordability as a big fat Oxymoron. And Govmit exacerbates the situation on one end and whines on the other. I also control the 117 acres on the North side of Evergreen parkway and West of Jackson School road.. long battle moving that into the UGB but we have it at a price were they can throw this stuff at us I know we will be doing major road improvements.. but at least the state built the new freeway over pass and the roundabout LOL those things cost 2 to 4 mil to build.. its a 2030 to 2035 project maybe 2040 and my kids and grandkids will be the winners.. :)

Podcast Guest on Show #222
JLH Capital Partners51 Review
Website View Page
1 Reply
Genny Li
Baltimore, MD · Member since 2018 · 431 posts · 281 votes
5y
Originally posted by @Matt Devincenzo:
@Genny Li unfortunately factory built modular can only compete so much. I've explored the cost and the requirements both personally and professionally as a site and land use civil, and the biggest savings is in reduced construction time. Your transport and installation costs are higher which offsets some of the benefit of the construction savings.

The factory built manufactured homes on permanent foundations which meet the new MHadvantage or ChoiceHomes lending guidelines do offer construction cost savings, but these are HUD standard (1X top and bottom plates, smaller plumbing sizing, different materials allowed) not building code standard and they are constrained to single story etc. Site built will always be more flexible in being able to address a specific challenge a site may have because it can be built piece by piece to accommodate that challenge. I do think they could be a great option, but there isn't a magic bullet to this.

As far as the WW quote, my point wasn't the accuracy or validity of the show it was the quote being relevant. People generally look for the one thing to fix this problem instead of creating smaller changes across the broad context and shifting the overall perspective associated with addressing the issue.

Yes, there are a lot of problems to fix, that's true. This is just one that sticks in my craw. lol.
Labor costs are better overall on factory-built homes, and laborers themselves have better, steadier incomes, too. They work regular hours regardless of weather, which I think is important for many people who want to have predictability in their lives. It takes less labor total, more efficient labor, and in better working conditions.
It can also move most mass-production efficiencies and cost reductions to the factory rather than the main builder. This lets little guy builders tap into these efficiencies.

0 Reply
Genny Li
Baltimore, MD · Member since 2018 · 431 posts · 281 votes
5y
Originally posted by @Max T.:
@Bruce Woodruff
climate change and racism in housing policy are well documented.
I could recommend some books for you but I get the feeling you wouldn’t read them.

Racism was institutionalized by the FHA during the City Beautiful movement, as they set the standards of redlining which the states were forced to follow. Now the same people who created the problem are claiming that they're the solution to the problem. In reality, you could destroy ghettoization pretty fast with just a few changes.
First, explode all school districting and end public school monopolies. The money follows the child, period, to any school that will accept that money and not a cent more. (Last bit is important, too.) Universal vouchers, and special needs kids get more money. Right now, you can only have the very poor, the very rich, and the very single living in places with poor schools. Anyone in between avoids them. This is the source of much of the gentrification conflict, because it's a conflict of extremes.
Second, make every district responsible for paying its own bills and also for its own zoning. No transfer of wealth from one section of a city to another. Each city must stand on its own. They'll find the economic highest use really fast when the power gets shut off, and if they don't, then the new developers who buy it up at pennies on the dollar because of their disfunction will do so.
As for global warming, you're absolutely hilarious. Don't you know that Miami was submerged in 2012? That's what we were told. The poles warm faster than lower latitudes. When there is once again free-grazing cattle, widespread lowland forests, and barley in Greenland, we will have achieved the global temperatures that are more normal of the Holocene as a whole and will have finally recovered from the Little Ice Age. If that happens, then it will be good for humans and for life because warm = wet. There is a reason there's a period called the Holocene Climatic Optimum that was much warmer than now. Until then, there can be no net warming at all. It is impossible. So either you're one of those people who rejects basic history in favor of propaganda, or you're not.
1 Reply
Genny Li
Baltimore, MD · Member since 2018 · 431 posts · 281 votes
5y
Originally posted by @Max T.:
The root of the affordability crisis is lack of supply.
It’s not by accident. It is due to decades of exclusionary zoning policy, almost always rooted in racism.
The same policies also encouraged suburban sprawl - many of the problems @Nathan G. Mentioned.
In my opinion if you own a home you should get to do with it what you want (within reason). Splitting into 2 units is within reason. Preventing your neighbors from splitting theirs is not within reason. And If an owner doesn’t like the changing character of their neighborhood they can move.
As for the comment about forcing people onto public transit. That’s dumb. Right now cars impose a lot of costs, externalities on society that car owners themselves are not directly paying for. Public transit is much cheaper and better for the environment.

Public transit is about the government determining where you go, when you go, and how you get there. It is the delight of social engineers and tyrants. Yet the single most important factor for a person who is working to escape poverty is that person's jobshed from their place of residence, and the single most important way of increasing a 30-minute job shed is to give that person access to individualized transportation--i.e., a car. Not only that, but in the vast majority of towns and cities, it would be more cost effective to give every poor person lacking a car an inexpesive car with free gas, insurance, and maintenance than it is to subsidize transportation for them.
The elites never give up their cars. There is a reason for that. Those who want individual choice for all, not just the elite, support cars for all. My family's rich relatives in Hong Kong have cars.
0 Reply
Genny Li
Baltimore, MD · Member since 2018 · 431 posts · 281 votes
5y
Originally posted by @Roarke Van Brunt:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Nathan Gesner:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Most people can barely afford what they've got, so it's typically only people with money that can afford to build an ADU and then they'll rent it for a high price.
I'm a fan of less-restrictive laws, but have reservations about the long-term impact. When you double the number of residents on 25% of the lots, that's a big increase in parking. How does it impact traffic flow? Pollution? Landfill? Water and electric demands? Wastewater treatment? And it may work well in an upper-class community where people are better citizens. Population density and low-income do not produce good results.
Anway, I hope it works.

Nathan as for the new ADU rules Portland is the poster child for this as well as most of Oregon.. I can do an ADU here in Lake Oswego and if I put a covenant on it that its a true granny unit direct relative going to live in it then NO permit fee's If I am going to rent it permit for a ADU is about 50k in our market so thats before you put a spade in the ground. Portland Metro has very high density rules and has had for years so its already here.. I built 3 homes in city of Portland in 2019/2020 it was a 40X100 lot and I put 3 SFR's on it 2 were attached and one was free standing.. zoning did NOT ALLOW for any off road parking.. I wanted to go under and have parking below but that was not allowed the city planners want people to take metro and ride bikes .. so yes you look at the street and its a mess when those 3 units bring 3 to 6 cars with them and no place to park .. the laws are changing now to get even more density in these areas of SFR.. Every lot now can have a duplex.. So you can imagine in areas were you have stately 1 to 3 million dollar homes and someone all of a sudden wants to build a duplex LOL.. not popular.. I just sold one in the Historic district close to downtown and the investors is putting ADU in Basement building a garage with ADU above then on the side lot another ADU.. and that house was basically a tear down I sold for 700k.. so to make the math work he is going to be in this 1.2 at least and now you have the main house an adu above garage an Adu in basement and the other adu.. so rents will all be well over 2k per door to make that work.. so affordable Na planners and city fathers puff their chest out about how great they are doing proving additional housing YA..

Jay,
A 50,000 dollar permit fee for an ADU is freaking obscene. Why do taxpayers tolerate this nonsense?
Then our politicians wonder why there are homeless people on the sidewalk in front of their businesses.
Give me a break. Throw these people out of office immediately!
Gary

Gary they hit us from every angle.. ON my phase 3 of the current project 30 of 90 new builds. we have to build a 1200 foot pedestrian path that hooks up to nowhere.. just in case sometime in the next 50 the trails go through but thats probably 100k.. And now the Fire Marshall again after the fact.. wants 1000 feet of 8 inch water main outside of our project there would be zero homes protected with this water line. thats 100k.. so right there on 30 lots about 8k a lot increase.. then in this city add 30k for permits and other 50k per lot to put in sewer water power etc to their standards and well you have 88k per lot round up to 100k because its always more.. Before you even bought the dirt.. so how are we to build 200k affordable homes in our area.. add in 150 a foot for vertical and now cost is right at 400k or a little more per house. add in carrying costs and builder profit and you can see why a 2k sq ft home needs to sell for about 600k in our market to have a reasonable return on risk .
In charleston SC permits are 5k per house total although they just hit us with some extension stuff we never had to do a few years back but still. so 500k is starter in the inner city..
I am building in N. FLA right now and we can put out a dinger 1200 sq ft 3 2 brand new and make a profit at 225k. investors are buying these up from us.. as they are nice rentals.. really bullet proof houses with very little wood .. and modern codes. strong demand and I can see why given other markets.
Its why this whole RE game is so very market specific one size simply does not fit all. And U folks that have a sand box filled with homes you can buy for far less than replacement cost your in the drivers seat when you choose correctly.. If I lived there thats what i would be doing :)

Gary,

If you think what Jay is saying is scary, let me tell you it's the tip of the iceberg. Rock climbing gym project derailed because planners want sidewalk ramp up to building for wheelchair accessibility form street level on elevated site, Bend OR. Only way to do it was eat up property with switchback or elevator. Project tips over budget, doesn't get built. Hillsboro OR adopts development code requiring 3/4 street improvements or 20 year warranty of existing street/sidewalks on development. Good luck proving that it has 20 years of lift left. Hope you owned a flag lot, and not something that's narrow against a street. Kills projects left and right. How do you build less than 50k square feet and not get destroyed by the half mil in public improvements you have to do? They built the city out, increased their tax base, and now just want to let the big whales in. Dundee OR, 3/4 street installed from intersection to railroad behind building that has no crossing. I mean project still went because the business expanding was booming, but that was 125k of useless pavement. I think the only use it has is when the city parks vehicles on it...

The fire/life/safety (aka fire marshal) games that Jay is talking about area a universal constant in OR.

There were some earlier comments in this thread regarding local vs federal, and lets be honest, incentives are what matter local or not. Cities/Counties can be as inviting or not inviting as they want and the average person has no idea.

I love the small town I invest in. I called up the fire marshal to make sure it was allowed to have a microhood vent onto the outdoor emergency exit. Fire marshal was appalled at the suggestion that it wouldn't be.
(I wanted to make sure there was a reason other than cheapness that the builder made it recirculating.)
0 Reply
Genny Li
Baltimore, MD · Member since 2018 · 431 posts · 281 votes
5y
Originally posted by @Robert C.:
@Max T., Could be, which is why I'm only talking about my neck of the woods (real estate is local and all that). BUT, something to think about - people like to look at West Coast/California/Bay Area as some weird "never could happen to here" type of place. OR, maybe it's not far fetched to think that what's happened in the Bay Area in terms of politics/supply/demand/rent control is the natural progression of things. Other states have gotten a little taste during the pandemic of what happens when the money/demand spreads across the nation. Imagine what happens if Silicon Valley tech headquarters really do fully decentralize to other locations over time.

@Genny Li, In my opinion, the demand side of the argument in the Bay Area is totally moot. It's about supply and solving some of the affordability problems - neither of which are really addressed by the ADU's - it's just incentivizing the wrong people to build for often the wrong purpose. Just to point out a few things... 1.) If you want the brand new, not nasty corporate apartment with the amenities, you need to afford anywhere from $4500-$6500/month for a 2 bedroom. 2.) Focusing on downtown development might solve some of the problem, but it also cuts out a lot of smaller developers that could be building apartment housing instead of luxury homes. 3.) The rest of the housing stock around here is already 50+ years old.

Then what you're talking about is extremely, extremely expensive teardowns, with the so-called "missing middle" being put there to maximize the economic return, which means that you will have extremely expensive rent/buy condos/townhomes/2-3-4-plexs.
California suffers from the perfect storm of stupid policies, bad street planning (that's actually getting worse), some real actual natural constraints to building, and receiving a massive local inflation hit from not only the Fed's money printing machine but also from overseas investors who also have monopoly money looking either a place to dump some cash or somewhere to have an anchor baby.

0 Reply
Joe SplitrockPro Member
Moderator
Rental Property Investor · Sioux Falls, SD · Member since 2015 · 9k+ posts · 18k+ votes
5y
Interesting on the fact sheet, they define "large investor" as anyone who owns over 10 single family homes. I guess I am a large investor and apparently public enemy number one. They say 1/6 (16.6%) of houses are bought by investors and 35% of those houses are by investors who own more than ten properties. That means 5.8% of houses are purchased by large investors (owning over 10 houses). What the statistics do not consider is how many investors are selling single family houses. For example if 16.6% of houses are sold to investors, but 20% of homes are sold FROM investors, the net supply of rental housing could be decreasing. I made up the 20% number, but the point is they intentionally don't share that statistic, so we have no way to know.
It gets interesting when you take a look at actual home ownership rates. From the 1960's well into the 1990's home ownership rates were below 66%. Then in the early 2000's, congress introduces all sorts of incentives and lowers the bar, resulting in home ownership increasing in the early 2000's and peaking in 2005 before tumbling in the following years. Lowering the standard means increasing sub prime mortgages, which is what lead to the housing crash. All those "evil investors" purchased houses after the crash and provided housing to people who lost their houses to foreclosure. So let's put this in perspective, at highest recorded levels only 68% of people own their own home. That means 32% of households are renters in a best case situation. Compare that to the number of houses being purchased by investors at 16.6% and it is half the percentage of renters.
Home ownership rate by year:
https://tradingeconomics.com/u...
Home ownership rates today are still above 50 year average, so it begs the question what problem are we trying to solve? I was watching the news yesterday and Secretary Yellen is throwing up a red flag saying by October the US will default on its debt! The treasury is running out of money and unless they raise the debt ceiling, the party is over. Congress was warned about this months ago. The only response from the Biden administration is to spend money like its 1999. (For those too young to remember we had an actual budget surplus in 1999.)
Budget deficit or surplus by year:
https://www.thoughtco.com/hist...
1 Reply
Jason Cacioppo
Real Estate Agent · Commerce CIty, CO · Member since 2018 · 127 posts · 78 votes
5y
@Max T. I'd love to see occupancy limits relaxed for non related tenants. Could be a game changer.
1 Reply
Roarke Van Brunt
Contractor · Portland OR · Member since 2021 · 39 posts · 24 votes
5y
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Roarke Van Brunt:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @Nathan Gesner:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Most people can barely afford what they've got, so it's typically only people with money that can afford to build an ADU and then they'll rent it for a high price.
I'm a fan of less-restrictive laws, but have reservations about the long-term impact. When you double the number of residents on 25% of the lots, that's a big increase in parking. How does it impact traffic flow? Pollution? Landfill? Water and electric demands? Wastewater treatment? And it may work well in an upper-class community where people are better citizens. Population density and low-income do not produce good results.
Anway, I hope it works.

Nathan as for the new ADU rules Portland is the poster child for this as well as most of Oregon.. I can do an ADU here in Lake Oswego and if I put a covenant on it that its a true granny unit direct relative going to live in it then NO permit fee's If I am going to rent it permit for a ADU is about 50k in our market so thats before you put a spade in the ground. Portland Metro has very high density rules and has had for years so its already here.. I built 3 homes in city of Portland in 2019/2020 it was a 40X100 lot and I put 3 SFR's on it 2 were attached and one was free standing.. zoning did NOT ALLOW for any off road parking.. I wanted to go under and have parking below but that was not allowed the city planners want people to take metro and ride bikes .. so yes you look at the street and its a mess when those 3 units bring 3 to 6 cars with them and no place to park .. the laws are changing now to get even more density in these areas of SFR.. Every lot now can have a duplex.. So you can imagine in areas were you have stately 1 to 3 million dollar homes and someone all of a sudden wants to build a duplex LOL.. not popular.. I just sold one in the Historic district close to downtown and the investors is putting ADU in Basement building a garage with ADU above then on the side lot another ADU.. and that house was basically a tear down I sold for 700k.. so to make the math work he is going to be in this 1.2 at least and now you have the main house an adu above garage an Adu in basement and the other adu.. so rents will all be well over 2k per door to make that work.. so affordable Na planners and city fathers puff their chest out about how great they are doing proving additional housing YA..

Jay,
A 50,000 dollar permit fee for an ADU is freaking obscene. Why do taxpayers tolerate this nonsense?
Then our politicians wonder why there are homeless people on the sidewalk in front of their businesses.
Give me a break. Throw these people out of office immediately!
Gary

Gary they hit us from every angle.. ON my phase 3 of the current project 30 of 90 new builds. we have to build a 1200 foot pedestrian path that hooks up to nowhere.. just in case sometime in the next 50 the trails go through but thats probably 100k.. And now the Fire Marshall again after the fact.. wants 1000 feet of 8 inch water main outside of our project there would be zero homes protected with this water line. thats 100k.. so right there on 30 lots about 8k a lot increase.. then in this city add 30k for permits and other 50k per lot to put in sewer water power etc to their standards and well you have 88k per lot round up to 100k because its always more.. Before you even bought the dirt.. so how are we to build 200k affordable homes in our area.. add in 150 a foot for vertical and now cost is right at 400k or a little more per house. add in carrying costs and builder profit and you can see why a 2k sq ft home needs to sell for about 600k in our market to have a reasonable return on risk .
In charleston SC permits are 5k per house total although they just hit us with some extension stuff we never had to do a few years back but still. so 500k is starter in the inner city..
I am building in N. FLA right now and we can put out a dinger 1200 sq ft 3 2 brand new and make a profit at 225k. investors are buying these up from us.. as they are nice rentals.. really bullet proof houses with very little wood .. and modern codes. strong demand and I can see why given other markets.
Its why this whole RE game is so very market specific one size simply does not fit all. And U folks that have a sand box filled with homes you can buy for far less than replacement cost your in the drivers seat when you choose correctly.. If I lived there thats what i would be doing :)

Gary,

If you think what Jay is saying is scary, let me tell you it's the tip of the iceberg. Rock climbing gym project derailed because planners want sidewalk ramp up to building for wheelchair accessibility form street level on elevated site, Bend OR. Only way to do it was eat up property with switchback or elevator. Project tips over budget, doesn't get built. Hillsboro OR adopts development code requiring 3/4 street improvements or 20 year warranty of existing street/sidewalks on development. Good luck proving that it has 20 years of lift left. Hope you owned a flag lot, and not something that's narrow against a street. Kills projects left and right. How do you build less than 50k square feet and not get destroyed by the half mil in public improvements you have to do? They built the city out, increased their tax base, and now just want to let the big whales in. Dundee OR, 3/4 street installed from intersection to railroad behind building that has no crossing. I mean project still went because the business expanding was booming, but that was 125k of useless pavement. I think the only use it has is when the city parks vehicles on it...

The fire/life/safety (aka fire marshal) games that Jay is talking about area a universal constant in OR.

There were some earlier comments in this thread regarding local vs federal, and lets be honest, incentives are what matter local or not. Cities/Counties can be as inviting or not inviting as they want and the average person has no idea.

I had a project in Dundee tied up a number of years ago and exactly at that time could no way make it work given the improvements to the existing roads plus build the infrastructure through the project.. It did finally sell and develop once lot prices got high enough. But what you see is affordability as a big fat Oxymoron. And Govmit exacerbates the situation on one end and whines on the other. I also control the 117 acres on the North side of Evergreen parkway and West of Jackson School road.. long battle moving that into the UGB but we have it at a price were they can throw this stuff at us I know we will be doing major road improvements.. but at least the state built the new freeway over pass and the roundabout LOL those things cost 2 to 4 mil to build.. its a 2030 to 2035 project maybe 2040 and my kids and grandkids will be the winners.. :)

Amazing job on that land Jay. I think once Canby fills up (the hot spot for us right now) then people are going to be right back out to that fill out that area by Brookwood, Meek and NE Evergreen, but right now that land doesn't quite pencil (for most businesses) vs some other close by areas, at least in the Manufacturing/Industrial/Commercial space unless you are doing 10+ acre lots. Or at least that's what we are seeing.

Either way, amazing vision on that long term land purchase in that area. Its like as if you bought land west of Cornelius pass 20 years ago. You are 100% right, going to be amazing for you kids in 2030+.

0 Reply

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.