HOUSING - CA short 800,000 homes

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Current News : One Thread

California short of 800,000 homes

LAGGING BEHIND: Only one in three can afford median-priced home of more than $250,000.

By Jim Wasserman, The Associated Press

SACRAMENTO -- Forget the good weather, the great jobs, the ocean next door. For millions of Californians, housing is the cross they must bear for living here.

There simply isn't enough of it.

For nearly 20 years, California's home-building industry has lagged behind the state's population growth. Every year it builds about 140,000 new places for people to live. And every year that's 80,000 short, say state housing officials.

The result is a lifestyle constraint unique in the West.

As builders have fallen more than 800,000 homes behind demand, according to state estimates, only one in three Californians can afford a median-priced home of more than $250,000.

Millions of working people spend more than half their paychecks for rent. The state's homeownership rate is declining -- 55 percent compared to 66 percent nationally. And as the homes in the rest of the United States become less crowded, Californians are moving in together to make ends meet.

"In San Jose," said California Research Bureau Director Dean Misczynski, "even the lawyers have roommates now."

The reasons for the state's housing paralysis are dazzlingly complex. But whatever the causes, the state's Department of Housing and Community Development warns of extreme shortages in years ahead.

California needs an "unprecedented amount of new housing construction," the agency said, "more suburban housing, more infill housing, more ownership housing, more rental housing, more affordable housing, more senior housing, and more family housing."

In California during the 1990s, the number of new houses, apartments and condominiums continued a 1980s trend of falling behind household growth. Simultaneously, average home occupancy rose from 2.8 to 2.9 people, revealing that human closeness is becoming a way of life.

In places such as Fresno County and cities of San Jose, Santa Rosa and Merced, average occupancy jumped past three per household. Arvin in Kern County averages 4.5 people per dwelling. In Los Angeles County, East Compton averages five per home.

Nationally, the average per household is 2.6 and falling.

Authorities say the California numbers reflect immigrants crowding together, but also skyrocketing prices driving others into sharing space.

In Berkeley, Hermina Astalis recently bought a house with her sister after renting for years and living with three and four others. Now, a homeowner in her late 20s, she recalls numerous stories of rental hell.

"It took me six weeks once to find a room in a house," she said. "At the time I couldn't afford a one-bedroom by myself. It's like a full-time job looking for an apartment."

In San Francisco, where monthly rent for a one-bedroom apartment ranges from $1,795 to $3,495, people with roommates increased 30 percent during the 1990s.

The 2000 census offers more proof of California's housing shortage. In Santa Clara County, developers built only 39,000 housing units for 45,700 new households during the 1990s. Builders fell 9,800 homes short in Alameda County and nearly 37,000 short in Los Angeles County. Similar shortages occurred in Contra Costa, Orange and Ventura counties. All are among the nation's most expensive housing markets.

Shortages mean higher prices, said Tim Coyle, senior vice president of the California Building Industry Association.

"Statewide, the median home price is $252,000," Coyle said. "In order to qualify for a $252,000 house, you need to be making $84,000 to $85,000 a year. The statewide median income is $43,000 to $44,000."

The irony in a state that desperately needs housing is that most cities don't want it.

With the state's post-Proposition 13 tax structure, a local government typically keeps about 11 percent of the property taxes generated by a house. For a $300,000 house that's little more than $500 a year.

So, Lewis said, not much money goes to a city that must find fire trucks, police officers and equipment, playgrounds for new parks and eventually, street repairs for the people who live in the new homes.

July 22, 2001

-- Anonymous, July 23, 2001

Answers

Until a couple decades ago, housing in Boston and the Republic of Cambridge was really short. So, rather than have all the po' and elderly folks displaced, "rent control" was put into effect. The private market screamed that new housing would never be built if rents couldn't be decided by the free market. So, over a period of time (usually as people moved), rent control was phased out. Still not nearly enough housing, of course, but part of that is the rapidly growing demands by college students. Looks like the free market isn't reacting very well in California either.

-- Anonymous, July 23, 2001

Moderation questions? read the FAQ