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

Bay Area homeowner is the face of California’s latest housing drama

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 228 posts

Re: Bay Area homeowner is the face of California’s latest housing drama

#71

Post by DiggyJohnson »

jai_ wrote: post #66
eric-hu wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did a search to check the history of this claim, but maybe I wasn’t searching for the right thing. Would you mind sharing a link?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-family_zoning It's the first sentence in the History section

I admittedly rolled my eyes at the WP link. To atone for this, I’ve copy and pasted the relevant references from that line in the History section:

[1] Baldassari, Erin; Solomon, Molly (October 5, 2020). "The Racist History of Single-Family Home Zoning". NPR. Archived from the original on November 14, 2020. https://web.archive.org/web/20201114004918/https://www.kqed....

[3] Hansen, Louis (March 1, 2021). "Is this the end of single-family zoning in the Bay Area? San Jose, Berkeley, other cities consider sweeping changes". San Jose Mercury News. https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/03/01/is-this-the-end-of-si...

[4] Ruggiero, Angela (February 24, 2021). "Berkeley to end single-family residential zoning, citing racist ties". San Jose Mercury News. https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/02/24/berkeley-to-end-singl...

[5] Yelimeli, Supriya (February 24, 2021). "Berkeley denounces racist history of single-family zoning, begins 2-year process to change general plan - Council unanimously approved a resolution that will work toward banning single-family zoning". Berkeleyside. https://web.archive.org/web/20210301140957/https://www.berke...

[8] Baldassari, Erin (March 13, 2021). "Facing Housing Crunch, California Cities Rethink Single-Family Neighborhoods". NPR. Archived from the original on March 31, 2021. https://web.archive.org/web/20210331194917/https://www.npr.o...

Re: Bay Area homeowner is the face of California’s latest housing drama

#72

Post by abeppu »

> The builder’s remedy says that noncompliant cities must allow housing at any density and any height, anywhere in the city, as long as at least 20% of the new homes are affordable.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/builde...

For most places in the Bay Area, is there an existing affordability percentage requirement? How much of an increase is this? I'm not a development/construction insider, but a quick search pulls up a claim that builders often are in the range of 10-20% gross profit. Does a 20% affordable unit requirement swing a normal project to being unprofitable, even if cities can't block it for zoning reasons?

https://buildbook.co/blog/home-builders-profit-margin

Re: Bay Area homeowner is the face of California’s latest housing drama

#73

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

astrange wrote: post #58
occz wrote: post #3

Zoning laws broadly are probably still in effect, right? I doubt you could build something industrial in residential zones. It's just the bad parts of zoning that are disabled, if I understood the article correctly. Excellent development in any case. Hope a lot of good dense housing gets built.

Residential-only zoning is "the bad kind of zoning". It wasn't invented to keep factories away from homes; it was /literally/ invented in Berkeley to stop Chinese immigrants from being able to afford homes by running laundry businesses out of them.

Right - but that part of residential zoning still stays, right?

It's just that you can build a duplex on a "single-family residential lot".

But you still can't teach piano lessons out of your house without one of your neighbors constantly calling the city and complaining about how you're causing traffic problems, right?

And you definitely can't wash other people's clothes or dishes in your house, right??

Re: Bay Area homeowner is the face of California’s latest housing drama

#74

Post by jmyeet »

I think this article overstates the risks to those wanting to use the builder's remedy. It suggests wealthy towns would have the means to fight this in court. But the reality is the towns have very little legal defense. Just last year, 4000+ new units were approved via the builder's remedy in Santa Monica, a rich envlcave of LA that has notoriously fought development with oppressive zoning for decades.

Also, the point isn't to build giant high rises in the middle of Los Altos. It is to bypass restrictive zoning that doesn't let you build anything at all other than single family houses on large lots. In a lot of Bay Area towns that will be townhouses and low-rise apartments. But this can make a massive difference to the local housing markets.

The builder's remedy is just one of many measures the state has passed in recent years. Others include automatic approval for building residential above commercial and bypassing zoning for lots with wide rights of way. It all adds up.

