Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 10 submissions in the queue.
posted by hubie on Sunday September 10 2023, @01:23AM   Printer-friendly
from the hot-housing-market dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:

Sharon Daniels, 66, had lived in Antioch, California, since 1984.

But growing concerned about crime, she and her husband decided it was time to move away from the East Bay and its delta breezes to a more affordable, far-flung community in the San Joaquin Valley.

She and her husband, Anthony, saw ads for new developments in the city of Lathrop in San Joaquin County, where they could build a new home for the same price as buying an existing one in Antioch. The median home in Lathrop sold for $530,400 in June 2023, compared with $930,000 in Antioch's Contra Costa County, according to the California Association of Realtors.

[...] As with most communities in California, the stark difference in home prices between the Danielses' former and current counties of residence is inversely related to the climate: The hotter a region is, the more affordable housing is.

[...] A Times analysis showed a clear link between projected extreme heat and home prices in California: Counties with higher home prices are less likely to face dire heat projections, and vice versa.

[...] Part of the dynamic is explained by the fact that the state's most expensive counties are coastal, and thus less likely to be hit hardest by extreme heat, though other climate change-fueled dangers such as sea level rise are still of concern.

The most efficient places to grow are California's coastal cities, both in terms of lessening the environmental footprint of residents and limiting their exposure to heat, said Zack Subin, an associate research director for the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley.

However, these cities are the least affordable places to build and live in the state.

Some coastal communities have proved aggressively resistant to increasing density, boosting affordable housing and allowing more development. That has left inland exurbs as drivers of new housing, even though they are significantly hotter and require long commutes to job centers.

"We likely need more policy to better integrate the state's housing affordability policies in concert with our climate strategies," Subin said.

"Compact development near the coasts," he said, can "reduce emissions across sectors." In these types of development, residents drive less, building energy use is lower—partially due to less extreme heat—and undeveloped land inland can be left undisturbed.

Subin said California's coastal cities still have plenty of room to grow. "It's not a technical limitation, it's a policy choice that we have chosen to reserve much of our [coastal] cities for surface parking lots, for exclusive single-family home zoning," he said.

[...] Subin said that adding density to already existing cities in the North Coast could make sense, but in terms of creating a planned mega-city, there's "not a great track record for that around the world."


Original Submission

This discussion was created by hubie (1068) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday September 10 2023, @05:22AM (4 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday September 10 2023, @05:22AM (#1323934) Journal
    First, I still stand [soylentnews.org] by my prediction that Fresno (which is on the southwest side of California's central valley) will see population decline by 2027. This trend of people moving from the coastal urban areas inland will boost its population somewhat, but I still think I have a better chance of my prediction coming true than not.

    Second, we see the typical cognitive dissonance of the climate change narrative. For example:

    Contra Costa County—home to Antioch—will have 71 days of extreme heat annually on average between 2035 and 2064, according to projections in a study from the Public Health Alliance of Southern California and UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation.

    As the Earth warms, San Joaquin County is expected to endure about 121 days above 90 degrees each year in the same time span.

    A Times analysis showed a clear link between projected extreme heat and home prices in California: Counties with higher home prices are less likely to face dire heat projections, and vice versa.

    The average American home changes hands every 13.2 years, according to Redfin, so future temperature projections suggest what the climate might look like by the time Californians are ready to move into their next home.

    We don't know when the 121 days of extreme heat is supposed to happen, but the peculiar wording suggests it is after 2064. That means we'll see roughly three changes of ownership of those homes by then and thus, for most home owners following this degree of turnover, not much need to worry about alleged climate change that far in the future.

    Moving on:

    Subin said that adding density to already existing cities in the North Coast could make sense, but in terms of creating a planned mega-city, there's "not a great track record for that around the world."

    The state continues to build housing in places that will be most affected by extreme heat, and population is expected to grow in the Central Valley while shrinking in coastal cities and staying flat statewide.

    On the first paragraph, "not a great track record" means nobody has solved the problems of high population density. In particular, consider that statement in light of when the author wrote:

    Subin said California's coastal cities still have plenty of room to grow. "It's not a technical limitation, it's a policy choice that we have chosen to reserve much of our [coastal] cities for surface parking lots, for exclusive single-family home zoning," he said.

    My take is that this demonstrates an actual technical limitation contrary to narrative.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by DadaDoofy on Sunday September 10 2023, @10:21AM (3 children)

      by DadaDoofy (23827) on Sunday September 10 2023, @10:21AM (#1323952)

      "The state continues to build housing in places that will be most affected by extreme heat, and population is expected to grow in the Central Valley while shrinking in coastal cities and staying flat statewide."

