Please, Please, Make This Study Go Away!

by James A. Bacon

A General Assembly-ordered study has published its findings for making housing more affordable and accessible for lower-income Virginians and minorities. One can only pray that the report is relegated to one of those proverbial shelves that collects dust, and is never to be seen again. Its recommendations, if followed, would steer resources into government programs while doing nothing to address the underlying cause of the ever-escalating cost of housing: the shortfall in new construction.

It’s not as if the authors of the Statewide Housing Study are ignorant of the laws of supply and demand. The research section of the study notes that roughly 30,000 new homes are built in Virginia each year, about half the annual production of the mid-2000’s. Virginia’s population has increased 10.2% since 2008, while housing supply has grown only 8.7%. Moreover, the housing type is out of whack. More than two-thirds of all new homes are detached, single-family dwellings, as opposed to less-expensive townhouses and apartments. By 2021, the imbalance of supply and demand pushed up the average cost of a single-family home by 30% over five years.

The report’s narrative also alludes briefly to the supply-demand equation. “The lack of inventory remains the biggest impediment to homeownership opportunities for Virginians,” it says in one place. And in another, it acknowledges, “Market conditions and local land use consistently put constraints on the availability and timing of new [rental] supply.”

While acknowledging that local zoning and land-use regulations are among the factors that impact housing affordability in Virginia, the authors state that this topic is deemed to be “beyond the scope of this study.”

Imagine that. This housing-affordability study ignores the primary economic forces affecting affordability. Instead, it focuses on tangential, second-tier factors. As an added bonus, it skews its analysis by viewing affordability through a racial lens rather than an income lens. “Stakeholders, along with both state housing agencies, unanimously agreed to add racial equity as a fifth focus area for significant recommendations.” [Bold face in the original quote.]

The results are predictable. The remedies call for greater government intervention in the housing marketplace rather than less. They emphasize transfer payments and subsidies. And they would steer resources and power to nonprofits and quasi-governmental organizations such as the two entities responsible for the study, Virginia Housing and the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD).

Such an outlook was probably baked into the process from the beginning. Of the 40 “stakeholders” consulted, only nine were representatives of private industry such as developers, home builders, Realtors, and financiers — the people who actually build, finance and sell the vast majority of housing. The other 31 were from governmental, quasi-governmental, nonprofit and academic entities. The process itself was steered by Virginia Housing and DHCD employees.

As part of their research, Virginia Housing and DHCD commissioned a survey of “a diverse and representative range of stakeholders” to address community housing needs, racial disparities, the efficacy of state housing policies, and the impact of COVID-19. The 400 respondents were heavily skewed to nonprofits (23%), local government (20%), homeless service providers (12%), public housing authorities (7%), housing counselors (7%). Only a third were in the for-profit sector.

Unsurprisingly, given this make-up, respondents perceived racial disparities in various categories of housing to be “significant” to “very significant,” and they were inclined to rate as “somewhat significant” to “significant” the efficacy of various governmental and nonprofit programs in addressing housing affordability. Market-based solutions were not provided as an option in the survey.

So, what did this process yield as far as recommendations?

  • A statewide rental assistance program for lower-income Virginians;
  • Utility rate reduction through a variety of taxpayer-funded initiatives;
  • An amendment to the state constitution that would enable local governments to offer real estate tax relief for affordable housing and homeless purposes;
  • Expanded and/or subsidized access to tax-free bonds for Virginia Housing and DHCD.

No list today would be complete without a racial-equity component. In this case, the study recommends expanding Black access to homeownership, mitigating the effects of gentrification, bolstering rental-assistance programs, and ensuring that “equity is considered at all levels of the housing industry.”

No one associated with the study appears to remember the last time social-justice activists lobbied — very successfully — to increase the rate of Black homeownership by reducing lending standards. It resulted in the sub-prime mortgage meltdown of 2008. The ensuing tsunami of foreclosures was the greatest setback to Black wealth accumulation since slaves were captured in Africa and transported to the New World.

