ADK housing

[saabrian]

"If the state steps in it's going to be less effective and more subject to cronyism"

LOL!!! Because there's no cronyism in rural places... especially when it comes to the relationship between small town politicians and developers (who are often one and the same).

I have no objection to the dorm idea. Every little bit helps. It's great for certain groups - primarily younger and single. But is it going to be that appealing for a parent or couple with kids? Every little bit helps. But I am skeptical this is going to make much of a difference generally. Maybe in specific places.

"It's not fun but..." is not really a great marketing ploy. It pretty much guarantees that dorms are going to be viewed as temporary and of last resort. That does not really bode well for its longer term impact. I assume we want people to move to the Adks for work... and stay there!

[wiiawiwb]

No question that those who live and work in the Adirondacks are getting priced out of living near where they work. That dynamic is underscored when gas prices are rising by leaps and bounds making commuting to work almost, if not totally, unaffordable. The proverbial quagmire.

Towns, counties and school districts could offer their own "STAR" program whereby a credit is allowed against real estate taxes levied. Gear the qualifier toward those who live and work in the area along with an income test much like the "Senior STAR".

It's one thing to have a city such as NYC unaffordable because there is a mass transit system in place that allows those who work in NYC to commute. In the ADKs, the only commuting mechanism is your vehicle which nowadays is nearly unaffordable as a means to get hinther and yon especially in a environment where home and work can be a distance apart.

[billconner]

Not to mention heating in addition to gasoline. I use to get oil bills around $400. Last week's was over $1000. Don't think dorms work for a family of 4 but like the Star program thoughts.

[montcalm]

Fuel oil is a concern. We need to get off that stuff although I’m sure a number of people in the region are invested in this and the alternatives are not cheap.

I found it interesting that central New York had its own regional program to alleviate cost of geothermal. I’m also not sure this will be the end all, say all in terms of heat energy. In fact, due to remoteness and storm interruptions, I’m not sure the grid alone is going to work in the north country. With any change in our dependence on fossil fuels and increasing prices, this will certainly strain those individuals the most.

[chairrock]

Originally Posted by montcalm

Fuel oil is a concern. We need to get off that stuff although I?m sure a number of people in the region are invested in this and the alternatives are not cheap.

I found it interesting that central New York had its own regional program to alleviate cost of geothermal. I?m also not sure this will be the end all, say all in terms of heat energy. In fact, due to remoteness and storm interruptions, I?m not sure the grid alone is going to work in the north country. With any change in our dependence on fossil fuels and increasing prices, this will certainly strain those individuals the most.

We have "geothermal", best thing we ever did... in the Finger Lakes....as long as the grid stays lit..... we are planning on solar to get totally off grid... long term it makes sense. The up front money is a problem, but the long term savings and "green" benefits count... I almost wish they would codify "geothermal" into new construction...

[montcalm]

Originally Posted by chairrock

We have "geothermal", best thing we ever did... in the Finger Lakes....as long as the grid stays lit..... we are planning on solar to get totally off grid... long term it makes sense. The up front money is a problem, but the long term savings and "green" benefits count... I almost wish they would codify "geothermal" into new construction...

Yeah, your area has the incentives - I think it's because you don't have any NG resources there. The issue is similar in the Adirondacks but I'm not sure if the wells are going to be as easy to install. Again, you need some electricity to power to the system - that could be in the form of batteries.

Perhaps people in the north country will have to revert back to wood as a backup, at minimum.

[chairrock]

Originally Posted by montcalm

Yeah, your area has the incentives - I think it's because you don't have any NG resources there. The issue is similar in the Adirondacks but I'm not sure if the wells are going to be as easy to install. Again, you need some electricity to power to the system - that could be in the form of batteries.

Perhaps people in the north country will have to revert back to wood as a backup, at minimum.

The well is actually pretty easy... one day, 500 foot deep....depends on soil or rocks.... can be done in an urban back yard...expensive? maybe....Howard Hughs did design a great drill bit....battery? where do they get charged?