      Oh really? People are leaving the failed state of California in droves. Five hundred thousand have left since 2020 and there is no reason to believe this trend will not continue.

      https://ktla.com/news/california/new-census-estimates-show-which-california-counties-are-losing-residents/ [ktla.com]

      • (Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Sunday September 10 2023, @04:48PM (2 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday September 10 2023, @04:48PM (#1323978) Journal
        That story understates the trend. California lost crudely 2.5 million to emigration over those three years. It's only because the state also has a huge immigration rate (and a slightly positive from natural birth rate over death rate) that the state has only declined by half a million population over that time. My take is that the rate of net population decline will increase over the next decade and within two decades, Texas will become the most populous state.

        My take on California's troubles is that I see it as real world proof of basic economic ideas that get routinely trashed in modern discourse. There's plenty wrong with the state, but I guess it all boils down to prioritizing politics and fantasies above maintaining the economic engine. The state has nice climate and natural resources, but past that, everything depends on the economy and the network effect of the various industry concentrations they currently have (Silicon Valley, Hollywood, Central Valley agriculture). Their economy is a mess and with all that emigration, they will lose the network effect.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 10 2023, @11:14PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 10 2023, @11:14PM (#1324013)

          This would all sound so much cooler if the Kansas experiment [wikipedia.org] hadn't already been tried, died, retried, died again and died again.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday September 11 2023, @02:05AM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 11 2023, @02:05AM (#1324020) Journal
            Indeed. For what it's worth, the Kansas experiment didn't hurt as many people and only lasted a few years. The California experiment will take decades more to reach its nadir.
  • (Score: 2) by driverless on Sunday September 10 2023, @07:18AM

    by driverless (4770) on Sunday September 10 2023, @07:18AM (#1323937)

    ... before they get to Oregon or Arizona I'm fine with that. Nevada? Well, that's mostly empty so can fill up with Californians as much as it wants.

    (Also, I don't live in Nevada).

  • (Score: 5, Touché) by jb on Sunday September 10 2023, @07:56AM (4 children)

    by jb (338) on Sunday September 10 2023, @07:56AM (#1323939)

    When you move closer to a desert it gets hotter.

    Ain't it always been that way?

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Gaaark on Sunday September 10 2023, @05:16PM

      by Gaaark (41) on Sunday September 10 2023, @05:16PM (#1323986) Journal

      Move away from a temperature moderator like a large body of water, you get colder or hotter.

      It's like on the north shore of Lake Ontario: the lake moderates the weather and you get more extremes the more north you go.

      --
      --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday September 10 2023, @05:25PM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday September 10 2023, @05:25PM (#1323988) Journal

      When you move closer to a desert it gets hotter.

      Ain't it always been that way?

      Not really. High altitude/latitude deserts can get cold (examples: Great Basin, Gobi, and Patagonia deserts)

      Here, the effect is the cooling from the Pacific Ocean which is greatly attenuated that far inland. Level of moisture has nothing to do with it (aside from rain being a more efficient way to radiate heat to space).

    • (Score: 2) by ChrisMaple on Monday September 11 2023, @07:26PM (1 child)

      by ChrisMaple (6964) on Monday September 11 2023, @07:26PM (#1324111)

      Water moderates temperature. Water has a specific heat of 1.0, dry soil about 0.25. The warmer it is, the faster water evaporates, and evaporation causes cooling. Desert soil doesn't evaporate. Water, particularly with waves, tends to have some vertical circulation, so that daily solar heating affect a fathom or so, whereas in the desert it afect maybe a foot.

      • (Score: 2) by ChrisMaple on Monday September 11 2023, @07:28PM

        by ChrisMaple (6964) on Monday September 11 2023, @07:28PM (#1324112)

        Sorry about the grammar and spelling; I hit submit too soon.

  • (Score: 3, Touché) by Improbus on Sunday September 10 2023, @06:33PM (1 child)

    by Improbus (6425) on Sunday September 10 2023, @06:33PM (#1323994)

    Don't just move inland guys... move INLAND, like to a state where you can afford to live... that isn't on fire or being blown away by a hurricane.

    • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Monday September 11 2023, @02:46AM

      by Reziac (2489) on Monday September 11 2023, @02:46AM (#1324024) Homepage

      So long as they don't bring their voting habits with them....

      --
      And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(1)