The one thing we can all agree upon is that access and affordability to housing for lower-income Virginians is a major social problem. We can only hope that the Youngkin administration and General Assembly scrap this study and start over with an emphasis on the only viable long-term solution: building more housing and ensuring that housing type matches up with market demand.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

51 responses to “Please, Please, Make This Study Go Away!”

  1. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    An agency study that recommends more spending on the agency. Dog bites man.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      “Expanding Rte. 460 Suffolk to Petersburg: A Study in Funding Foreign Contractors”

      1. how_it_works Avatar
        how_it_works

        you forgot the other half of that title

        “and the Kickbacks They Provide to Corrupt Virginia Politicians”

  2. “Utility rate reduction through a variety of taxpayer funded initiatives.” – I love that one…How about rate reduction through more energy exploration, sources, and extraction like we had under Orange Man!!!!!

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Solve two problems, nay THREE problems at once! More energy, company housing, and no food desert… the company store. Oh, and safe housing patrolled by the Pinkertons.

  3. LarrytheG Avatar

    It’s not THAT hard to get multi-family zoning (apartments, townhouses) if the infrastructure to support them is there or planned.

    Despite some who claim that zoning restricts housing, it really doesn’t if the infrastructure, water, sewer is provided. You can’t look at a single-family subdivision and really claim it restricts aparments if the water/sewer for that area is sized for single-family and not multi-family. Ditto with parking, roads, libraries, EMS.. it’s not just the housing unit itself.

    When we say “build more” – where is the money to do that going to come from? Investors will build what the market demands and what the market will pay for and the banks will lend money for. Low-income housing stock is not exactly a lucrative thing for developer nor banks.

    So you say the govt ought not to be doing it but let the “market” do it?

    “Growth” up Fredericksburg way these days IS, in fact, apartments, multi-story complexes in places where there IS water/sewer/roads/EMS, schools, etc. But these are “market” priced, not subsidized and the developers actually do set aside some number of them for “workforce” but none of them are for low-income.

    Finally, you don’t really want low-income apartments – that concentrate low income demographics – do you?

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      The biggest impediment is the roads. Throw up 1000 units on 2-lane Rte. 17 SE of Fredricksburg and everyone wonders why traffic sucks.

      1. how_it_works Avatar
        how_it_works

        Lack of roadway capacity doesn’t usually stop developers. Yea, they might be asked to fund a traffic light and some turn lanes, but that’s about it.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          developers only have to mitigate in the immediate area.

          And they do but it does not have the network capacity. You can build the condos, but can you widen the major roads in that area without having to tear down commercial properties?

          The idea of building “dense” primarily for low-income is NOT a “solution” anyhow.

          1. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            Who rezones these agricultural properties to commercial before the roadway is widened? Who does that, I wonder?

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            In our area, the roads are added for the development but the problem is the regional roads are not and more development keeps adding to that.

            Think in terms of I-95 where development is occurring off the interchanges. No development pays to expand I-95, right? And how do you widen I-95 in urban areas where the sides are already developed and there is no more available ROW?

          3. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            The problem with I-95 is that it serves as a local road in many places in Virginia, with traffic going one or two exits. That is not supposed to be the function of an Interstate highway. But it is when the local roads are inadequate, because Virginians don’t like to build (or maintain) roads unless the Feds are paying for it.

      2. LarrytheG Avatar

        That’s actually a 2-lane on a 4-way Row.. and likely will be expanded at some point. Near the VRE station.

        Our problem, like NoVa is that we don’t have the road capacity for rush hour and really no way to get it without tearing down commercial property.

    2. DJRippert Avatar

      Water, sewer and EMS are easy. Roads and schools are hard. Road expansion is expensive, especially where existing structures need to be torn down. Schools are a financially losing battle. A three bedroom condo with two parents and two kids might cost $200,000. At a 1% real estate tax, that condo generates $2,000 in real estate taxes per year. But those two kids generate $20,000 in government school costs every year.

