Walt Disney World gets green light for affordable housing project

I'd love to understand what this "infrastructure can't support it" thing even means. Disney already built the massive complex for the college program folks, and there are a bunch of hotels and retail, too. There's an interchange to SR-429 right there, and Western Way goes directly into the Disney property. Not only is the infrastructure there, it's largely already developed and being used right now. The few neighborhoods just to the west that are in Horizon West are mostly built-out too.

But as you might expect, the locals around me are delusional and don't pay attention. I've lived in the area for a decade now, and my house, and the one I lived in before that, sit on what used to be abandoned orange groves. It was all zoned for a balanced mix of residential types and commercial stuff. It was a plan made decades ago by the county. They've been building up roads during that time, while the school district has built at least eight schools that I can think of. If these folks moved in thinking it was going to stay rural, they didn't do even the most basic due diligence.

I drove through those orange groves and nearly killed myself on those curvy roads long before your house was built.

Outside of the Interstate I'd argue the immediate area round WDW has developed far more effectively and efficiently than most other urban communities. And where Disney has had near total control, they've done even better. Case in point...the direct access to Disney Springs from I-4.

I suspect you may be talking about what is now Seidel Rd. I forget what it used to be called, but there were a couple of sharp bends and turns on a narrow two-lane road. Now it's four lanes and includes a high school and elementary. Even a gas station. The last of the groves are on the far side of Avalon, if there are any left at all at this point.

Yep, that area along with Reams (which has been reshaped significantly) and even 535 was pretty dangerous back in the late 80s/early 90s. When I got to the College Program in '92 they spent a lot of time trying to warn us about those roads, and I seem to recall being told that several cast members had died as a result of accidents.

I'm curious to see what the rents/mortgages will be on this "affordable" housing.

Most non-house rentals are starting around $1,500 that I'd consider "close enough" to WDW. So split that with a roommate, $750 each, or $9k a year. If you follow the 30% rule for the most you should spend on housing, that equates to $30k salary a year, or about $15 hourly. That's definitely on the edge of "affordability." Let's say you have 30% withheld for taxes, benefits and retirement (wish I would have done that), that's about $1,750 take home a month, so you have a grand to cover everything not rent. It's certainly doable, but you have to be disciplined and aren't going to spend much on entertainment.

Well, I was a cast member and I didn't spend money on entertainment, unless you consider the $30 Annual Pass I purchased for Pleasure Island. $30. Can you imagine?

That is my concern with the "affordable housing" movement in Florida. It isn't really moving the needle for those who REALLY need it to be more affordable. And, if they don't fix the insurance crisis (car insurance alone is insane), then it is a perpetual cycle that never gives people a chance to pull themselves up.

wahoo skipper:

I'm curious to see what the rents/mortgages will be on this "affordable" housing.

Linked article says that 75% of the houses must be available to people making between 50% and 100% of the median income in Orlando ($90,400). To a certain degree, "affordable housing" is in the eyes of the beholder. But I have typically see it at no more than 30% of gross income. So would be no more than about $1,130-2,260/month. If utilities are included in the calculation of what is "affordable," that range would also need to include utilities.

There are take home pay calculators online but they typically only take into account taxes. Likely would be some costs for benefits if nothing else that would impact take home pay.

It baffles me that there isn't a ton more pressure on these companies to stop price gouging for housing. If that capital was freed up, it would be spent elsewhere. Basically, non-housing companies would stand to gain a lot from reducing the profit margins of housing companies and landlords.

It's not price gouging if demand is high and supply is low. On top of that, there's a trade labor shortage so it isn't cheap to build like it used to be.

How low is the supply actually? I hear this often, but it isn't like I see tens of thousands of people living in the streets who could pay for a house but just can't seem to find one.

Do you know of any areas that have a glut of vacant single or multi-family housing? People that can afford it aren't living in tents under overpasses. They are paying the higher prices that the market is setting.

Up here in SE MI, the house we paid $120/sqft for in 2017 would now go for around $220/sqft, an ~80% increase over 7 years. And the $850/month rental we moved out of now goes for around $1500, a ~76% increase over that same span. There's nothing unique about the SE MI area that would suggest we're a statistical outlier.

It doesn't take a PHD in economics to understand that's indicative of demand outpacing supply.

In South Florida we have a lot of adult children living with their parents, and even 3 generation households. An odd byproduct of that is a parking issue in many communities, because not enough parking spaces were built in anticipation of households that might have 3-5 vehicles.

Why is that? Is it due to a housing shortage, or an affordable housing shortage?

Housing demand is fairly inelastic, I think you would agree with that. So if that is the case then pricing isn’t going to affect demand very much. People gotta live, or house, or whatever. In situations of inelastic demand that opens up the ability to increase pricing past what normally would be possible in more elastic demand curves. Maybe I should have said there is a shortage in affordable housing, not a shortage in housing, because again people aren’t living in the street en masse, and when you look for a place to live housing is available, so not a shortage in the strict sense of the word.

So what is the resolution? Now bear with me and keep this on outcomes and solutions, don’t get hung up on logistics and if such things would be possible, let’s just say that they are.

What would happen if we banned all ownership for purposes of Airbnb, and returned those properties to those who want to live in them?

What about if we said that landlords could only rent higher density MDU’s, no single family/townhome/duplex etc.

What if we mandated that home builders, not personal home construction, were not allowed to build anything over a 3/2, and maybe also included a stipulation that a percentage could not be greater than 2/1.

What if we mandated that a percentage of new builds must be high density MDU’s?

What would the above things do to fix the pricing and availability of housing?

Do we really have a housing shortage, or have we been conditioned to think we have one so that pricing can remain at all time highs?

I don't know if you haven't been paying attention, don't own a home, or weren't previously interested, but this isn't a phenomenon that started yesterday. There's no "conditioning" going on, it's just supply and demand. Higher interest rates, Boomers not selling (or dying young), trade labor shortages, younger people who prefer to rent (I'll never understand that), migrating populations, etc., all factor into this.

I moved into my house seven years ago, new. At closing, it was $480k. Going by Zillow, it's now worth $900k, and I believe that's accurate because another home near me, same floor plan but with a pool and nicer bathroom, sold for $950k. We're not price gouging, it's just what the properties are worth. It has nothing to do with greedy developers or whatever. And by the way, my HOA does ban short-term rentals entirely, and long-term only after you've owned the house for a year, so these are not rental investment opportunities. The entire area (the one in the article, actually) is zoned with a very specific mix of apartments, townhomes, bungalows and McMansions, balanced against retail and commercial. It's a fairly high density requirement compared to, say, almost anywhere in Ohio, to lessen the effects of urban sprawl. My neighbors are ten feet away on either side, we have no front yard, and there's 4,200 sqft. of house on a lot that's 0.2 acres.

The solution is straightforward, and frankly one of the better policy positions of the Harris campaign: Stimulate the construction of more housing. There are different levers to do that, many of them involving tax maneuvers, and also lower interest rates (which presidents can't actually influence).

Don't worry, I've been watching, I watched the prices absolutely skyrocket in the past 10 years.

I'm also watching them convert a massive swath of farmland into homes that are advertised as 4/5 bedrooms, with generational options and RV garages. So, who are we building these homes for? Certainly not the demographic with the lowest rate of homeownership.

Is there only one kind of family?

TheMillenniumRider:

if that is the case then pricing isn’t going to affect demand very much.

It certainly can. As prices rise, more people pick up roommates, more young adults stay in their childhood homes, etc. Higher density is the same thing as lower demand.

TheMillenniumRider:
who are we building these homes for? Certainly not the demographic with the lowest rate of homeownership.

But the existence of those homes gives the people who can afford them more choices. Some of them will choose these more expensive options. That means they won't be bidding on less expensive options, which in turn doesn't jack up those prices. That makes those houses less expensvie, and the next group of potential home-owners can buy them, and so on.

The alternative (not building them) means all those people with money bid on less expensive homes. More competition for those homes drives their prices up.

Bought my home in South Florida in 2019 (Covid fall) for $620,000. This month's estimated value is just north of $1,000,000. Home values have gone through the roof. Housing prices have increased 30%-50% over the past five years here.

My home insurance has skyrocketed too, along with my car insurance. Fair market rent in Broward County for a 2-bedroom unit is $2,100. Median rent is $2,300 for a 2-bedroom. Families are moving into multi-generational situations out of need for affordable housing.