|
nimbys will literally fight every new apartment building as "luxury housing" because the market rate for an apartment where you cook in the same room where you sleep is $2,000/mo and then leave the planning commission meeting and go home to their single-family dwelling on its own lot with two personal private parks and separate rooms for "family" and "living"
Greg12 fucked around with this message at 17:00 on May 19, 2021 |
#
?
May 19, 2021 15:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 05:41 |
|
|
The funny thing is that there is some small degree of truth to "luxury" here where I live (above a certain square footage usually is it) but usually it's like a new car- if you get a base model, it's not very luxurious, but there is the potential to be luxurious. You can add on fireplaces, flooring/kitchens, crown moulding, sound systems, expand out windows into bay windows, expand out the back of a home to add square footage, add a deck or patio, add high end finishings to doorknobs, increase the thickness and quality of the garage door etc. So yea, a home can be luxury, but it comes with a big asterisk.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 16:57
|
|
|
Luxury just means “not old”
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 17:01
|
|
|
What is it about real estate that makes people forget every lesson they've learned from living in a consumer economy? "Wait, you mean this guy trying to sell me something is purposefully using language that makes it sound better? Is that legal!?!"
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 17:10
|
|
|
withak posted:Luxury just means “not old” Exactly. Same way every new house built today is a “McMansion”. Just a catchall that means “not old and cheap”
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 17:11
|
|
|
Greg12 posted:nimbys will literally fight every new apartment building as "luxury housing" because the market rate for an apartment where you cook in the same room where you sleep is $2,000/mo and then leave the planning commission meeting and go home to their single-family dwelling on its own lot with two personal private parks and separate rooms for "family" and "living" The idea that it has anything to do with "luxury" or "profits" is bullshit NIMBY's throw around to try and ally themselves with the left. The truth is that they're just reactionaries who will fight anything that makes for more density, because they want only sprawly, exclusionary neighborhoods, and they have zero problems loving over the environment to get what they want.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 17:36
|
|
|
you love to see the bay guardian "techies raus" types in sf vote to overturn approval of turning that private tennis club for rich assholes by embarcadero center into apartments for other rich assholes because, uh, it would block another set of rich assholes' view of the water thanks san francisco sierra club, great job
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 17:50
|
|
|
The people who materially benefit from housing shortage in the bay are also generally the people most active in almost every level of civic political life, including many political organizations that self describe as liberal or even leftist. Techies are just people who happen to have a skillset that the vagaries of the market have made able to command high-ish salaries right now. They want very normal things that most people want, to be able to live near where they work or near fun stuff to do. The actual villians here are the people throttling housing supply so that only they can afford those things. But for various reasons the google programmer is an easier target than the nice old hippy who owns a house that's worth orders of magnitude more now than when they bought it.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 19:31
|
|
|
the techie defender has logged on lol
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 19:44
|
|
|
sorry you're right. people who happen to make a living computer touching are outsiders who are bad (don't fit in with neighborhood character, uncool), landlords and homeowners who block affordable housing are good (part of the community, understand our unique culture).
