Jump to content

Zoom Boomtowns


dinneR

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, jsharr said:

I think quality of life and cost of living and companies reopening will decide that

Definitely.  Add in companies see large savings from fewer facilities/rent savings.

My brother is adamant he is NOT going back to the office once COVID lets up.  He says he'll quit.  I just smile.  I agree with the feeling, but will have to see what actually happens.  My particular office let its lease end early at the landlord's request.  They are gutting the building, so figured now was a better time to do it rather than when folks are actually back in offices.  They packed all our crap up and are storing it at HQ.

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For years companies resisted work from home and after being forced to allow it they are suddenly enlightened.

On the other hand a couple of my families interactions with people working from home are far far less than satisfactory.  Oldest son has been fighting with the State of New Jersey for 32 weeks to collect unemployment benefits.  A mistake was made on his paperwork way back when and he is unable to contact anyone who can rectify it because all the phone numbers either lead to the call center where unskilled labor is unable to make that decision or the calls lead to supervisors desk phones where they never are because they are working from home.  Yes, they never made their phone numbers available to the public.  In fact most of the call center help is unable to reach them either.

Our opinion of the government of the state of New Jersey has become a great deal lower during this.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, denniS said:

Covid pushed people from big cities to small towns in states like MT and WY. Will these people stay or will they wake up one day say why do we live in MT and move back to where they came from?

Most will.  They will get over the novelty, and the ones not into outdoor activities will scuttle off.  It is nice to be closer to international airports.  

I think the ones that go away will go back to CA and CO, and maybe some to WA to torment Dottie.

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

Most will.  They will get over the novelty, and the ones not into outdoor activities will scuttle off.  It is nice to be closer to international airports.  

I think the ones that go away will go back to CA and CO, and maybe some to WA to torment Dottie.

When? I need a timeline so I can buy a place to live. I was thinking winter would scare these people away. Maybe it will after a couple of years. I guess it's easier to deal with a cold winter when you can hop in your private jet and fly to Cabo whenever you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, denniS said:

When? I need a timeline so I can buy a place to live. I was thinking winter would scare these people away. Maybe it will after a couple of years. I guess it's easier to deal with a cold winter when you can hop in your private jet and fly to Cabo whenever you want.

Winter would scare me off.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, denniS said:

When? I need a timeline so I can buy a place to live. I was thinking winter would scare these people away. Maybe it will after a couple of years. I guess it's easier to deal with a cold winter when you can hop in your private jet and fly to Cabo whenever you want.

I think you are screwed.  You live in a resort town, and resort towns are generally chock a block full of folks who own multiple homes.  Why would someone living in Jackson now, but with a home in NYC, LA, Vancouver, Dallas, etc., sell their vacation home in Jackson?  I can't see that happening.  If anything, folks of all wealth levels are looking at finding get-away homes.  I think the trend - for middle and upper class folks - will include multiple home ownership, and that means supply will have to grow faster than just population growth.

What remains very true, and also which creates affordable housing challenges, is that when properties ARE developed, they are rarely "affordable" housing.  Apartments and homes are usually aimed at upper-middle class customers.  If no one is building "starter" homes or low frills apartments, supply for that stuff isn't going to get any greater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was talking to eldest daughter. She works for the company I will be applying to. They have been working from home since the beginning of Covid. They took a poll recently about returning to the office and it was split 50/50. This may work to the company's advantage. They were needing to move to a larger building. Now they can stay put. She forsees a mandatory in office once or twice per week for those that want to work from home just to have some team building, etc. Remote workers will be exempt. There is still discussion about where to draw the line between long commute and remote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In places where housing is unaffordable, I believe you will see people develop novel and non-traditional solutions.  Part of this will be due to the housing 'shortage' that many places see, but part of it will be driven by the many regulations, permits, and inspections municipalities require in the process of building a traditional home.

For example, I could see someone buying a lot, drilling a well, installing a septic system, getting an electric service to a meter on a pole, and then buying an RV and placing it 'temporarily' on the lot until they can 'build' the permanent house.  Every few months or so disconnect the RV from the water, sewer, and electric, tow it around the block to establish that it's not a 'permanent' structure, and then park it back where it was.   One could do a similar approach for  putting up a 'tent', albeit a fancy tent. 

Building codes have fewer rules for temporary structures than for permanent structures like houses.  Local inspectors will, I think, be hard pressed to limit or sanction such living approaches simply due to the lack of regulations and codes.

But that won't last for long.  As soon as such living styles gain traction and become more common, you can be sure local and state agencies will start passing laws to give them greater ability to regulate non-traditional housing. 

So, I'd suggest get going now and get yourself set up so - with some luck - you can be 'grandfathered' in and the new permits/codes/regulations won't be applied retroactively to you.  Maybe.

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

I think you are screwed.  You live in a resort town, and resort towns are generally chock a block full of folks who own multiple homes.  Why would someone living in Jackson now, but with a home in NYC, LA, Vancouver, Dallas, etc., sell their vacation home in Jackson?  I can't see that happening.  If anything, folks of all wealth levels are looking at finding get-away homes.  I think the trend - for middle and upper class folks - will include multiple home ownership, and that means supply will have to grow faster than just population growth.

What remains very true, and also which creates affordable housing challenges, is that when properties ARE developed, they are rarely "affordable" housing.  Apartments and homes are usually aimed at upper-middle class customers.  If no one is building "starter" homes or low frills apartments, supply for that stuff isn't going to get any greater.

