Resistance to multifamily housing law (Boston, Worcester: real estate market, city hall, new home)

[yesmaybe]

Originally Posted by lrfox

• The most recent sale of one of those Fall River town houses was for $285k in 2021 and it has a $75/mo HOA fee.
• Comparable single-families in that same neighborhood are significantly more expensive.
• This 3br/1ba single family, a few doors down, sold in 2021 for $375k. This 2br/2ba sold for $375 in 2020.

That's not new construction. New construction is 500k and up.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by massnative71

yesmaybe does have a valid point, that people "from" this area generally won't consider a condo even if it is a townhouse style. It's either SF or nothing. I think that may play at least somewhat of a part in the lack of builds or enthusiasm from local towns about them, although the ones that are built (mostly pre-existing) certainly do have no problem selling and there is a demand even if a large proportion of their owners do happen to be foreign. But I am pretty confident that if given a chance, in this current era of unaffordability more people will "discover" them or at least come down to the reality that they offer a great alternative to renting with many advantages of a SF. And that when done right, they are not "the projects" like suburban people around here dismiss all condos and apartments as.

I think the biggest issues, by far, with building townhomes (or any multifamily housing) in desirable suburban towns are 1) the perceived strain on existing town resources (especially if they are rental properties) and 2) that multifamily housing is "out of character/context" compared to the rest of the town. In most "nice" suburban towns, they're impossible to build without an exemption to existing zoning laws which is almost always rejected due to 1 and 2 above. I've never heard "lack of interest" as an argument against and I think that the success of the limited number of examples in Metro Boston that do exist would indicate a clear market for them. Especially in this climate when many buyers on a budget are priced out of single families in "nice" towns, limited to fixer-upper single families in "ok" or "less than ok" towns, larger condo complexes, or moving to the edges (or entirely out) of the metro area. For a contingent of buyers, a townhome style condo in a decent area (especially near transit) is a fair compromise compared to the alternatives.

Now if you are talking the multistory/garden style apartments/condos that are currently sprouting up on every vacant lot (ie. those hideous shoeboxes by Norwood Depot and North Quincy), yes those tend to get packed full of H1Bs and investors (where units often sit empty). They simply have no appeal to most Americans (especially New Englanders) and certainly not families. I do not see that changing any time soon. I think that kind of development is what those in the smaller towns are fearing, and for not a bad reason.

I actually think these places have a reasonable amount of appeal in the urban Boston area as alternatives to renting an awkwardly laid out unit in an old three decker or conversion. They tend to fill up quickly around here. But yeah, the appeal in the 'burbs is a lot more limited (but not zero). When they built these around Middleborough-Lakeville, they were touted as appealing to Boston commuters who wanted to walk to the train. What they ended up drawing was families who were previously renting in places like Fall River/New Bedford and couldn't afford single family homes in Lakeville, but didn't want to send their kids to FR/NB schools. Of course, that in and of itself was an issue for Lakeville (back to the strain on resources), but there are so few rental options outside of urban Boston and the less-than-desirable gateway cities so there's at least some market for these places. Though I fully agree that every not every MBTA Commuter Rail town needs a dozen of them. Lower density housing (like duplexes and townhouses) can still meet the law's requirements without requiring a glut of those 4 and 5 over 1 apartment buildings.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by yesmaybe

[/list] That's not new construction. New construction is 500k and up.

Ok, and how much is a new construction SFH in the same neighborhood? The entire point is that a townhouse is almost always going to be cheaper than the comparable SFH.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by lrfox

I think the biggest issues, by far, with building townhomes (or any multifamily housing) in desirable suburban towns are 1) the perceived strain on existing town resources (especially if they are rental properties) and 2) that multifamily housing is "out of character/context" compared to the rest of the town. In most "nice" suburban towns, they're impossible to build without an exemption to existing zoning laws which is almost always rejected due to 1 and 2 above. I've never heard "lack of interest" as an argument against and I think that the success of the limited number of examples in Metro Boston that do exist would indicate a clear market for them. Especially in this climate when many buyers on a budget are priced out of single families in "nice" towns, limited to fixer-upper single families in "ok" or "less than ok" towns, larger condo complexes, or moving to the edges (or entirely out) of the metro area. For a contingent of buyers, a townhome style condo in a decent area (especially near transit) is a fair compromise compared to the alternatives.



I actually think these places have a reasonable amount of appeal in the urban Boston area as alternatives to renting an awkwardly laid out unit in an old three decker or conversion. They tend to fill up quickly around here. But yeah, the appeal in the 'burbs is a lot more limited (but not zero). When they built these around Middleborough-Lakeville, they were touted as appealing to Boston commuters who wanted to walk to the train. What they ended up drawing was families who were previously renting in places like Fall River/New Bedford and couldn't afford single family homes in Lakeville, but didn't want to send their kids to FR/NB schools. Of course, that in and of itself was an issue for Lakeville (back to the strain on resources), but there are so few rental options outside of urban Boston and the less-than-desirable gateway cities so there's at least some market for these places. Though I fully agree that every not every MBTA Commuter Rail town needs a dozen of them. Lower density housing (like duplexes and townhouses) can still meet the law's requirements without requiring a glut of those 4 and 5 over 1 apartment buildings.

My sister lives in a 33’ frontage lot house in Vancouver BC. An alley behind to access parking. To fit 15 per acre, you’d need 33’ x 78’ lots with a 20’ wide alley. 3 foot setback. You can build a totally reasonable 27’ x 40’ footprint two level home on a lot like that with a bit of front lawn, a back deck, and an optional 2 car garage. With a full basement and an attic, that’s plenty of living space and conditioned storage space.

[yesmaybe]

Originally Posted by lrfox

Ok, and how much is a new construction SFH in the same neighborhood? The entire point is that a townhouse is almost always going to be cheaper than the comparable SFH.

A new construction TH could very easily be comparable in price to an existing/old SFH. That's the whole point I've been trying to make. You for some reason seem to think that a new TH would be cheaper.

[jayrandom]

Originally Posted by yesmaybe

A new construction TH could very easily be comparable in price to an existing/old SFH. That's the whole point I've been trying to make. You for some reason seem to think that a new TH would be cheaper.

I mean, comparable can either mean similar in price or similar in size/finish/age. I think it’s pretty clear that people will pay a premium for a SFH. Whether the comparable townhome is newer or the comparable townhome is cheaper depends on the comparable you’re using.

[yesmaybe]

Originally Posted by jayrandom

I mean, comparable can either mean similar in price or similar in size/finish/age. I think it’s pretty clear that people will pay a premium for a SFH. Whether the comparable townhome is newer or the comparable townhome is cheaper depends on the comparable you’re using.

To be clear, I'm talking about a new construction TH versus say a 60s,70s SFH. I would say most burb 'locals' would take the SFH every day of the week.

[jayrandom]

Originally Posted by yesmaybe

To be clear, I'm talking about a new construction TH versus say a 60s,70s SFH. I would say most burb 'locals' would take the SFH every day of the week.

That is certainly the case for me. And most people I know. Not everyone I know, though.

I think the market price reflects exactly how desirable or undesirable something actually is. Whatever is more expensive on the market is more desirable.

[BostonBornMassMade]

The state is seeing a shrinking workforce because its too expensive to live. You all (Mass. residents) are well beyond the point of conversation about whether or not to build more housing.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/02/...ter-out-there/


Unquestionably, stratospheric housing costs are a major factor in why people leave Massachusetts, especially now. Before the pandemic, a family making $100,000 a year could afford to buy 37 percent of homes available in the state. Today that figure is just 12 percent. In metro Boston, it’s just 6 percent, compared with 34 percent nationally.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by yesmaybe

A new construction TH could very easily be comparable in price to an existing/old SFH. That's the whole point I've been trying to make. You for some reason seem to think that a new TH would be cheaper.

No, I never said that. A new SFH will be more expensive than a new TH. A 20 year old SFH is going to be more expensive than a 20 year old TH. Hence my emphasis on “comparable.” You’re not talking about comparable. Your example is very specific and only one of many. Of course there are buyers that would prefer a 30 year old SFH over a new TH, but there are plenty who would take the cheaper new construction TH over a more expensive new construction SFH or a similarly priced older SFH that needs work. You’re reducing the potential market to one specific scenario. The point is that we need more options on the market for all types of buyers (and renters) and we don’t currently have them. This law is one step toward addressing that issue.