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
Still Dismal posted:The people who materially benefit from housing shortage in the bay are also generally the people most active in almost every level of civic political life, including many political organizations that self describe as liberal or even leftist. Post blocks or contiguous tracts of land that you think we should use eminent domain to seize, raise, and construct public housing on, sorted by the median net worth of the current owners, and then maybe we can talk about fixing the “supply” problem.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 22:36
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:Post blocks or contiguous tracts of land that you think we should use eminent domain to seize, raise, and construct public housing on, sorted by the median net worth of the current owners, and then maybe we can talk about fixing the “supply” problem. We could start by fighting off people like these: https://twitter.com/nbcsandiego/status/1395023983653892103?s=20
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 22:40
|
|
|
Milpitas is like 50% empty office buildings with big "30,000+ sqft of office space! Call our realtors!!!" signs out in front, and no company in their right mind is going to spend to lease one of them right now. Level that poo poo and throw up some apartments and/or townhouses
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 22:46
|
|
|
Affordable housing?? In our neighborhood?? Its obscene.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 22:48
|
|
|
Weembles posted:We could start by fighting off people like these: I grade this response an F for failing to address any of the instructions provided. Please see me after class to discuss remedial assignments.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 23:05
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Exactly. Same way every new house built today is a “McMansion”. Just a catchall that means “not old and cheap” some one in my parent's neighborhood did a tear down and replaced it with a very tasteful craftsmen that respects the lot size and the pre-existing architectural styles on adjacent properties so there's at least one brand new house that isn't a mcmansion
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2021 00:39
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:Post blocks or contiguous tracts of land that you think we should use eminent domain to seize, raise, and construct public housing on, sorted by the median net worth of the current owners, and then maybe we can talk about fixing the “supply” problem. lmao sure, were I given the power, I would gladly seize with eminent domain every area of the La Jolla coastline that is currently zoned for single family housing, and the same with every residential area in Westwood, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills and Orinda within 5 miles of public transit, and build dense social housing there. Hell, let's do the same in every single area with a median home value north of one million that's within walking distance of any passenger rail transit. You shouldn't be able to see the sky without looking straight up anywhere near those places (unless they get out at a beach or a park). Ok, I did yours, what's your plan to enact the revolution that makes this possible? You have one, right? Because otherwise this seems a lot like utterly empty "more radical-than-thou" posturing. Weembles posted:We could start by fighting off people like these: Yeah, our biggest problem is that the construction of new housing has endless loving veto points where a handful of busybodies or greedy assholes looking to protect their property values can drag things out forever. Making it not de facto illegal to build apartments in the areas that need it the most and taxing property values at sane levels wouldn't solve all of our problems, but they would solve a lot of them.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
Sydin posted:Milpitas is like 50% empty office buildings with big "30,000+ sqft of office space! Call our realtors!!!" signs out in front, and no company in their right mind is going to spend to lease one of them right now. Level that poo poo and throw up some apartments and/or townhouses i'm not a buildologist but i think converting them could be cheaper e: it's an academic distinction, but all our state- or region-scale plans are at the "fun to imagine" stage
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2021 01:40
|
|
|
Not an architect but my understanding is that there are a couple of things that that make converting office spaces to apartments impractical/almost as much trouble as just tearing down (or totally fitting the interior) and replacing. The needs/code requirements for housing vs. office space on fairly basic foundational stuff like plumbing are very different I think. Dunno if it’s like a building code thing that could be tweaked or a hard physical requirement. Would be a great partial solution to the crisis though if we could wholesale convert empty office buildings though. Harder for NIMBYs to complain about buildings that have already been built. I know that there’s been a lot of success in converting abandoned motels to permanent supportive housing, but they’re obviously far closer to apartment buildings already.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2021 02:05
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:Post blocks or contiguous tracts of land that you think we should use eminent domain to seize, raise, and construct public housing on, sorted by the median net worth of the current owners, and then maybe we can talk about fixing the “supply” problem.  https://sfplanninggis.s3.amazonaws.com/hub/BIGmap_HeightBulk.pdf This is San Francisco zoning. The light yellow is mostly zoned 40ft max. The western half of the city is small single-family-house-over-garage, below is typical (random google streetview in the sunset)  This is fairly old housing built when the city was expanding out to the ocean in the 30s-60s, they are now generally worth about $1.5 million each. There is essentially zero chance you could get a project to build something like a 5-10 story apartment building
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2021 02:05
|
|
|
i live on 48th avenue and i say build em all!
