> In the 1970s, left-wing activists opposed the construction of dingbat apartments and allied with liberal homeowners to pass the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance (NPO), which effectively finished off housing construction in the city I am not surprised.
> In the 1970s, left-wing activists opposed the construction of dingbat apartments and allied with liberal homeowners to pass the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance (NPO), which effectively finished off housing construction in the city Short of sleazebag propaganda, there is no logic or context, historical or otherwise, that can justify describing this as "left wing." They are right wing activists by definition. I d…
Berkeley's upzoning would be among nation's largest
51–60 of 289 posts
Re: Berkeley's upzoning would be among nation's largest
#52> In the 1970s, left-wing activists opposed the construction of dingbat apartments and allied with liberal homeowners to pass the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance (NPO), which effectively finished off housing construction in the city I am not surprised.
> In the 1970s, left-wing activists opposed the construction of dingbat apartments and allied with liberal homeowners to pass the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance (NPO), which effectively finished off housing construction in the city Short of sleazebag propaganda, there is no logic or context, historical or otherwise, that can justify describing this as "left wing." They are right wing activists by definition. I d…
I believe the national org is now YIMBY and most chapters are, but there are certainly many progressive/environmental orgs that have blocked construction for decades.
https://sf.curbed.com/2020/2/6/21122825/affordable-housing-h...
Re: Berkeley's upzoning would be among nation's largest
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It only results in a decrease in per-unit average house prices It never does. Upzoning does NOT reduce per-unit prices, but it certainly increases everyone's misery.
Ah yes, real estate prices are famously low in the most upzoned parts of the country (Manhattan). If you can build a 100 floor skyscraper on a piece of land, that land is insanely valuable!
Re: Berkeley's upzoning would be among nation's largest
#54I’m still shocked by the notion that a highly dense population is inherently good. Pollution increases, energy requirements increase, crime per-capita increases, babies per-capita tend to decrease, time spent in traffic or commuting increases, space per person decreases. I get that you get more food or entertainment options, but in general it doesn’t appear that increasing density actually improves quality of life. T…
- Space wise, I definitely don't need more than 2 bedroom apartment to myself. I don't think I would get a bigger place unless I partnered up or something.
- Especially white collar jobs are within the city, so living in a city decreases your commute time. My longest commute in the past was 20 minutes from door-to-door back in 2016. After that, it was about 15 minute walk, or under-10 minute bike ride
- Energy and pollution per capita decreases just because of economies of scale to my understanding
- Babies per-capita, I guess kinda decreases. But that's mostly North American thing, I would say. I've known a lot of people who grew up in very urbanized European cities. It's just times are different and people are having less babies, rather than "apartments not letting people have babies"
- Crime per-capita, I guess increases. But alas, I don't care, really not a big problem where I live (relatively speaking)
- I will add one big con though to your list - we have forgotten in North America how to build functional cities. And unfortunately, it shows. There's a resurgence in the past 10 years in urban planning and etc., but we'll see how it goes. In some cities, urban cleanliness, public infrastructure, and city culture is lacking.
Now if you start adding actual pros that can't be replicated in less dense areas because of not having enough people:
- Never have to drive anywhere, unless I'm going outside of the city like camping or something
- Get to mingle with other people easily. I have a few friends living in the same neighbourhood, so a simple "wanna grab ramen in an hour?" message in a group chat ends up with a meet up
- 3 proper grocery stores within 5 minute distance from me. And a downtown Costco 15 minute walk away
That being said, I really wish we were able to design our cities to be full of 5-10 story buildings, rather than towers that we're building in specific pockets of lands. I understand that's the only way we can do it from zoning perspective in my city, but it just sucks, cause we could do so much better by just copying what other countries are doing.
Re: Berkeley's upzoning would be among nation's largest
#55Each home only getting twelve percent of an acre qualifies as "exclusionary housing only for rich people"? Just how insane is the cost of living in Berkeley?
485m² of land in one of the highest-income urban areas in the world is for rich people only, yeah.
Re: Berkeley's upzoning would be among nation's largest
#56A surprisingly progressive proposal coming from Berkeley, but of course they are still playing games with parking minimums maximums, setback requirements, and income segregation. Seems like it would be a step forward at least.
yeah, i'm pretty skeptical that berkeley will actually manage to accomplish something progressive. if this change had actual merit, somebody would have put a stop to it by now. I'd assume that between setbacks, parking minimums, height limits, and floor-area-ratio requirements, they're going to end up changing basically nothing.
> All density limits for the R-1, R-2 and R-1A zones have been removed. Any number of homes can be built, provided the building does not exceed 3 stories, with a 4 foot side or rear setback and 15-20 foot front yards. In practice, this will allow about 6 to 10 homes on most city parcels.
> Allow 60% of a parcel to be developed, up from the 30 - 45% standard. No floor area ratio requirements.
> No parking is required per the city’s climate change anti-driving policy.
The article also mentions that under the status quo most of these parcels can only see 1-2 homes.
Re: Berkeley's upzoning would be among nation's largest
#57Has the author lived in Berkeley? I have, I don't think upzoning can fix it. It's a small community tucked up against the hills. New construction in the hills is just setting the stage for the next devastating fire. Closer to the bay, it's already pretty dense. This would do a lot of good in Emeryville and Oakland, but it's not like Berkeley is suburban sprawl like over the hills in the rest of Alameda... Berkeley ne…
Re: Berkeley's upzoning would be among nation's largest
#58Has the author lived in Berkeley? I have, I don't think upzoning can fix it. It's a small community tucked up against the hills. New construction in the hills is just setting the stage for the next devastating fire. Closer to the bay, it's already pretty dense. This would do a lot of good in Emeryville and Oakland, but it's not like Berkeley is suburban sprawl like over the hills in the rest of Alameda... Berkeley ne…
In addition, new homes pay 2024 market rate property taxes, which the city can reinvest in things like garbage cans and street sweepers.
Re: Berkeley's upzoning would be among nation's largest
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In the 1970s, left-wing activists opposed the construction of dingbat apartments and allied with liberal homeowners to pass the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance (NPO), which effectively finished off housing construction in the city Short of sleazebag propaganda, there is no logic or context, historical or otherwise, that can justify describing this as "left wing." They are right wing activists by definition. I d…
There was a major environmentalist and neighborhood preservationist movement in California during the 1960s and 1970s that helped fuel anti-growth measures. While they weren't strictly leftist (there are right-wing slow- and anti-growth advocates), they did complement the views of the New Left, which embraced environmentalism and came out of the counter-cultural movement of the 1960s. The San Francisco freeway revolt…
We should all be grateful for those. The proposals to put freeways across SF would have ruined the city. Similar freeway construction did ruin other cities all over the USA, and was especially horrible for working-class neighborhoods that got bulldozed in the name of "progress" (i.e. the convenience of unsustainable car commuters from the suburbs).
Re: Berkeley's upzoning would be among nation's largest
#60Has the author lived in Berkeley? I have, I don't think upzoning can fix it. It's a small community tucked up against the hills. New construction in the hills is just setting the stage for the next devastating fire. Closer to the bay, it's already pretty dense. This would do a lot of good in Emeryville and Oakland, but it's not like Berkeley is suburban sprawl like over the hills in the rest of Alameda... Berkeley ne…
"Berkeley is already pretty dense" is a laughable statement with its single-family homes near downtown.