One thing they can do to make it easier is publish approved adu plans.
To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law
11–20 of 53 posts
Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law
#12Judging from the articles that get posted on here, in the US you only seem to have a choice between completely bonkers regulations that only serve entrenched interests or no regulation at all. How about regulation that is actually sensible?
That's what I was thinking of. If you turn off all regulation you'll end with 20 story apartment buildings with zero parking space, zero greenery and accessible only by a tiny narrow road that's always clogged.
Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law
#13Judging from the articles that get posted on here, in the US you only seem to have a choice between completely bonkers regulations that only serve entrenched interests or no regulation at all. How about regulation that is actually sensible?
Every NIMBY thinks they have just the right amount of "sensible" regulation.
"But what about schools?" Enrollment is declining precipitously.
"But what about traffic?" Okay, we're improving bike lanes, and putting accessible retail on the ground floor of housing for walkability. "No, not like that."
On and on.
Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law
#14Judging from the articles that get posted on here, in the US you only seem to have a choice between completely bonkers regulations that only serve entrenched interests or no regulation at all. How about regulation that is actually sensible?
That's what I was thinking of. If you turn off all regulation you'll end with 20 story apartment buildings with zero parking space, zero greenery and accessible only by a tiny narrow road that's always clogged.
[deleted]
Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law
#15Judging from the articles that get posted on here, in the US you only seem to have a choice between completely bonkers regulations that only serve entrenched interests or no regulation at all. How about regulation that is actually sensible?
That's what I was thinking of. If you turn off all regulation you'll end with 20 story apartment buildings with zero parking space, zero greenery and accessible only by a tiny narrow road that's always clogged.
Why do you think people will build houses with no street space? Anyways it’s not like street space will suddenly be turned over from the govt to private builders, but even if it was private land why wouldn’t they build land with enough space in it?
Zero parking space would be a good thing because it would indicate public transport is good enough that people don’t need their own private cars for most trips. But in practice if that’s not the case a builder is gonna be unable to sell an apartment without parking space, so they aren’t gonna build apartments like those.
And what’s wrong with 20 storey apartment buildings? And why does that preclude greenery?
Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law
#16Judging from the articles that get posted on here, in the US you only seem to have a choice between completely bonkers regulations that only serve entrenched interests or no regulation at all. How about regulation that is actually sensible?
Isn’t Europe notorious for it’s regulatory bureaucracy?
Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same with Auckland, but we need higher intensity, not more land. Public transport that’s useful seems very unlikely here. We tried looser regulations and got a massive fiasco of leaky buildings due to poor design, poor material choice, poor workmanship, poor auditing and inappropriate sign off. It’ll be interesting to see how all goes for Hawaii.
The effectiveness of public transport is significantly affected by the population density. Without sufficient people per unit area, you won’t have enough passengers to make the public transport work, depending on all the obvious factors like cost/quality of the public transport, proximity to housing without parking, the existence of housing without parking, etc. I would view the existence of housing that doesn’t come…
> ...it on average only gets built where public transportation is viable, and once built it ensures ongoing continued demand for that transportation which keeps public transport more viable around that location.
A kind of corollary of this is that people living in places where where public transport doesn't exist build a lifestyle around private vehicles (obviously). This then leads to people becoming incredulous that life without a car is possible.
Without a car how do you take your two kids to Saturday morning sports in separate far-flung suburbs? How do you cart home a weeks worth of groceries? Get to your workplace 30km away? Stop in on your fiends who live in the countryside for afternoon tea on the weekend? etc...
The answer is mostly you don't. And believe it or not, that's okay. You don't establish that sort of lifestyle to start with. You live a different lifestyle with its own compromises and benefits. Closer family, friends, and acquaintances. Nearby amenities, serendipitous meetings, smaller (or common) gardens, a closer workplace, frequent public transport, nature walks you can actually walk to from your house. And - ironically - time. So much time! People really underestimate what is possible and attainable if you don't start with the assumption that you will own a car.
The fact that 20,000km is a typical distance traveled in a year by a driver is astounding to me. That's over 50km per day. That has to be an indication of a very inefficient society. Try explaining what it's all for to a time traveler from 100 years ago.
The suburban house really is the siren song of modern civilization.
Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's what I was thinking of. If you turn off all regulation you'll end with 20 story apartment buildings with zero parking space, zero greenery and accessible only by a tiny narrow road that's always clogged.
Why do you think people will build houses with no street space? Anyways it’s not like street space will suddenly be turned over from the govt to private builders, but even if it was private land why wouldn’t they build land with enough space in it? Zero parking space would be a good thing because it would indicate public transport is good enough that people don’t need their own private cars for most trips. But in pra…
Everything you mentioned cuts into their profit so it's not worth doing without any regulations.
Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law
#19Judging from the articles that get posted on here, in the US you only seem to have a choice between completely bonkers regulations that only serve entrenched interests or no regulation at all. How about regulation that is actually sensible?
That's what I was thinking of. If you turn off all regulation you'll end with 20 story apartment buildings with zero parking space, zero greenery and accessible only by a tiny narrow road that's always clogged.
TBH, a few of those with transit would be completely fine for housing affordability if centrally located.
Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law
#20Judging from the articles that get posted on here, in the US you only seem to have a choice between completely bonkers regulations that only serve entrenched interests or no regulation at all. How about regulation that is actually sensible?
Isn’t Europe notorious for it’s regulatory bureaucracy?
There's a lot more of it, and it's a big burden on small businesses, but it lacks the flamboyant craziness of the worst excesses of US regulation.
Also the EU does not regulate urban planning at all, that's all local.