      People try to restructure badly build areas to be more compact, more mixed use and (sometimes) more affordable. It’s happening in Tysons now. But will it work? IMO, not under the present plan. It’s still too much of an auto-dependent culture. And the roads in Tysons just can’t handle the growth.

      One thing that should be considered is forbidding the expansion of any road into a highway without the use of overpasses vs stop lights. Up here in NoVa that idea worked well for Rt 28 but seems to have been totally forgotten in the widening of Rt 7.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        well, they’re all hard in terms of who is going to pay to build them PRIOR to the development so that they are online when development occurs.

        and yes… you want to widen roads where there are existing commercial properties? Whose fault is that?

        re: the cost of the kids. You’re talking about rents that are NOT low income, right and even they – lose, right?

        re: overpasses – you mean grade-separated intersections, right? If you think road widening in commercial is expensive, grade-separated is twice, 3 times and not pretty nor “liveable” for the folks near the “overpass”.

        Yes, we AGREE!

        It’s EASY for someone to say that zoning is the problem – but in reality, it’s not.

        No one is going to build low-income housing in Tysons, right? And even if by some miracle they did – do you REALLY want entire multi-story buildings to be ALL low-income?

        Isn’t that a failed concept?

      2. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        28 used to be awful before they put the overpasses in vs stop lights. Rte 50 all the way to Dulles Landing is awful in the afternoons and the traffic planners didn’t sync the stop lights.

        1. how_it_works Avatar
          how_it_works

          VDOT used to be very good about syncing stop lights. That was no less than about 15 years ago.

          I expect that the only person they had on the payroll who was good at it either quit or was let go.

          1. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Probably the case, I mean if you were on it early enough the lights were synced, but not at rush hour in the afternoon. The drive from Fairfax to South Riding was always awful on 50. It was faster to take Braddock Road to Pleasant Valley and 66 if you the hours worked out.

          2. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            Back in about 2004, Congressman Frank Wolf got VDOT some Federal funding to install an adaptive traffic system on Route 7. This system uses video cameras to detect traffic and automatically adjust the traffic signals to remain in sync. The project was also supposed to include Route 28 and I think maybe Route 50, but it never got any further than Route 7 because…

            …the contractor that VDOT used to install the system on Route 7 installed the cameras completely wrong, so they were getting sun glare in the mornings and evenings. This was at least ONE of the problems with the way it was installed. There are probably others.

            Congressman Wolf told me (he had a lot of “townhall” style meetings) that he was on Route 7 at about 9pm and hitting every single red light possible. He called VDOT and was told that they turn off the system at night.

            He did some further investigation and found that VDOT never got the system operational.

            Wolf pulled the Federal funding for the rest of the project and it never got implemented.

            I did run across a technical paper written for VDOT by another contractor which listed some of the problems with the installation on Route 7 and the suggested corrections, but to the best of my knowledge VDOT never implemented them and the system remains defunct, as a testament to the money that can be wasted by VDOT incompetence to this day.

            The video cameras they installed for this system are still installed on many of the Route 7 intersections in Tyson’s Corner. Next time you drive through there, look at them and realize just how much incompetent government really ruins things.

          3. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            That’s hilarious, nothing like a bridge to nowhere. I’m sure the contractor had connections to get their payday.

          4. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            Yea, they probably did. Here’s another more recent VDOT screwup for ya. This is a sign they installed. It’s supposed to warn drivers of a flooded road ahead. There are supposed to be flashers on the sign, but there are none.

            What sort of mental malfunction causes this sign to be installed without the accompanying flashers and flood detection equipment is beyond me…

            The sign reads, “ROAD FLOOD TURN AROUND DON’T DROWN” and the bottom sign reads “WHEN FLASHING” but there’s no flashers, as mentioned above!
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/bdcef70b3dbe1509b58f17483564367a56d6ea5cb5ce5c05efbc0ad370d91dac.png

          5. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            And all that information I just related about this failed Route 7 adaptive traffic system certainly contributed heavily to my perception that Virginia is populated and run by incompetent boobs.

