The Impact of Zoning on Housing Affordability (2002) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Impact of Zoning on Housing Affordability (2002)

#101

Post by krausejj » Wed, Feb 28, 2018, 3:02 PM UTC

Gibbon1 wrote: post #41

krausejj wrote: post #2

If you care about places like Silicon Valley or New York, or if you care about social justice across (and within) generations, it's time to research and understand why housing is becoming increasingly unaffordable in the most dynamic areas of the world. It's not due to lack of land. In California, we have a chance to fix things. SB-827 is a new bill that prevents local governments from banning density near public tra…

If you care about the rest of the country you should ask why the fire hose of investment money is directed at SF and New York and not elsewhere. Instead of asking what's wrong with San Francisco. Why not ask what's wrong with the rest of the US? Sure I can name a bunch of reasons why little housing is built in California, we can start with the Libertarian wet dream that is Prop 13. Prop 13 does two things, removes an…

In my case, nothing is wrong with the rest of the US, but I happen to have created a life here in California. My friends and job are here. Sure, the sunshine is nice, but that's not the thing keeping me here. And the tax rate in Reno policy in very appealing (and they have mountains! near Tahoe!), but am I going to abandon my community for those reasons alone? Nope.

Re: The Impact of Zoning on Housing Affordability (2002)

#102

Post by krausejj » Wed, Feb 28, 2018, 3:04 PM UTC

axau wrote: post #86

krausejj wrote: post #2

If you care about places like Silicon Valley or New York, or if you care about social justice across (and within) generations, it's time to research and understand why housing is becoming increasingly unaffordable in the most dynamic areas of the world. It's not due to lack of land. In California, we have a chance to fix things. SB-827 is a new bill that prevents local governments from banning density near public tra…

SB-827 is great, but I’m assuming its chance of passing is about zero. Am I wrong? What else can be done?

The only people who know about SB-827 are housing policy wonks and homeowners associations. If the people who it really affects—like Millennials—knew what was happening, it would have a much better chance.

Re: The Impact of Zoning on Housing Affordability (2002)

#103

Post by kaybe » Wed, Feb 28, 2018, 8:37 PM UTC

ng12 wrote: post #37

Retric wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can notice people at a bus stop outside your house then you need better sound insulation. If you want to keep your windows open at night and have that be quite then move the the middle of nowhere. I say this as someone that lived near an airport, even guests did not notice unless the windows where open.

Definitely. If it really bothers you, you can invest in double-paned windows and a good ventilation system. I used to live right under the San Diego flight path [1] and slept beautifully every night. 1. Not my video, but my neighborhood: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_M8PCO3BvE

The state-of-the-art arrived at triple-paned by now.

Re: The Impact of Zoning on Housing Affordability (2002)

#104

Post by secstate » Fri, Mar 02, 2018, 4:32 PM UTC

yostrovs wrote: post #97

secstate wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh wow. Personal preference is thick in that last statement there. I can't stand places with wet and dry seasons. I can't imagine wanting to live somewhere without snow in the winter. "Great year round weather" is a value judgement.

To soothe your feelings, I now live in the northern Midwest where we have real winter. And since it is indeed a value judgement, I still hold to the fact that Califonia has great weather. I like warmth, sun, reasonable levels of humidity. I think the majority of people are with me on this one.

Not sure my feelings were hurt. I was just pointing out a value judgement when I saw it.

Re: The Impact of Zoning on Housing Affordability (2002)

#105

Post by secstate » Fri, Mar 02, 2018, 4:39 PM UTC

manfredo wrote: post #66

secstate wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be careful with "simple facts." Rarely do they turn out to be simple. Show me the evidence that dense urban areas are economically AND environmentally more efficient. The environment part seems especially suspect. To a large degree we're still living in the shadow of the industrial revolution, when workers flocked to cities for work. As a telecommuter, my quality of life is a thousand fold higher than my co-worke…

The economic efficiency is demonstrated by the greater job growth in urban areas. I'll easily find stats on this when I get off mobile. And this is the first time I've heard someone claim that sprawl and dispersed populations are environmentally better than urban areas. Not only do dispersed populations need greater land development, they need significantly more energy used in transportation to deliver the same quali…

Thanks for the data! Is it unreasonable to think that as energy efficiency of things (cars, heating systems, airplanes) improve and we move towards renewable energy that the inefficiency of rural life could become offsetting and the value of nature on the human psyche is allowed to return to our culture?

I realize that's more of a value judgement and not objective. But there are definitely costs associated with living in dense urban places. Regardless of efficiencies we are definitely still living in a post-industrial-revolution world, and people did not voluntarily cram themselves into giant cities then, so some sort of reversion when it's possible makes sense. Vast populations of urban people in China would rather not have to move into the city.