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2021 02:12
|
|
|
a whole generation poisoned by boomer-brained movies where a tiny cabal of connected elites trying to preserve their exclusive access to and ownership of a private space solely used for their arcane hobby, but are temporarily embarrassed by capital shortfall are the good guys, and the guy trying to build a nice shopping mall where everyone is welcome and has things people want to buy, nice places to eat, and Tiffany concerts is the bad guy
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2021 14:00
|
|
|
it's loving may, what the hell https://twitter.com/CAFireScanner/status/1395602069185208320
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 07:38
|
|
|
It begins! Fire season 2021: the firening
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 08:43
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:
There are tons of apartment buildings on the west side too, it's not all single family homes. Multiple 5+ story buildings have been built in the western half of SF in the past several years (should've been way more of course), and many more were built back in the day before current zoning was implemented. There's also dozens of midrises and highrises under construction in a single development on the west side, in park merced (which already had several high rise buildings before the new construction, as does neighboring SFSU...it's that multicolored area on the southwest corner of the map). But yeah, up-zoning the area in general would meet a ton of resistance. Maybe the city could get away with limited upzoning along the main commercial streets, especially if BART ever gets extended down Geary/19th ave. Rah! fucked around with this message at 08:49 on May 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 08:44
|
|
|
God I just wish real life were Sim City or Cities Skylines and I could just plop "rezone" without a million screaming feudal lords rising up in arms against me at the city council meetings.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 14:13
|
|
|
environmental justice and equity demand that we urban renew white neighborhoods to make way for the cities we need single dwellings are blight; bring on the bulldozers.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 14:55
|
|
|
 I want a mural of jars of mayonnaise crying up on an Erewhon somewhere.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 15:08
|
|
|
Rah! posted:But yeah, up-zoning the area in general would meet a ton of resistance. Maybe the city could get away with limited upzoning along the main commercial streets, especially if BART ever gets extended down Geary/19th ave. Alas, many Democratic representatives are pieces of poo poo who are still more concerned about 'neighborhood character' (my Jesus-given right to free car parking) than people being able to pay their rent, or taking care of the environment.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 17:03
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Sen. Scott Wiener had the right idea by just mandating upzones around transit via a state-wide regulation. Doing it that way neatly sidesteps the local NIMBY's. state-wide housing policy, gavbot recalled instantly, Dwayne Johnson wins in a landslide, "you cannot build on this Rock".
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 17:05
|
|
|
willie brown proposed a bill to eliminate local government and replace it all with regional governments. it failed. instead, his legacy is kamala
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 20:02
|
|
|
Greg12 posted:environmental justice and equity demand that we urban renew white neighborhoods to make way for the cities we need in SF's case those western neighborhoods are over 50% asian used to be turbo whitey land, but not for a few decades now also a lot of those single family homes in SF have additional in-law units on the ground floor, so they have more than one family living in them. But why have just two households on that lot when you could have more 
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 20:34
|
|
|
Greg12 posted:willie brown proposed a bill to eliminate local government and replace it all with regional governments. Yeah, local governments really are scum when it comes to land use. Doing anything possible to placate their screaming homeowner electorates. Just textbook tragedy of the commons poo poo where everyone acting in their self-interest fucks everything up. This thread is pretty revealing of the ways that plenty of cities just straight up loving lie about the amount of housing that they're going to be adding in the near future to get out of having to actually meet their RHNA numbers. https://twitter.com/mnolangray/status/1392647001959927810 My ideal solution would be: add X number of units by date Y (with minimum % affordable) or lose your land use authority for 10 years.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2021 22:20
|
|
|
Still Dismal posted:textbook tragedy of the commons poo poo We should really fix those textbooks because the tragedy of the commons is a myth that isn’t historically accurate
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2021 00:12
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:We should really fix those textbooks because the tragedy of the commons is a myth that isn’t historically accurate Is it a myth because even with State regulation, it allows the depletion and destruction of the commons? Such as overfishing? Or is it a myth because even without regulation, the State allows the depletion of destruction of the commons? Such as overfishing? Or is it a myth because Capitalism is the cause? I had NFI was it was until I googled it. These are good faith questions.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
The historical one is a myth because it turns out villages of less than a hundred people or so are actually pretty good about going "Farmer John, your sheep are overgrazing on the village commons and wrecking it. Cut that out or we will take your sheep and/or hit you with sticks" Village commons were historically managed well for common social good. They're more examples of how small-group community socialism works well, even without formal rules 'tragedy of the commons' as shorthand for individual actors wrecking much larger common things is still a thing Foxfire_ fucked around with this message at 01:34 on May 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2021 01:28
