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

Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 403 posts

Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

#221

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

jperras wrote: post #112
cryptoz wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've lived on the 2nd and 3rd floors of triplexes in the plateau and it was one of the best living experiences I've had. Really awesome location, price, size, etc.

Yeah, it's hard to describe to people that haven't lived in them before. Couple that with the fact that everyone typically gets their own private entrance/exit to outddoors due to the exterior staircases, and it's a fantastic combination of privacy, density, convenience, and urbanization IMO.

Those exterior staircases are such a unique feature, certainly the way they are positioned. Love your city very much, one of the best in North America.

Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

#222

Post by notJim »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #206
_fat_santa wrote: post #5

As soon as you look at the zoning of LA, the housing problem there becomes clear as day, even for someone who doesn't visit very often. I don't know what you would call this system but LA's problem is that the folks that have the power to fix housing have zero interest in doing because it would hurt their self interest. Housing is only a "problem" if you haven't bought a house yet, once you purchase a house, all the…

> Un-democratic in the sense that it casts out folks that don't live there, but democratic in the sense that the voices of those who own homes are clearly heard. And the voices of those who own land?

In the US, you typically own the land your house is on.

Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

#223

Post by dmode »

subsubzero wrote: post #130

What is the end solution to this housing crisis? The solutions will all hurt existing homeowners or multi-homeowners and are not likely to be implemented. The duplex in a single family lot is not going to move the needle on this crisis much, as building 2 houses on a existing lot will require a teardown of the original structure, then a buildup of the new duplex, all very costly. It will run at least $500K+ and I don…

Two things I would add to your list: - CEQA reform to now allow single individuals to hold up project - State level zoning guidance (similar to SB 9 / SB 50), where if a developer meets certain zoning guidance, local communities cannot oppose

Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

#224

Post by jessaustin »

ihaveajob wrote: post #103
klyrs wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's even worse than that. Because LA is so spread out, merely living in apartment buildings doesn't solve the problem: the apartment-dwellers still need cars to live in LA. When you need 1-3 parking spots for every apartment, the economic efficiency of apartment buildings drops precipitously. With rose-colored glasses, I can see a path forward; building free-standing parking garages that will eventually be demolishe…

Somewhere someone had proposed a new rule that would require all parking structures to be built on level floors, with the idea of allowing a future conversion when the conditions are right. Slanted floors negate this option from the start.

The additional work required to build a level floor over a slanted slab seems minor when compared to the total work involved in converting a garage to e.g. residential use.

Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

#225

Post by ghaff »

marto1 wrote: post #166
nluken wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to the same extent because the rise in your own home's value mirrors the rise in value of the bigger place.

I've seen this argument in many places yet I'm not sure the math holds up. For example a house that costs 1000$ goes up in value by 20% = 1200$. Over the same period a 2000$ bigger house goes up by the same amount = 2400$. If you wanted to buy the bigger house before the increase you would have loaned 1000$, but now since the increase you'll have to pay 1200$. Is there a catch I'm missing somewhere or what ?

No. Assuming prices increase by the same percentage in all price bands, appreciation makes buying up more expensive.

Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

#226

Post by flyingfences »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #213
nimbius wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

housing reform has been a political third-rail for a while now and follows the same aggravating pattern. - Home owners delight in 100k of equity per year on what amounts to bungalow property held together by stucco, as they have since the late seventies when neoliberal tax reforms at a republican behest elevated them to an untouchable landed gentry. - Residents in the state bemoan "Reagans army," the indelible popula…

> there are hundreds of derelict, abandoned malls, clubs, bars, parking structures, and other edifices of commerce including giant grass and trash lots that just seem to exist. Theyre all owned by property management cabals or millionaires who refuse to do anything with the land The fact that developing the lot causes the property tax to be reassessed may have something to do with this. If you make someone pay a giga…

This is why Henry George supported a tax on land value, not on property value.

Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

#227

Post by dmode »

sushsjsuauahab wrote: post #199

I live in Washington and I don't understand how anybody can live in LA unless they have a physical job or family that is tying them there. If you like hot weather, there are many better places to live, like Scottsdale or Naples. If you must live in California, why not Palm Springs? If you are concerned about taxes and cost of living and you don't need California's weather, virtually any other state has a safe communi…

Palm Springs and Scottsdale are magnitudes hotter than LA. When I used to live in Scottsdale, every day between early May and end of September will be above 100. LA weather barely gets into the 90s. Most days it is between 75-85. Also, Palm Springs and Scottsdale do not have beaches, do not have nearly the same level of entertainment (music venues, clubs, bars, nightlife, two football teams, two basketball teams, stories baseball teams). Not to mention access to nature, wine countries, international airports etc. I lived in LA for 2 years, even with all its traffic problems, it is a 10x more interesting place to live than Scottsdale

Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

#228

Post by kenhwang »

usrusr wrote: post #207
danans wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a small step in the right direction but California has really dug themselves into a hole here. California needs whole apartment blocks, not just duplexes, but apartments is something that is likely to never happen because of the above issue where no one will vote against their self interest Incremental upzoning is what will get us there. So changing single family zoning to duplex zoning like what this does,…

Sorry for being so ignorant about particularities of American zoning (I hardly know more than what you pick up playing the original Sim City): could it be easier to shift commercial to high density residential? Of course the general threat to owners would still be there, "if we solve the housing crisis my Prophet might stop appreciating like mad". But that's true for any approach short of an October 1917 reenactment.…

From what I can see, many cities are much more open to commercial zones being rezoned to high density mixed-use. There's quite a lot of empty strip malls and big box retailer spaces these days. Nearby businesses don't mind the change in zoning since it brings in a reliable customer base, and it's easier attracting people to live there since its conveniently located near shopping.

Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

#229

Post by dmode »

999900000999 wrote: post #155

The city has been too far gone for 20 years. You have some of most inept local politicians you can imagine, who are more focused on taking glamor shots in front of half a million dollar per unit homeless shelters. If it's really costing half a million dollars to house a single homeless family, why not just give them $5,000 to move? Even for someone like myself, and I do consider myself to be somewhat upper middle cla…

Yeah, it is too expensive. Nobody goes there anymore

Re: Facing housing crisis, L.A. voters back duplexes in single-family neighborhoods

#230

Post by Tiktaalik »

tjr225 wrote: post #8
seibelj wrote: post #2

I live in Jamaica Plain, a neighborhood of Boston, Massachusetts. Nearly every single home is multi-family, and the single families that do exist are usually $2 million and up. Take a stroll down one of our streets https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3130357,-71.1188873,3a,75y,1... It is dense, walkable, and extremely beautiful. There is no reason every neighborhood with duplexes has to look like cookie cutter sprawl tha…

Boston was incorporated two hundred years before Los Angeles. Of course it is going to have more beautiful, old houses. Of course it is going to have more walkable neighborhoods. But what I'm more interested in is this: > Nearly every single home is multi-family, and the single families that do exist are usually $2 million and up. SFH are already 1 million and up in LA, really in SD, LA, SF, Seattle, and Vancouver. I…

Yeah I mean, what do you figure the value of a SFH would be in downtown Manhattan?

SFH's or rather, the underlying land the house sits on, is going to become insanely valuable as the amount available dwindles and population grows.

There is no unwinding this trend. The only thing that can be done is to ignore and not worry about the price of a SFH, and subdivide the land into more apartments so that more people can afford to live on that parcel of land.

Post reply on HN