Another aspect to this is just because you have an approved project, as a builder, it doesn't mean you have to build it. It does give you a hell of a bargaining chip with the city over something else you want to build however.

All these Bay Area NIMBY enclaves have been fucking around and I imagine a large number of them are about to find out.

This week a viral video tour of a high school in Carmel, IN has been circulating [1]. For those who don't understand, particularly non-Americans, schools are funded primarily by local property taxes. This means wealthy towns have facilities like this and poorer communities have buildings that are falling apart.

This is economic segregation.

A lot of wealthy towns in CA have been fighting state housing mandates because they want to maintain their "character". This includes some ultra-wealthy towns like Atherton.

One reason I support what CA is doing here is because by allowing a mix of accomodation it will increase access to facilities like this beyond just the ultra-wealthy.

[1]: https://www.insider.com/carmel-high-school-tour-tiktok-publi...

Re: Bay Area homeowner is the face of California’s latest housing drama

#76

Post by sroussey »

hardtke wrote: post #55
occz wrote: post #3

Zoning laws broadly are probably still in effect, right? I doubt you could build something industrial in residential zones. It's just the bad parts of zoning that are disabled, if I understood the article correctly. Excellent development in any case. Hope a lot of good dense housing gets built.

The same "Builder's Remedy" kicked in last year in many Southern California cities when they missed similar deadlines, and as far as I know it has led to approximately (if not exactly) zero new construction.

Under the builder's remedy, a developer can propose any housing project, regardless of existing zoning and land use codes, and it is automatically considered “approved,” as long as it doesn't present a clear danger to public health or safety.

https://smdp.com/2022/10/24/16-projects-4562-housing-units-h...

Re: Bay Area homeowner is the face of California’s latest housing drama

#78

Post by cheriot »

hardtke wrote: post #55
occz wrote: post #3

Zoning laws broadly are probably still in effect, right? I doubt you could build something industrial in residential zones. It's just the bad parts of zoning that are disabled, if I understood the article correctly. Excellent development in any case. Hope a lot of good dense housing gets built.

The same "Builder's Remedy" kicked in last year in many Southern California cities when they missed similar deadlines, and as far as I know it has led to approximately (if not exactly) zero new construction.

It take years to get construction approved in CA so not sure the ending has been written.

Re: Bay Area homeowner is the face of California’s latest housing drama

#79

Post by majormajor »

hardtke wrote: post #55
occz wrote: post #3

Zoning laws broadly are probably still in effect, right? I doubt you could build something industrial in residential zones. It's just the bad parts of zoning that are disabled, if I understood the article correctly. Excellent development in any case. Hope a lot of good dense housing gets built.

The same "Builder's Remedy" kicked in last year in many Southern California cities when they missed similar deadlines, and as far as I know it has led to approximately (if not exactly) zero new construction.

It takes time.

https://therealdeal.com/la/2023/01/18/shekhters-ws-communiti...

Here, for instance: "Santa Monica officials later indicated they would wait to respond until WSC filed its full project application, which is due six months from the preliminary filing."

Interesting that the developer that started the commotion is listing some of the sites they started the application process on for sale, but not necessarily indicative of it not going to happen - "Even as it prepares the listing WSC is still moving ahead with the full application, Walter confirmed this week." from this Jan 2023 article. Could just be looking to offload some risk to someone else who now thinks there's enough of a chance of these things getting built to pay more for the lots than they would've last year.

Re: Bay Area homeowner is the face of California’s latest housing drama

#80

Post by Cardinal7167 »

DiggyJohnson wrote: post #71
jai_ wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-family_zoning It's the first sentence in the History section

I admittedly rolled my eyes at the WP link. To atone for this, I’ve copy and pasted the relevant references from that line in the History section: [1] Baldassari, Erin; Solomon, Molly (October 5, 2020). "The Racist History of Single-Family Home Zoning". NPR. Archived from the original on November 14, 2020. https://web.archive.org/web/20201114004918/https://www.kqed.... [3] Hansen, Louis (March 1, 2021). "Is this the…

Why did you roll your eyes at it if it provided exactly the correct type of referential value it’s supposed to?
Post reply on HN