          6. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            I think there is plenty of evidence to that fact. Maybe it’s the proximity to the incompetent boobs I’m D.C. Lord knows it doesn’t reflect well on your state electorate when your former Gov. thinks it’s a bright idea to head north on 95 at 1300 during a snow storm or not.

          7. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            It wouldn’t be so bad if the incompetence weren’t invariably accompanied by a huge ego.

  4. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “Its recommendations, if followed, would steer resources into government programs while doing nothing to address the underlying cause of the ever-escalating cost of housing: the shortfall in new construction.”

    Loudoun was one of the fastest growing county in the country in new housing for about a decade. Housing prices escalated dramatically throughout that period. The two are not necessarily connected in any way.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      Loudoun is not known as a low-income housing mecca.

      1. how_it_works Avatar
        how_it_works

        Isn’t Loudoun the richest county in the USA?

        Who knew that screwing Federal Government could be so lucrative..

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          well that went right by me…

    2. DJRippert Avatar

      I went out to Purcellville recently. Well, actually … just outside of Purcellville. Oh my goodness! Houses, houses everywhere. Huge subdivisions with street after street of nice, single family homes. No townhomes, no condos, no apartments. There may be some but I didn’t see any.

      Why no townhomes / condos / apartments in Purcellville to go with the many, many SFHs?

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        That is what JAB’s suggestion of “building more housing and ensuring that housing type matches up with market demand” gets you… aka “the laws of supply and demand”…. alas…

    3. dave schutz Avatar
      dave schutz

      ” yield as far as recommendations?

      A statewide rental assistance program for lower-income Virginians.
      Utility rate reduction through a variety of taxpayer funded initiatives.
      An amendment to the state constitution that would enable local governments to offer real estate tax relief for affordable housing and homeless purposes.
      Expanded and/or subsidized access to tax-free bonds for Virginia Housing and DHCD.”

      The first two recommendations just increase demand. The last one increases supply. Not by coincidence – the last one would actually do something about the problem, the first two just take money from some citizens and give it to other citizens. And the third? Sort of mixed – it takes money from local residents for the purpose of building/providing services for poor and homeless, so it should somewhat increase supply as well as redistributing. The local level is, however, not where the urban governance theory would suggest doing redistribution for this regional problem.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        TIF – Tax Increment Financing basically does not tax the development or a lower tax,in exchange for building infrastructure or low-income stuff.

        It’s still a subsidy to compete against normal market forces.

        1. dave schutz Avatar
          dave schutz

          And specifically it shifts tax burden within the city from subsidized units to the unsubsidized units. Again, not the optimal level of government for doing this.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar

            It CAN incentivize re-development of existing blighted places and it can incentivize roads/water sewer – “special service districts” bigger capacity than one development will need – get it done before the follow-on development.

            Yes, it’s a govt involvement, not pure private sector.

  5. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Let them build mansions like great great granddaddy.

  6. DJRippert Avatar

    Every recommendation in that report has been enthusiastically adopted in New York City and there is still an “unaffordable housing crisis” in the Big Apple.

    Rapidly growing areas generate a surplus of people and deficit of housing stock. Ask the long time residents of Austin or Nashville. Or … Loudoun County.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      Correct. It’s NOT a govt problem with wrong zoning or some such – it’s a MARKET problem where the MARKET does NOT build low-income housing. There is NO “market” for low-income housing…. it does not “work” that way.

      1. DJRippert Avatar

        It’s all supply and demand. Plenty of affordable homes in Detroit (median home listing price in 2020 – $59,000).

        https://www.forbes.com/advisor/mortgages/most-affordable-cities-to-buy-a-home/

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          yep – but that is tied to THAT market and it’s very likely NOT for low-income. “Affordable” is NOT “low income” in NoVa, Richmond nor Detroit. Developers do not build low-income housing if the “market” is more lucrative for “affordable” and higher scale.

          It’s NOT a problem that the private sector solves. Never has.

          1. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            Why do low-income people have to live in expensive locations?

