Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 141

Thread: California bans building parking lots near transit stops

  1. #106 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136,602
    Thanks
    46,752
    Thanked 68,619 Times in 51,914 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,506 Times in 2,463 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    I'll throw this out as well and then I'll stop. Admittedly I'm projecting here but I think you saw this article and 1) misunderstood it - because it's not banning parking near public transit and 2) just instantly thought because California is doing it it must be bad.

    Now I'll be the first to admit the latter part is not an unreasonable reaction to have. It's one I often have. But in this case this legislation is pro-growth and pro-development (usually things people on the right support). Developers have wanted this for a long time because the unreasonable parking requirements previously made new development difficult to pencil out. And for a state with a housing crisis this will help with the supply side (again, something people on the right generally support).

    You have people on the left who dislike this because they often don't like new market rate developments and think government doing anything a developer wants is bad. But I don't understand right-wing opposition to this.
    Thanks for a clear reading of the OP link. I don't know if it will work or not, but I support their right to choose.

    IMO, California is more fucked up than a screen door on a submarine, but I support their right to pass their own local laws. The fact the Alt-Right is against State's Rights and supports Federal authoritarianism disturbs me because that means neither of the two major US political parties support the 10th Amendment...more than lip-service.
    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  2. #107 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    134,846
    Thanks
    13,245
    Thanked 40,785 Times in 32,151 Posts
    Groans
    3,661
    Groaned 2,865 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LurchAddams View Post
    Water issues are not a "lib"problem, moron. It's worldwide. Wait 'till Saudi Arabia runs out of water - WWIII will commence soonafter I guarantee you, troll.
    ???...Saudi Arabia's problems aren't mine either, dumbfuck......
    Isaiah 6:5
    “Woe to me!” I cried. “I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty.”

  3. The Following User Groans At PostmodernProphet For This Awful Post:

    LurchAddams (09-25-2022)

  4. #108 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136,602
    Thanks
    46,752
    Thanked 68,619 Times in 51,914 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,506 Times in 2,463 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
    ???...Saudi Arabia's problems aren't mine either, dumbfuck......
    Excellent example of why I know you aren't a Christian and lean hard toward evil.

    Exodus 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

    Mark 12:31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”

    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  5. #109 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    21,174
    Thanks
    3,418
    Thanked 7,931 Times in 5,908 Posts
    Groans
    9
    Groaned 444 Times in 424 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    In a certain sense we are pushing businesses out of the state with our high taxes, unfavorable business environment etc. etc. but I don't follow the logic that we should not allow new businesses here or encourage new businesses to start here or move here. That's how a state dies.

    We are not full. People claimed the state was full when we had 20 to 30 million and now we have 40 million. There is room to grow here. You need smart growth like allowing more density in urban areas such as legislation in the OP is all about.
    running out of water and building in natural wildfire areas is also a good way to kill a state.
    "Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything." Joseph Stalin
    The USA has lost WWIV to China with no other weapons but China Virus and some cash to buy democrats.

  6. #110 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,856
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celticguy View Post
    running out of water and building in natural wildfire areas is also a good way to kill a state.
    One reason we build in natural wildfire areas is because of how hard it is to build in the more urban areas. Instead of building up in urban areas around public transportation we force people to build further and further out. This legislation specifically addresses that by allowing more density around public transportation in urban areas.

  7. #111 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,035
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,923 Times in 13,192 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    This legislation prevents no one from having a car. If you choose to live in the City without a car you can rent Zip cars or whatever the service is that lets you get cars for the hour or however long you need. You can borrow a friend's car. Lots of people live in SF without cars. But whether people choose to have a car or not isn't really relevant to this legislation.
    This is an argument to moderation fallacy. Okay, you can still own a car. Where do you keep it when not using it? The rest of this is just reductio ad absurdum arguments. Something like 99% of Americans don't live in San Francisco. So, what works for San Fran isn't a model that should be forced on everyone else.
    Having a car in most parts of the US is a necessity, not an option. Same goes for California.

    Under this law any construction within just shy of 1000 yards of a bus stop is not going to be able to have parking. The average single family home lot in the US is 100' on a side, give or take. That puts several blocks of such homes within that distance. In urban areas--like San Fran-- it pretty much eliminates all new parking from any new construction.

  8. #112 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,035
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,923 Times in 13,192 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    I don't think you understand how this legislation works (hence your title being incorrect). The legislation says nothing about not being able to build parking. It says cities can't mandate the same amount they previously did for developments next to public transportation. Developers can still build more parking if they want to pay for it. But people who will live in this housing are the type that are less likely to use cars. If you're a family with kids and you want multiple parking spots you'll probably choose to live in one of thousands of other apartment buildings.
    No, they can't. What it effectively does is make it difficult to impossible for a developer to build in parking into a project. What the likely outcome is, is that businesses and people will simply move elsewhere and not deal with this.

