Idea for fixing the housing shortage

ritchiew said:
So.... how does more WFH address the housing shortage?
Click to expand...
If the argument were that people with Boston jobs don't even need to live in Massachusetts, then it would probably address housing, by freeing up some supply. But that's not what is being suggested in this discussion.

And to be honest, if anything, WFH puts more strain on housing supply. Anybody looking to move due to WFH changing their geographic requirements will likely look for more space to accommodate a home office. If work from home means more people seeking a space with an additional bedroom over what they currently have, then it's a net loss of housing as that process plays out.
 
HenryAlan said:
If the argument were that people with Boston jobs don't even need to live in Massachusetts, then it would probably address housing, by freeing up some supply. But that's not what is being suggested in this discussion.

And to be honest, if anything, WFH puts more strain on housing supply. Anybody looking to move due to WFH changing their geographic requirements will likely look for more space to accommodate a home office. If work from home means more people seeking a space with an additional bedroom over what they currently have, then it's a net loss of housing as that process plays out.
Click to expand...
It also takes money out of the city. At least commuters buy lunch/products in Boston, but having that money sent over to wherever they are WFH takes it out of the equation.
 
Does Rhode Island contribute funds to the MBTA in any way? They have commuter rail stops in RI so I wasn't sure if they provided any funding besides the fares that are collected at the gates.
 
beck4537 said:
Does Rhode Island contribute funds to the MBTA in any way? They have commuter rail stops in RI so I wasn't sure if they provided any funding besides the fares that are collected at the gates.
Click to expand...
based on what I could find on wikipedia, RI pays for capital funding on the Providence/Stoughton line, as wells as pays Amtrak for the rights for the MBTA to use Amtrak rail. I'm sure there's more there but I can't find easy proof of it.

I'd be surprised if Rhode Island didn't contribute to the MBTA.
 
Blackbird said:
I think this is the big flaw in the argument: that if people/companies formerly tied to Boston were given the opportunity, they’d choose to reside instead in Brockton and Fall River. Wishful thinking to the extreme!
Click to expand...
I’m intrigued by the discrepancies in the responses here.

One camp insists that the suburbs are too allergic to development for remote work to help alleviate housing shortages.

The other wonders why anyone would move into those cities desperate for businesses and residents to move in.

Dispersal of people and work to the extent possible automatically will alleviate the housing shortage to some extent by making it easier for people to live wherever they want. When the residents themselves have more options, they’ll always be able to find housing more easily.

For example, in principle, I could sell my house in Kingston and move to Pittsfield tomorrow - my late grandfather’s house is presently unoccupied. My job is hybrid, so we can’t. But if we could, between the drawing from the profit from selling our house and the savings in expenses, we’d almost match my salary.

That is our unique situation, but there’s loads of situations where potential housing options are off the table because people are tied to specific locales for work.
 
DominusNovus said:
One camp insists that the suburbs are too allergic to development for remote work to help alleviate housing shortages.
Click to expand...
They are. Please see the ongoing MBTA communities act discourse, where the state did indeed try to incentivize modest zoning reforms in towns near MBTA infrastructure (they didn't even mandate actual construction!) and towns as close as Milton lost their minds and had people in the streets opposing it. Rich suburbs primarily want single family zoning (pick your favorite reason), and since Eastern Mass has been populated since the 17th century, most of the buildable single family lots are spoken for. Also worth noting that many nice suburbs have made commuting effectively impossible for those that want hybrid work. The historic Lexington line was terminated in the 70s despite a centuries old ROW, Hingham has moved their commuter rail stations outside of downtown (and even built a new tunnel for commuter rail through running), and Arlington vehemently opposed the Red Line extension when it was on offer.

DominusNovus said:
The other wonders why anyone would move into those cities desperate for businesses and residents to move in.
Click to expand...

This is not an issue. The demand for living in the city is strong as evidenced by high prices (rental and purchase prices) and young people leaving when they can't afford to live here on modest salaries. Boston, too, has failed to provide ample housing for this demand and so in my opinion they have effectively SHUNNED new residents from moving here.

DominusNovus said:
Dispersal of people and work to the extent possible automatically will alleviate the housing shortage to some extent by making it easier for people to live wherever they want. When the residents themselves have more options, they’ll always be able to find housing more easily.
Click to expand...

I believe in freedom, and fortunately we have it in spades in this country. People are free to align their living and working incentives in whatever way they like. Lots of jobs have remote and hybrid options, but that might mean you need to find a new employer. Some people drive 2.5 hours a day from NH for work in Boston. Some people bike half a mile from their house in Cambridge to Kendall Square. There is no government mandate making people return to work. Be an entrepreneur and work from the islands! Consult 3/4 time and make 90% salary! Take a risk on a new job that aligns with your lifestyle! If you don't like that employers are inching back to a pre-pandemic work style, then it's on the plucky individual to find something that works.

Cities are drivers of human ingenuity and prosperity. They will continue to be that, and if someone wants to vote with their feet and opt out, go for it.

Just build more housing.
 
As much as Jane Jacobs gets criticized today for being fairly NIMBY, her read on the benefits of agglomeration in an era of White flight and city center disinvestment, still rings quite true.

City's work because they bring people with many skills and knowledge close together. For business, that means smaller enterprises can benefit from a niche and larger enterprises can trade with fewer barriers between each other.

Remote work doesn't really change this formula or principle, though, it does eat away at some of the contributing factors. Lack of affordable housing in city centers is perhaps more caustic. than all that.
 
DominusNovus said:
For example, in principle, I could sell my house in Kingston and move to Pittsfield tomorrow - my late grandfather’s house is presently unoccupied. My job is hybrid, so we can’t. But if we could, between the drawing from the profit from selling our house and the savings in expenses, we’d almost match my salary.
Click to expand...
Again, what part of your example does anything to fix the housing shortage? The shortage is near ubiquitous. Pittsfield also has a housing shortage. It has the same root problem: little or no new development being built. It has the same consequences: house prices in the Pittsfield have gone up 80% in the past three years, and existing locals are being priced out and forced to move some place cheaper.

So if you and others move from one region with a housing shortage to a nearby region with a housing shortage.... what exactly do you think you've fixed?

DominusNovus said:
Dispersal of people and work to the extent possible automatically will alleviate the housing shortage to some extent by making it easier for people to live wherever they want.
Click to expand...
You keep saying this happens "automatically," but it really doesn't if there just aren't enough homes. That's just shuffling people around in an increasingly bad game of musical chairs.
 
Piling on... in the past 5 years, Brockton housing prices have gone up 50%, Lowell 57%, and Fall River 70%. It's not just Boston and the suburbs that are unaffordable, it's the "gateway" cities too, which were called such because they were supposed to be an affordable gateway into the middle class.

Another thing-- the best places to increase density quickly are ones that have the zoning, transit, and walkability to support it. You know, where you don't need to build a bunch of parking and new roads in order to allow the new residents to go to school, get groceries, etc. In 2024 in MA, guess where those places are clustered?
 
Let's not forget that it is a feature, not a bug, for suburban housing advocates who already own homes to fight for constrained supply. Those increased prices that are causing people to move away are absolute boons for longtime residents who have seen their home values quintuple in 20 years by just saying no. Build!
 
In the US, housing is simultaneously the bulk of the wealth for many families and the primary means of moving between rungs of the social ladder. Families don’t want to risk losing their place on their ladder. Families also don’t want to risk losing their wealth, because there is no true safety net.

Figure out how to change that is the problem at the root of much of the unrest in contemporary America.
 
RandomWalk said:
In the US, housing is simultaneously the bulk of the wealth for many families and the primary means of moving between rungs of the social ladder. Families don’t want to risk losing their place on their ladder. Families also don’t want to risk losing their wealth, because there is no true safety net.

Figure out how to change that is the problem at the root of much of the unrest in contemporary America.
Click to expand...
In MA, over the next 5 years we need something like 40k home per year *to keep pace with demand* . Right now we're under 20k/yr. We could double housing production it would keep home prices *stable*, not decrease the average home value.

No, middle class MA homeowners are not at risk of their house being devalued, even if that's what they fear. But they ARE at risk of having their income eaten away by cost of living increases which are in a large part being driven by *drumroll please* ever-increasing rent faced by people who professionally cook, clean, drive, teach, build, serve our communities, and take care of our children.
 
Justbuildit said:
The city should use all the tools it has to entice people and companies to come back rather than flag defeat because of traffic concerns. Conversion to residential purposes is also of course a great idea, especially in places like Downtown where there are few housing units to begin with.
Click to expand...

Traffic---has become a nightmare sitting, rushing and constantly in traffic puts a lot of stress on society.
Boston/suburbs are being plagued by traffic congestion.

The fact our elected officials are so fortunate to usher in migrants (illegal aliens)/along with constantly subsidize housing projects why not invest our tax dollars into an energy self-sufficient transit system that is free to our society. This would help out all income levels across the state in Transporation and be beneficial to our state and its people.
 
Johnnyrocket891 said:
Traffic---has become a nightmare sitting, rushing and constantly in traffic puts a lot of stress on society.
Boston/suburbs are being plagued by traffic congestion.

The fact our elected officials are so fortunate to usher in migrants (illegal aliens)/along with constantly subsidize housing projects why not invest our tax dollars into an energy self-sufficient transit system that is free to our society. This would help out all income levels across the state in Transporation and be beneficial to our state and its people.
Click to expand...

Hey, just FYI I muted you awhile ago because I find your comments generally uninspiring and boring. I took a peek since you replied to me but wanted to let you know so you're not left waiting in the future. Enjoy the traffic in from Saugus!
 
Is there anywhere to see how the region is doing at adding housing stock?

The St Louis Fed has things like "housing structures authorized for boston MSA" or "1-unit houses authorized in Boston MSA" which doesn't seem to capture amount of housing units or bedrooms authorized for people -- just if structure development is up or down.

Boston.gov doesn't seem to have updated any data on the their Housing: Boston 2030 page since 2020.

I love to see all the housing developments here on this website (especially for the region, as Boston is only one piece), but I have no idea what the greater picture is when I get the itch to go down that rabbit-hole.
 
eber said:
Is there anywhere to see how the region is doing at adding housing stock?

The St Louis Fed has things like "housing structures authorized for boston MSA" or "1-unit houses authorized in Boston MSA" which doesn't seem to capture amount of housing units or bedrooms authorized for people -- just if structure development is up or down.

Boston.gov doesn't seem to have updated any data on the their Housing: Boston 2030 page since 2020.

I love to see all the housing developments here on this website (especially for the region, as Boston is only one piece), but I have no idea what the greater picture is when I get the itch to go down that rabbit-hole.
Click to expand...

Center for Housing Data - Massachusetts Housing Partnership

www.mhp.net www.mhp.net

Massachusetts Housing Partnership, Center for Housing Data

Unfortunately not very complete. The real data you are looking for is buried in the databases of all the individual Cities and Towns.
 
Last edited:
JeffDowntown said:

Center for Housing Data - Massachusetts Housing Partnership

www.mhp.net www.mhp.net

Massachusetts Housing Partnership, Center for Housing Data

Unfortunately not very complete. The real data you are looking for is buried in the databases of all the individual Cities and Towns.
Click to expand...
This helps, thanks! From that Center for Housing Data I found their DataTown site where you can see the annual housing production per town. But that data ends seems to end at 2020, so I looked at where they're getting their data from.

So from there I found the US Census visualization tool's Annual New Privately Owned Housing Units Authorized by State or by MSA which lets me drill down to the county and gets to 2023. I then assume grabbing the raw excel data to grab monthly data or some MSA data.
 
Last edited:
ritchiew said:
Again, what part of your example does anything to fix the housing shortage? The shortage is near ubiquitous. Pittsfield also has a housing shortage. It has the same root problem: little or no new development being built. It has the same consequences: house prices in the Pittsfield have gone up 80% in the past three years, and existing locals are being priced out and forced to move some place cheaper.

So if you and others move from one region with a housing shortage to a nearby region with a housing shortage.... what exactly do you think you've fixed?


You keep saying this happens "automatically," but it really doesn't if there just aren't enough homes. That's just shuffling people around in an increasingly bad game of musical chairs.
Click to expand...

As long as you’re drawing from a wider pool of supply, the more options you have to draw from, the better a fit you’ll be able to find. Even if the overall imbalance between supply and demand remains constant. When you can choose from a wider array of towns, you’re more likely to find one that is allowing enough development for you.

Just look at the numbers provided. Pittsfield prices go up 80% in 3 years, while Brockton prices have only gone ip 50% in 5. That a 26% annual growth rate vs a 10%. That makes Brockton a veritable steal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top