            I can’t afford to live in Arlington County. Why should someone on government aid be able to live in Arlington County?

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            where would you have them live? They’re not looking to live in expensive locations per se. They’re lookig for places they can afford and the market does not provide it. Where do you expect people who perform labor jobs – food service, janitorial, delivery, etc to live? far from where they work?

          3. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            Are we talking about low-income people who work, or low-income people who don’t work and, for example, are on SSI? The latter need not live in expensive locations.

            As for the ones who work, well, I’ve pointed out here in the past that labor jobs in Northern Virginia don’t pay nearly what they should given the area’s cost-of-living. And anyone who does that sort of work would would be better off in practically any other part of the country.

            But, if you’re wondering, the de-facto low cost of living areas for Northern Virginia are places like Sterling Park and Manassas, where folks overcrowd houses to make ends meet.

            And long commutes are common in Northern Virginia, even for those who make “good” money.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar

            Just FYI – I’m not sure that SSI or TANF or other entitlements are COLA-adjusted. If you work at a low-pay
            job in NoVa, where are you supposed to live? You need to have the folks that do this work -right? food, delivery, trash, janitorial, etc? What would you do without them? They’d be even worse off living in an area where there are no jobs, right?

            So why don’t they get paid enough? is that a similar problem to not enough low cost housing – neither of them does the private sector market provide enough?

          5. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            SSI is NOT COLA-adjusted. Therefore anyone on SSI should probably find a lower COLA area to live.

            Are you assuming that it’s impossible to find labor jobs in lower COLA areas than Northern Virginia? I have seen nothing to indicate that is the case.

            I, in fact, talked one of my friends out of moving back to Northern Virginia by pointing out that he’d have to make about 150% of his current pay to have the same standard of living as he does where he lives now (the midwest). He wasn’t aware of that. He’s a blue-collar car dealer employee.

            Don’t mind helping someone avoid making a bad life choice…wish someone would’ve told my dad that!

          6. LarrytheG Avatar

            No, it’s just that these jobs need to be done and people will take them. That’s the reality. You’re not going to want to live where there is no trash pickup, right?

          7. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            Larry, if the trash company can’t find workers willing to work for what they pay, they increase the pay and then increase their rates.

            There will never be “no trash pickup”, there will just be no “cheap trash pickup”.

            Northern Virginians may feel that they are entitled to their cheap labor, but it’s just not the case.

          8. LarrytheG Avatar

            the point is that the wages paid for that work are not enough for housing near where the workers do their work. Even when they pay more for trash pickup, it’s still not enough for housing. Right? Ditto for other occupations – pay is higher than in less expensive less urban places, but the result is the same – not enough pay to afford basic housing. This is why the Govt is involved – whether it’s in NoVa or Bedford Va.

          9. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            ” pay is higher than in less expensive less urban places”

            I don’t believe that to be the case, especially when you look at the COLA for the area.

            Case in point: The Houlahan’s (restaurant) in Herndon, VA charges the same exact prices as the one in Champaign, IL.

            I’d be willing to bet they pay their employees exactly the same between the two locations.

            Yet Champaign, IL has a much lower COLA than Herndon.

          10. LarrytheG Avatar

            perhaps.. I won’t dispute it. We need to give it a rest for today…. ;-)… you can chew on me again tomorrow… ;-0

          11. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            ” pay is higher than in less expensive less urban places”

            I don’t believe that to be the case, especially when you look at the COLA for the area.

            Case in point: The Houlahan’s (restaurant) in Herndon, VA charges the same exact prices as the one in Champaign, IL.

            I’d be willing to bet they pay their employees exactly the same between the two locations.

            Yet Champaign, IL has a much lower COLA than Herndon.

          12. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Truth as a former NOVA resident, my apartment was 800 sf and it $1600 a month and 18 miles from my office. My next town home was 2500 sf, was $2250 a month and 32 miles from my office. My home is 3000 sf and 56 miles from my office.

            Oh and the median house price for NOVA in 2016 was $525,000.

Leave a Reply