  9. #113 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    21,174
    Thanks
    3,418
    Thanked 7,931 Times in 5,908 Posts
    Groans
    9
    Groaned 444 Times in 424 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    One reason we build in natural wildfire areas is because of how hard it is to build in the more urban areas. Instead of building up in urban areas around public transportation we force people to build further and further out. This legislation specifically addresses that by allowing more density around public transportation in urban areas.
    the point is the state should not allow residences in wildfire areas. fires are GOING to happen property loss is assured and costs A LOT to attempt to fight. Its why other places dont allow building in flood planes.

    If you are out of space, you are out of space. Period.
    "Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything." Joseph Stalin
    The USA has lost WWIV to China with no other weapons but China Virus and some cash to buy democrats.

  10. #114 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,856
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    This is an argument to moderation fallacy. Okay, you can still own a car. Where do you keep it when not using it? The rest of this is just reductio ad absurdum arguments. Something like 99% of Americans don't live in San Francisco. So, what works for San Fran isn't a model that should be forced on everyone else.
    Having a car in most parts of the US is a necessity, not an option. Same goes for California.

    Under this law any construction within just shy of 1000 yards of a bus stop is not going to be able to have parking. The average single family home lot in the US is 100' on a side, give or take. That puts several blocks of such homes within that distance. In urban areas--like San Fran-- it pretty much eliminates all new parking from any new construction.
    For starters this is a state law, not national. I’m not sure if you’re purposefully misrepresenting it or still don’t understand it. It doesn’t ban parking. It bans parking mandates, which were excessive and prevented development. BART stops in the Bay Area, or trains in LA, aren’t next to single family homes. This legislation has no effect on single family homes

  11. #115 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,856
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    No, they can't. What it effectively does is make it difficult to impossible for a developer to build in parking into a project. What the likely outcome is, is that businesses and people will simply move elsewhere and not deal with this.
    Sorry man, it is 100% the opposite. In your defense you don’t live in California so it’s understandable you don’t understand the dynamics at play here. Much needed new development wasn’t getting built because of ownerous parking ratios. Now developers can put in what the market desires. Again, the free market at play (if that’s what you support)
    Last edited by cawacko; 09-25-2022 at 12:33 PM.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to cawacko For This Post:

    Guno צְבִי (09-25-2022)

  13. #116 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,856
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celticguy View Post
    the point is the state should not allow residences in wildfire areas. fires are GOING to happen property loss is assured and costs A LOT to attempt to fight. Its why other places dont allow building in flood planes.

    If you are out of space, you are out of space. Period.
    Ok, but that’s a separate discussion. There is plenty of room here to build with more density. That’s what this legislation helps with

  14. #117 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    134,846
    Thanks
    13,245
    Thanked 40,785 Times in 32,151 Posts
    Groans
    3,661
    Groaned 2,865 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutch Cankle View Post
    I've never let my ignorance keep from posting on a topic
    true....regardless of how little you know you always find something to say.......
    Isaiah 6:5
    “Woe to me!” I cried. “I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty.”

  15. #118 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136,602
    Thanks
    46,752
    Thanked 68,619 Times in 51,914 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,506 Times in 2,463 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celticguy View Post
    the point is the state should not allow residences in wildfire areas. fires are GOING to happen property loss is assured and costs A LOT to attempt to fight. Its why other places dont allow building in flood planes.

    If you are out of space, you are out of space. Period.
    ...or hurricane areas, amirite? LOL
    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  16. #119 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2022
    Posts
    19,761
    Thanks
    13,760
    Thanked 8,893 Times in 6,585 Posts
    Groans
    5,254
    Groaned 537 Times in 514 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
    ???...Saudi Arabia's problems aren't mine either, dumbfuck......
    Well, when the nuclear cloud floats our way across the ocean you might feel differently. I kind of feel like we should protect our allies there.

    By the way, even though you're a MAGA, twumptard and we'll never agree, I do appreciate you're taking the time to debate. Insults don't bother me. People refusing to back up what they say do, and you're not one of those, usually.
    ================================================== =

    There will come a day where Donald Trump is gone, but the dishonor of those who carried his water will remain.

  17. #120 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,035
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,923 Times in 13,192 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    Ok, but that’s a separate discussion. There is plenty of room here to build with more density. That’s what this legislation helps with
    Why is higher urban density necessarily desirable?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 11-25-2020, 05:15 AM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-05-2018, 12:12 AM
  3. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-25-2013, 11:16 AM
  4. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-04-2012, 01:40 AM
  5. The parking lots are full again.
    By uscitizen in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-05-2009, 08:17 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •