Posted by  Carl Klapper on July 16, 2002 at 07:52:27:

In Reply to:  ArchWeek - Costs of "Dumb Growth" posted by Kevin Matthews on May 09, 2002 at 09:59:06:

The "Costs of Dumb Growth" article fails to mention another common
error in affordability calculations: the cost of owning and operating a motor vehicle where the style of development requires it. Here in NYC and in most of the nearby boroughs and small cities connected to it by train, bus or ferry, ownership of a car is not only unnecessary, but insane. As I have pointed out several times to friends in LA and Atlanta, the cost of an apartment in NYC sans car compares quite favorably to the cost of an Atlanta or LA apartment plus the cost of their required automobile. In general, the calculations fail to include the cost of the feasible transportation modes for each housing unit into the cost of that unit.

Also, the quality of the home and its surroundings has been excluded from these calculations. Often, we hear that some city is very affordable until we actually look for houses there. Then we find that the "affordable" homes border a highway or are rundown one-story shacks in a flood zone. One starts to wonder if the only reason these homes haven't been condemned is to make their city look "affordable".

I guess the lesson to be learned is that determining affordability is no easy matter and carelessly formulated measures of it have no place in public policy decisions.

Responses:

Post a Response -