Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 133 posts

Re: California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

#121

Post by smugma »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #33
epistasis wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are mistaken on the basic facts of where this permits more hosing. You also do now understand people in urban areas and their desires. For example look at Seattle, which has added a lot of population, but only added 1 car per 30 new people: https://www.theurbanist.org/2025/09/07/while-seattle-populat... For a few generations, 99% of housing that was built was car dependent. That's not what the market wants. So wh…

While I wholly support density and bike everywhere myself, I don’t know if “people are getting poorer in Seattle” is the win “The Urbanist” thinks it is.

Median income growth slowing or decreasing does mean things are working well. We don’t want middle class families being shut out of our housing markets and working class folks needing two hour commutes to come support our cities.

Every affordable housing project that gets built slows the growth of the area AMI.

Re: California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

#122

Post by smugma »

SilverElfin wrote: post #34
AlotOfReading wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who want small, mid-sized towns are free to live literally anywhere they want outside major metro areas. There's 90+% of the state by land area left to them. This discussion is and has always been centered around the housing crisis in urban centers, where it's been illegal to build density for decades. This has caused issues where those urban centers can't afford for people to provide critical services ( l…

> The people who want small, mid-sized towns are free to live literally anywhere they want outside major metro areas. This is what I was referring to, in terms of HN’s attitudes on this topic. Why should a “major metro area” change to accommodate newcomers? It should just stay serving its current residents, who may want it to stay the size it is. The ones desiring to live there at a price they can afford are the enti…

The state is passing laws to serve its current residents.

The state believes local control has not benefited Californians as a whole.

I happen to live in an expensive home in a dense area and I agree with the state.

Re: California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

#123

Post by tuna74 »

jjav wrote: post #49
AlotOfReading wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who want small, mid-sized towns are free to live literally anywhere they want outside major metro areas. There's 90+% of the state by land area left to them. This discussion is and has always been centered around the housing crisis in urban centers, where it's been illegal to build density for decades. This has caused issues where those urban centers can't afford for people to provide critical services ( l…

> The people who want small, mid-sized towns are free to live literally anywhere they want outside major metro areas. There's 90+% of the state by land area left to them. Whether good or bad, it's important to realize this is not true in California, with regard to these laws. They apply everywhere, not only in urban centers. So if there are people who want small towns without dense development, that option has been t…

Would it be better if the forest was cut down to build single family detached homes?

Re: California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

#124

Post by tuna74 »

epistasis wrote: post #27
mutator wrote: post #11

The discourse around high density housing does not make it clear what specific type of development do advocates prefer. Its likely that the market will have to decide for itself, but if we end up with an abundance of just 1/2 bedroom rental apartments, targeted towards transient younger people, I fear it's just going to enrich the property management class, and families with kids/older parents looking for larger plac…

You don't think that younger people need housing too? How about all the empty nesters that are sitting on 4 bedroom homes but are unwilling to move. Are you going to propose legislation to make them? Will you propose legislation to specially encourage more multi bedroom homes? The attitude of "this doesn't benefit a narrow band of people that I want to benefit, therefore it must be stopped" is why California is in su…

Yeah, these incentives should be changed.

Re: California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

#125

Post by tuna74 »

lotsoweiners wrote: post #111
eclipticplane wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but if we end up with an abundance of just 1/2 bedroom rental apartments That's still a massive win. To replace 10 single family homes supporting 2-3 people each with a 9 story building supporting many multiples of that is a win for society. If the people chasing 3 and 4 bedroom apartments accepted smaller rooms, they could still be economical vs studio/1/2 BR apartments and condos.

> That's still a massive win. To replace 10 single family homes supporting 2-3 people each with a 9 story building supporting many multiples of that is a win for society. Not if society wants to own their home.

A condo is still property.

Re: California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

#126

Post by tuna74 »

fooker wrote: post #116
stouset wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you design infrastructure based on what you think people want instead of what actually produces good outcomes, you end up with gridlock. Travel some time. Take a look at what’s happened in Paris over the last several years. See what’s happened in Utrecht and Amsterdam. These are far from the only examples.

The zeitgeist of what produces good outcomes tends to change somewhat fast. This is the line of thought that led the US to tear down railways, city center train stations, and built freeways through the middle of cities. They thought they were planning for good outcomes too. I have traveled all over the world, and have lived in Amsterdam for half a year. I like that model sure, but doesn't change the fact that America…

Dense neighbourhoods are very expensive in the US as well, so it seems like there is a big market for that type of housing.

Re: California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

#127

Post by jjav »

tuna74 wrote: post #123
jjav wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The people who want small, mid-sized towns are free to live literally anywhere they want outside major metro areas. There's 90+% of the state by land area left to them. Whether good or bad, it's important to realize this is not true in California, with regard to these laws. They apply everywhere, not only in urban centers. So if there are people who want small towns without dense development, that option has been t…

Would it be better if the forest was cut down to build single family detached homes?

It would be better if a tiny town was allowed to remain tiny. Not every place has to be forced to be the same.

Re: California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

#128

Post by mayneack »

ec109685 wrote: post #119
mayneack wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes! That's the tradeoff and the market prices it in.

Or fix transportation and you don’t have an awful commute! Everybody wins.

How can one fix car transportation? More lanes?

Re: California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

#129

Post by TulliusCicero »

Ylpertnodi wrote: post #105
davidw wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This bill barely passed (they got a majority +1, which they needed to pass) so a further reaching bill might have been difficult to sell. The LA area in particular, has some really bad elected officials in terms of housing.

> The LA area in particular, has some really bad elected officials in terms of housing. LA in particular? Naaah, mate. Those elected officials are fucking everywhere. Yours, an Eu resident.

In this case specifically, northern California was mostly in favor, and the wider LA area was mostly against. I almost said southern California, but actually San Diego was in favor too.

Re: California lawmakers pass SB 79, housing bill that brings dense housing

#130

Post by TulliusCicero »

ggm wrote: post #3

... near transit hubs. It should be a net positive if it doesn't die in the courts for every single proposal. It's also not enough by itself but Rome wasn't built in a day.

California spent decades digging this hole and it's gonna take decades to dig themselves out, even with bills like these.

But that's still better than refusing to fix the problem.

Post reply on HN