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

To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law

reason.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 53 posts

Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law

#31

Post by Simulacra »

bahro wrote: post #21

> environmental groups have already denounced the proclamation's potential to allow for high-rises in residential neighborhoods That's not an "environmental group." They may call themselves that, but there's no need for journalists to credulously repeat it. There is no "environmental" argument for preventing new residential buildings, even tall ones, from being built in existing urban residential neighborhoods. To pr…

Environmental Impact Studies have been used to halt a wide number of projects that could be hugely beneficial to society, from green energy and nuclear, to multi-unit dwellings and mass transit. There is an entire industry of attorneys who specializes in suing to stop projects like this, and in some cases, if they win they an get their fees paid for by the state under "environmental justice" laws.

In short, using environmental protection to halt projects is mostly a NIMBY farce.

Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law

#32

Post by Simulacra »

xg15 wrote: post #8

Judging 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?

The problem with regulation is the process as it is extremely drawn out, and creates dozens of opportunities for anyone, even someone with zero standing, to sue and stop it.

One of the most interesting things to happen to regulation is when the former administration required the removal of two regulations for every one that the government wished to enact. It was near paralysis.

Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law

#33

Post by seanmcdirmid »

techdragon wrote: post #7
lostlogin wrote: post #6

Earlier 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…

Transit in the USA is provided publicly, so supply lags demand by a decade or so. Your apartment with no parking forcing function is going to create a bunch of annoyed tenants during that time, it’s a more risky project too build out.

Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law

#34

Post by strikelaserclaw »

nottorp wrote: post #12
xg15 wrote: post #8

Judging 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.

at least people would get to live close to where they need to and not commute for hours a day and they might actually be able to afford to live in places. Fundamentally this always seemed like a problem where some people pretty much park their head in the sand and go "well i don't care about others, as long as my space is protected".

Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law

#35

Post by TacticalCoder »

pjc50 wrote: post #20
refurb wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The EU however has protected areas like all the "Natura 2000" areas and these, probably, aren't going away anytime soon:

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9seau_Natura_2000

These are huge: 30 000 sites and 18% of the surface of the EU.

If you don't want a high-rise to appear in your view, your best bet is to rent/buy right next to a Natura 2000 (both land and sea) wildlife protected land.

I'm typing this right now from France, rural area, with a Natura 2000 area right in front of me (I'm one of the last houses before the area starts).

And for my place in Luxembourg it's exactly the same: I picked a spot with another Natura 2000 protected area (land only) walking distance from my apartment.

I understand many want a world made of concrete only so that we can pack hundreds of billions of humans on earth... But I find the current trajectory miserable and I pick nature any day over concrete.

Wife and I decided to have one kid, we did our part to save mother earth.

And, no, you're not building a high-rise in my Natura 2000 wildlife protected area.

Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law

#36

Post by seanmcdirmid »

nottorp wrote: post #28
panick21_ wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what also creates shade. Let me give you a hint. It starts with "b" and ends with "uilding". Think about it.

I live in an apartment building. It creates shade only on the side opposite to where the sun is. On one side there's a small park with trees that has shade all day. On the other side there are no trees so it's only shaded late afternoon.

I’m currently vacationing in super hot Tokyo, and yes, those buildings do create shade when packed around narrow roads. I get that in the USA where buildings are spaced so far apart from each other that this wouldn’t be very effective.

Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law

#37

Post by seanmcdirmid »

naggreg wrote: post #29
panick21_ wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what also creates shade. Let me give you a hint. It starts with "b" and ends with "uilding". Think about it.

You know what stays hot even after sunset, potentially for the whole night? Starts with b and ends with “uilding”

Concrete buildings you mean, and even then, new ones are insulated well enough to not trap heat like pavement does (otherwise they couldn’t be cooled on the inside very effectively).

Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law

#39

Post by hotsauceror »

rhaway84773 wrote: post #15
nottorp wrote: post #12

Earlier 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…

Why would a private developer's decision not to include parking, be interpreted as some kind of metric for the sufficiency of public transport in the area?

If a builder chose not to install locks on the doors of a new apartment complex, would that be "a good thing because it would indicate public safety is good enough that people don't need their own private locks for most areas?"

There is no incentive for them to consider these externalities at all. There is, however, an incentive to use that same space for something they can profit from - namely, additional apartments.

Re: To tackle highest housing costs, hawaii's gov declares YIMBY martial law

#40

Post by rayiner »

bahro wrote: post #21

> environmental groups have already denounced the proclamation's potential to allow for high-rises in residential neighborhoods That's not an "environmental group." They may call themselves that, but there's no need for journalists to credulously repeat it. There is no "environmental" argument for preventing new residential buildings, even tall ones, from being built in existing urban residential neighborhoods. To pr…

Environmentalism is a big coalition, not just one focused on climate change. There’s a lot of people who oppose “the concrete jungle.” Most existing environmental laws, dating to the 1970s, are geared to them, not the more recent (or recently understood) problem of climate change.
Post reply on HN