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:'tragedy of the commons' as shorthand for the ruling class wrecking much larger common things is still a thing
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2021 06:51
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Latest poll shows the recall campaign is going nowhere I'm less inclined to believe that a major celebrity contender is going to get into the election now 1.) Things are looking better for Newsom now than they were 6 - 8 months ago. He hasn't flubbed noticeably as much since the French Laundry incident, things are opening back up and people are getting vaxxed (which means less people are stuck in their home obsessing over what Lord Gavin is doing currently), apparently we have a budget surplus plus money from the feds and now people are told they're going to be getting checks (or debit cards or direct deposits) from the State of California. Newsom's polling could be higher but it's fine. 2.) It's been nearly a month since CA SoS announced there were enough signatures, and before that it was known that there were allegedly more than enough signatures already. If someone was going to run seriously I think they would have announced by now... However, devil's advocate on that: Special Election is in September-October-probably*. The 2003 recall election was certified on 7/23/2003 (There wasn't a 30 day process to remove your recall petition signature back then), and the election was held 10/7/2003. Arnold announced his candidacy on 8/6/2003. He walked away with the governorship in 2 months, though Davis was a much much worse off candidate and before Arnold the candidates out there weren't very popular. I think the moment for Newsom to be recalled has passed, and that I was hoping for a real clowncar of candidates tripping over each other but I guess there's not enough blood in the water like there was in the 2003 recall; We may have to settle for John Cox's Bear Fines and Caitlyn Jenner's voting-not-voting scandal.  Maybe we'll get some interesting candidates within the next month or so but it's not as desirable to become a candidate as it was, again, 6 - 8 months ago. Of course, there's always the chance that Gavin does another French Laundry flub or two before election, or maybe he somehow has some sort of weird email server scandal the preceding two weeks before recall. Shear Modulus posted:if the rock runs and polls like poo poo I'm going to post "looks like folks aren't smelling what the Rock is cooking" * Also regarding the date of recall (cribbing from ballotpedia): 6/8/2021 is the deadline for petitioners to remove their names from the recall petition. From there, if we were to assume all the moving parts took the maximum amount of time to go through: 6/18/2021 (10 days) is the deadline for the Secretary of State to certify there's still enough signatures left. The department of finance then provides a cost estimate of the recall election. 7/18/2021 (30 days) is the deadline for the budget committee to review and comment on the cost estimate. Then the Secretary of State certifies the result. The Lt. Governor now must call for an election date, either 60 to 80 days from certification (so roughly anywhere from 9/18/2021 to 10/7/2021? Rough dates) or if a general election is occurring within 180 days, they can have it coincide with that. I don't think we have any general elections this year afaik. Speaking of this being not a general election year, that brings up "on the other hand hand" side of things: Since it doesn't coincide with a general election year... that means those who are motivated to go vote in the special election will be the ones who decide the result, as opposed to showing up to vote for various things and also voting on the recall. So while I still think things are better for Gavin than they were before, he doesn't just have to convince voters to not vote to recall him; he has to convince voters to show up to this special election in the first place just to vote to not recall him. Will the COVID Bear Bucks be enough to motivate people to show up to vote against recall? I think that's a tougher question. Hence (as Shear Modulus and others were talking about) Gavin would still want a backup candidate for those loyal democratic voters that they get to show up to vote for, especially since it's possible that those who vote for recall may be more split on who they vote to replace Gavin. BeAuMaN fucked around with this message at 11:02 on May 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2021 10:49
|
|
|
My understanding of the tragedy of the commons is that it was an excuse to justify enclosure of common land es decir: these peasants don't know how to care of their land, better these rich capitalists take it instead! E: and really it continues to be an excuse for "enclosure" of other common goods America Inc. fucked around with this message at 11:07 on May 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2021 10:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 05:41 |
|
|
Rah! posted:in SF's case those western neighborhoods are over 50% asian Granny flats are the loving pits. My now wife lived in one. No internet hookups, wasn’t allowed to have a subtenant despite it having two bedrooms, landlord showed up regularly with no notice to access the water meter and breaker, etc. You have reduced rights as a tenant because you’re technically living in someone else’s single family house. My main concern is even if zoning is fixed, labor and building costs are so high now because there are so few skilled construction workers left in the Bay Area and for cultural reasons most of them refuse to live in apartments. Couple this with the current cost of lumber and materials and I’ve given up hope that it’s even possible to make housing cheap without absolutely massive subsidies.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2021 15:06
|
|