[montcalm]

Originally Posted by chairrock

The well is actually pretty easy... one day, 500 foot deep....depends on soil or rocks.... can be done in an urban back yard...expensive? maybe....Howard Hughs did design a great drill bit....battery? where do they get charged?

Right - it's the expense of the depth and then the coil, which as I was looking was pretty high. And of course the unit itself.

I was mentioning battery (home) as a backup to grid in the event you lose your connection during a storm. You could also have a solar system or whatever. Mainly my thought though is people are going to have to have a generator and/or wood backups.

[BillyGr]

Originally Posted by Klinkhamer

Property taxes typically are based solely on assessed Property Value, however a year round resident making 30-40K a year can't afford property worth several hundred thousand dollars or more with the taxes attached to it. When your neighbor builds a million dollar home next door to your small cabin in the woods, your property values increase to a point the taxes on them become confiscatory and you can lose your home. Need to have a circuit breaker for property taxes based on some other variable(s) such as family income, provided the person(s) on that property are year-round residents actually living & working there in community too. I'm sure this isn't the first time this idea has been heard.

That makes no sense. If your house is much smaller than that million dollar one, it will never be valued the same.

The value of the land might go up a little, but that is only a small portion of the overall value - the majority of it is the building and that won't be worth more just because there is a large one near it.

Originally Posted by saabrian

I have no objection to the dorm idea. Every little bit helps. It's great for certain groups - primarily younger and single. But is it going to be that appealing for a parent or couple with kids? Every little bit helps. But I am skeptical this is going to make much of a difference generally. Maybe in specific places.

"It's not fun but..." is not really a great marketing ploy. It pretty much guarantees that dorms are going to be viewed as temporary and of last resort. That does not really bode well for its longer term impact. I assume we want people to move to the Adks for work... and stay there!

They don't have to be dorms as most think of them. Someone could build what basically would look like a 1950's motel (the individual cabins clustered in one area, just having enough to be a full time living vs. a place to stay travelling) and rent or sell those out.

They would be smaller than most "regular" houses, thus cheaper to build and maintain, and being a group in one spot they would have lower taxes (less land with each)

Originally Posted by billconner

Not to mention heating in addition to gasoline. I use to get oil bills around $400. Last week's was over $1000. Don't think dorms work for a family of 4 but like the Star program thoughts.

Originally Posted by montcalm

Fuel oil is a concern. We need to get off that stuff although I?m sure a number of people in the region are invested in this and the alternatives are not cheap.

It is expensive at the moment - doesn't mean it will stay that way. Luckily, this is the time of year most are using little (if any - only those who also heat water with it would) anyway, so that gives it time to readjust before the next heating season.

There are also ways to save on that - in fact, we had prepaid for ours last year and thus even if we were still getting that delivered today (not needing it now) it would have been only $2.82, no matter what the "market" price was! Quite a break from the current pricing, and it was never higher than that all year since last fall (and, had the actual price gone lower, it would adjust that way as well, so you aren't stuck with a high price).
Probably not all companies offer that, but certainly worth checking around to see if one in your area does.

[billconner]

Originally Posted by BillyGr

That makes no sense. If your house is much smaller than that million dollar one, it will never be valued the same.

The value of the land might go up a little, but that is only a small portion of the overall value - the majority of it is the building and that won't be worth more just because there is a large one near it.

Of course the total taxes go up. A dump surrounded by expensive real estate is worth more. Assessed value should relate to market value. They're called million dollar tear downs.

[BillyGr]

Originally Posted by billconner

Of course the total taxes go up. A dump surrounded by expensive real estate is worth more. Assessed value should relate to market value. They're called million dollar tear downs.

As I said, the LAND value may go up (which would raise taxes a bit), but since that is only a small part of the total value it won't make a major difference.

The house itself is NOT worth any more just because there is a big one nearby!

IF someone bought the property and REPLACED the house with a larger one, then of course the value would change - this is talking about someone who already owns the house and is not changing it.

[DuctTape]

In some areas the land value is a small percentage of the total value, in other areas it can be a high percentage.

[Wldrns]

However, when the multi-million $ homeeowners move in, they demand cityfied services of new water llines, sewers, well paved roads, city parks, pools, street lights (oh God no, please not that) upgraded fire and police protection, day care, nearby high end education schools and other education opportunities,upgraded communications services, and all kinds of expensive add-ons to normal life. Those excesses are not commonly found in small hamlet living, to be paid for with increased taxes to all residents. They leave the city life for "simple" rural pleasures, yet they want to bring the city with them.

Regarding the dormatory style living/apartments. google Soviet Union era housing in Eastern Bloc countries to see how well that all worked out for citizen's living conditions and the environment.

[billconner]

Originally Posted by BillyGr

As I said, the LAND value may go up (which would raise taxes a bit), but since that is only a small part of the total value it won't make a major difference.

The house itself is NOT worth any more just because there is a big one nearby!

IF someone bought the property and REPLACED the house with a larger one, then of course the value would change - this is talking about someone who already owns the house and is not changing it.

The land value increase from gentrification can easily exceed the price of what the family living there can afford.

[chairrock]

Originally Posted by billconner

The land value increase from gentrification can easily exceed the price of what the family living there can afford.

Yes, and the market will determine the real estate prices and the wages....OR the govt. will allocate money to subsidize.....and who pays for that?

[Bunchberry]

We must remember that the Adirondacks are heavily influenced by government regulation so they may need some additional government intervention to provide housing for the people that actually live in the Adirondacks. When the park was created remote work and verbo did not exist.

[MTVhike]

As a relatively recent escapee from southern NY, I was surprised to find that RE taxes in Elizabethtown are about the same as on Long Island, for a home with the same(ish) market value!
Someone else here suggested just buying a piece of land and getting a house built. That's what I thought I would do after losing many purchases to other buyers, but building my house ended costing more than the houses I had rejected!

[montcalm]

Originally Posted by MTVhike

As a relatively recent escapee from southern NY, I was surprised to find that RE taxes in Elizabethtown are about the same as on Long Island, for a home with the same(ish) market value!
Someone else here suggested just buying a piece of land and getting a house built. That's what I thought I would do after losing many purchases to other buyers, but building my house ended costing more than the houses I had rejected!

It varies all over, but many places I've researched are not this way wrt to tax rates.

Either way, I think some are missing the point that raising taxes or should I say, perhaps equalizing taxes should be done to meet the required town budget while factoring in a relief program for those who work (and have lower income) in the park.

If the towns want to screw themselves with poor political choices, that's on them. The state's role in this should only be that of limiting development and making sure current development preserves nature. Blaming the state for all the problems in the Adirondacks very much reminds me of the meme in which the person puts the stick in their own bicycle spokes.

As far as the last statement, I'll admit some hypocrisy here, but really that in some sense becomes a problem. The cost of developing new land, in the park, should always be far more than already developed land to be in line with Article 14.

I used to think this land development was a minor issue, but the more I think about it, I really do recall literally watching the sprawl happen around the Fulton chain, which was already vastly developed. But in the late 80s, that was largely contained to the lakes themselves. In more recent years a number of what I recall as "$300k" vacation homes popped up on newly developed housing tracts e.g. Dan Bar Acres et. al.

[montcalm]

Perhaps one other idea I have as well from the state level would be to provide (extremely) low interest loans or grants for housing to those who work in the park.

This then becomes less centralized to the community.

[saabrian]

Originally Posted by BillyGr

They don't have to be dorms as most think of them. Someone could build what basically would look like a 1950's motel (the individual cabins clustered in one area, just having enough to be a full time living vs. a place to stay travelling) and rent or sell those out.

They would be smaller than most "regular" houses, thus cheaper to build and maintain, and being a group in one spot they would have lower taxes (less land with each).

I hope someone is willing to pursue this. And that towns incentivize this. I live just outside the southeastern edge of Blue Line. I wanted move inside the Park. But the rental units (for living, not vacationing) were very limited, plus Internet was an issue, as I work from home. So I ended up moving to another place just outside the Blue Line. If there were more alternatives, I'd love to move further north. Something like you describe could work for someone like me.