Affordables are part of the program here. The waiting list was five years, it's probably longer now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, denniS said:

Affordables are part of the program here. The waiting list was five years, it's probably longer now. 

Affordable housing is usually part of the mix, but good luck getting enough of it.  It's always a point being made with any new development in my area, but also around the US.  Clearly, if the wait list is five+ years, then the program really miscalculated (or purposefully under-calculated)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Thaddeus Kosciuszko said:

In places where housing is unaffordable, I believe you will see people develop novel and non-traditional solutions.  Part of this will be due to the housing 'shortage' that many places see, but part of it will be driven by the many regulations, permits, and inspections municipalities require in the process of building a traditional home.

For example, I could see someone buying a lot, drilling a well, installing a septic system, getting an electric service to a meter on a pole, and then buying an RV and placing it 'temporarily' on the lot until they can 'build' the permanent house.  Every few months or so disconnect the RV from the water, sewer, and electric, tow it around the block to establish that it's not a 'permanent' structure, and then park it back where it was.   One could do a similar approach for  putting up a 'tent', albeit a fancy tent. 

Building codes have fewer rules for temporary structures than for permanent structures like houses.  Local inspectors will, I think, be hard pressed to limit or sanction such living approaches simply due to the lack of regulations and codes.

But that won't last for long.  As soon as such living styles gain traction and become more common, you can be sure local and state agencies will start passing laws to give them greater ability to regulate non-traditional housing. 

So, I'd suggest get going now and get yourself set up so - with some luck - you can be 'grandfathered' in and the new permits/codes/regulations won't be applied retroactively to you.  Maybe.

I was born into a tent (born in hospital but living in a tent) that was placed on someone's property who allowed us to live there while my father built his first house.  Seemed like a good solution at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

Affordable housing is usually part of the mix, but good luck getting enough of it.  It's always a point being made with any new development in my area, but also around the US.  Clearly, if the wait list is five+ years, then the program really miscalculated (or purposefully under-calculated)?

It's much more complicated than that.

Maybe this is the solution. Next year's budget for affordable housing is $13mil. There is currently a program to get locals to sell to locals. 

https://www.jhnewsandguide.com/the_hole_scroll/jackson-hole-household-gets-public-funds-for-restricting-home-resale-to-locals/article_ca35f1c2-ebd0-56a5-ac85-f22722703223.html

Photo courtesy of Sean Hawksford

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Thaddeus Kosciuszko said:

In places where housing is unaffordable, I believe you will see people develop novel and non-traditional solutions.  Part of this will be due to the housing 'shortage' that many places see, but part of it will be driven by the many regulations, permits, and inspections municipalities require in the process of building a traditional home.

For example, I could see someone buying a lot, drilling a well, installing a septic system, getting an electric service to a meter on a pole, and then buying an RV and placing it 'temporarily' on the lot until they can 'build' the permanent house.  Every few months or so disconnect the RV from the water, sewer, and electric, tow it around the block to establish that it's not a 'permanent' structure, and then park it back where it was.   One could do a similar approach for  putting up a 'tent', albeit a fancy tent. 

Building codes have fewer rules for temporary structures than for permanent structures like houses.  Local inspectors will, I think, be hard pressed to limit or sanction such living approaches simply due to the lack of regulations and codes.

But that won't last for long.  As soon as such living styles gain traction and become more common, you can be sure local and state agencies will start passing laws to give them greater ability to regulate non-traditional housing. 

So, I'd suggest get going now and get yourself set up so - with some luck - you can be 'grandfathered' in and the new permits/codes/regulations won't be applied retroactively to you.  Maybe.

A friend of mine is trying that. He has land in CO and wants to build yurts on it. The HOA has a covenant that it has to a stick built house. He needs 6 of the 10 home owners to agree to his yurts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, denniS said:

probably David, but I was more of a Boomtown Rats fan. Unfortunately, this is still appropriate to our times.

 

I grew up in Plano Texas in the late 70s and early 80s.   For a multitude of reasons, my hometown was the suicide capital of the world.  Lost a close friend to suicide and more than a few acuquaintances.  I am more of a Jeremy sort of guy, but yes, at times appropriate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MS91knuzoOA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, jsharr said:

I grew up in Plano Texas in the late 70s and early 80s.   For a multitude of reasons, my hometown was the suicide capital of the world.  Lost a close friend to suicide and more than a few acuquaintances.  I am more of a Jeremy sort of guy, but yes, at times appropriate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MS91knuzoOA

WY has the second highest suicide rate in the U.S. A good friend of mine died recently. No cause of death listed. That's where I went. 

I don't Mondays is about a school shooting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, denniS said:

WY has the second highest suicide rate in the U.S. A good friend of mine died recently. No cause of death listed. That's where I went. 

I don't Mondays is about a school shooting.

Both were related to school shootings.  Jeremy shot himself in his school.  Both were senseless acts, one directed outward, one directed inward.   Sorry to hear about your friend's death.  Having lost family to both suicide and murder, I can tell you that they both suck.   Sorry to derail your thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

Is that a subsidy to help pay rents or a commitment to build $13 million in housing (for rent or sale)?

Both.

Norton is also hoping to spend part of the $13 million on programs intended to support the valley’s lower income residents. One of those is a first/last/deposit program to help people get into a rental. Another is a so-called “family stabilization” pilot intended to help households with school-aged children experiencing homelessness find affordable rental housing.

But the community won’t see the benefits of the $13 million investment immediately.

Building housing takes time and, aside from the first/last/deposit programs and a proposed expansion of the housing preservation program, those funds won’t impact people experiencing housing issues now for a few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...