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

Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

darrellowens.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

#281

Post by arcticbull »

nlavezzo wrote: post #95
thepasswordis wrote: post #5

Wow that's great news! The level of bureaucratic creep that has been imposed on property owners is actually unbelievable to me. I obviously understand some regulations (you can't built a chemical processing plant in a residential neighborhood, obviously), but cities have creeped themselves into all-powerful overseers. Most cities now have the power to tell you what kind of house you can build, how you can paint it, h…

> If you don't want to deal with living near other people, move to the country. The reverse could also be said - if you don't want to deal with people deciding together that they want their community to have certain guidelines, move to the country. You can do pretty much whatever you want in rural areas without significantly impacting your neighbors. People living together in a small area do get to decide together wh…

This is America, land of the free, home of the property rights. It's a weird imposition to say that I can't build exactly what I want on my property (assuming it's safe). It's a totally fair thing to say that if you want full control over what can be built adjacent to your house buy a ranch in Montana.

Don't want a skyscraper in downtown SF? Buy the plot. Can't afford it? Sorry, you're getting neighbors. You shouldn't try and bog them down with a nightmare bureaucratic process of shade measurement and bird counting.

It's a good thing.

Re: Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

#282

Post by jakelazaroff »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #242
nlavezzo wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you don't want to deal with living near other people, move to the country. The reverse could also be said - if you don't want to deal with people deciding together that they want their community to have certain guidelines, move to the country. You can do pretty much whatever you want in rural areas without significantly impacting your neighbors. People living together in a small area do get to decide together wh…

> don't want to deal with people deciding together that they want their community to have certain guidelines, move to the country Shouldn’t this be the message to a suburban homeowner clinging to the past? Move to the country. Buy land around you. Don’t tell others what they can and cannot do on property you don’t own.

I mean… there's a balance, right? People should be able to mostly do what they want with their own property. At the same time, they should be able to come together to make collective decisions about their towns/cities/neighborhoods. Each of those has a bad outcome if taken to the extreme.

Re: Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

#283

Post by danenania »

Aloha wrote: post #158
LewisVerstappen wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Something tells me everyone who's homeless isn't a fentanyl addict. Especially given housing costs SF/LA has numerous programs that will give you housing if you're homeless. The issue is that many of the homeless refuse to take up these programs and insist on staying in their tents.... because they're mentally ill.... because of drugs.

You should look at the often onerous restrictions that come with those programs, often including: * No Pets * No Visitors * Curfew Time * Limits on the number of people per unit (meaning, families and couples cannot always be accommodated together) - and a host of others. Also in some places there is a requirement that you have a social worker, and/or receiving mental healthcare treatment - except there are long wait…

I'm sure it can't be this simple, but I would love to hear what the problems are with building large apartment complexes on cheap land in the outskirts of cities, staffing them with security, social workers, medical workers, etc. and then letting people live there no questions asked.

You would of course still need some rules in these places and there would certainly be various issues and difficulties, but it seems a whole lot better than what we have happening now in city centers?

Re: Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

#284

Post by TulliusCicero »

kqr2 wrote: post #48

How would the builder's remedy work in a place like Atherton if the homeowners form a pact and refuse to sell to any developers? E.g. if Marc Andreessen ( https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/marc-andre... ) and Steph Curry ( https://therealdeal.com/2023/01/29/steph-curry-shoots-his-ni... ) form a coalition with other residents then they can effectively keep the city down zoned even if builder's remedy i…

The point of upzoning is to allow for more housing to be built, not to literally force it upon unsuspecting property owners.

If nobody wants to sell, nobody wants to sell.

But eventually...

Re: Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

#285

Post by notyourwork »

Am I reading this right?

> Alternatively, 100% affordable to moderate income residents where rents don’t exceed 120% area median income.

If the median income is $50k, using arbitrary number for example. 120% is $60k, so rent can be $5000/monthly. Is that right?

Re: Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

#286

Post by stevehawk »

jedberg wrote: post #127

There is a developer in Cupertino who has been fighting with the city for years, who got awfully quiet lately. Now I know why. I suspect they have a plan for an absolutely massive high rise behind my house that they will be submitting at 8am tomorrow morning. My neighbors are going to be pissed .

Is it Bob Tillman? Because I'm absolutely rooting for him if he's still stuck in San Fran building purgatory.

Re: Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

#287

Post by beambot »

kqr2 wrote: post #48

How would the builder's remedy work in a place like Atherton if the homeowners form a pact and refuse to sell to any developers? E.g. if Marc Andreessen ( https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/marc-andre... ) and Steph Curry ( https://therealdeal.com/2023/01/29/steph-curry-shoots-his-ni... ) form a coalition with other residents then they can effectively keep the city down zoned even if builder's remedy i…

Just imagine one acreage selling out, and building a Manhattan-style pencil skyscraper on the plot. Hilarity would ensue.

Re: Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

#288

Post by HDThoreaun »

RealityVoid wrote: post #226
rjbwork wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody in the US, and indeed most of the world, "owns" their property. Try not paying your property taxes, and see where that gets you. You lease the right to usus, mostly fructus, and to some extent abusus from the state.

I feel that this is a misleading. Property taxes are not leases on property but simply a disincentive to hoarding unused land.

LVT is a disincentive to hoarding land. Property taxes are incentive to tear buildings on used land down.

Re: Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

#289

Post by TedShiller »

thepasswordis wrote: post #5

Wow that's great news! The level of bureaucratic creep that has been imposed on property owners is actually unbelievable to me. I obviously understand some regulations (you can't built a chemical processing plant in a residential neighborhood, obviously), but cities have creeped themselves into all-powerful overseers. Most cities now have the power to tell you what kind of house you can build, how you can paint it, h…

Wow that’s actually terrible news. Who wants more pollution crowding traffic and crime?

Re: Builder's Remedy goes into effect in many California cities tomorrow

#290

Post by CalRobert »

kqr2 wrote: post #48

How would the builder's remedy work in a place like Atherton if the homeowners form a pact and refuse to sell to any developers? E.g. if Marc Andreessen ( https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/marc-andre... ) and Steph Curry ( https://therealdeal.com/2023/01/29/steph-curry-shoots-his-ni... ) form a coalition with other residents then they can effectively keep the city down zoned even if builder's remedy i…

I'd happily sign and then sell to someone offering to give me multiple centuries of fuck-you money.
Post reply on HN