Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 76

Thread: LA considering law that would basically ban development

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default LA considering law that would basically ban development

    So there is a housing affordability issue, not to mention displacement, and the recommendation is to prevent all development? This is insane progressive thinking.


    https://www.wsj.com/articles/los-ang...64305?mod=e2tw

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to cawacko For This Post:

    Granule (02-18-2017), PostmodernProphet (02-16-2017)

  3. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    229
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 65 Times in 54 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 7 Times in 7 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    So there is a housing affordability issue, not to mention displacement, and the recommendation is to prevent all development? This is insane progressive thinking.


    https://www.wsj.com/articles/los-ang...64305?mod=e2tw
    Limousine liberals do not give a fuck about working people or their piss ant problems...like affording to keep a roof over ones head. As long as they can try and keep their over-inflated real estate solvent, screw everyone else.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to grapnel For This Post:

    Granule (02-18-2017)

  5. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    My man Zappa likes to claim it's 'tightie righties' who only care about themselves. Pretty clearly that's not the case. LA liberals got theirs.

    I do know that not all liberals think monolithically on this issue however. There are pro development Democrats that recognize and acknowledge that new housing needs to be built to keep prices more affordable and to allow for housing for our state's workforce.

  6. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    11,390
    Thanks
    476
    Thanked 4,028 Times in 3,012 Posts
    Groans
    398
    Groaned 234 Times in 225 Posts

    Default LA considering law that would basically ban development

    Only government can fix this

  7. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    String, since you stand up for the left now, and none of them will answer, is this situation as simple liberals in LA hit theirs (i.e. home ownership) and thus screw everyone else?

  8. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vinland
    Posts
    39,851
    Thanks
    41,529
    Thanked 10,833 Times in 8,248 Posts
    Groans
    11,150
    Groaned 5,899 Times in 5,299 Posts
    Blog Entries
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    String, since you stand up for the left now, and none of them will answer, is this situation as simple liberals in LA hit theirs (i.e. home ownership) and thus screw everyone else?
    I can't speak for Rick and wouldn't even try.
    That boy is bright.

    I would love to give you my opinion but I am not subscribing to the WSJ to do so.

    I imagine not many other liberals would either so perhaps you could copy the article?
    It is the responsibility of every American citizen to own a modern military rifle.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Rune For This Post:

    Althea (02-18-2017)

  10. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    My bad, didn't realize it was behind a firewall.


    Los Angeles Looks to Ban Major Real-Estate Developments

    Supporters of a ballot measure say it will give residents more say in planning; opponents counter it will worsen affordability problems




    Voters in the second-largest U.S. city are considering a measure that could effectively halt major real-estate projects, the most extreme example yet of a revolt against development that is breaking out across the country.

    A boom in luxury development over the last five years has transformed urban America, bringing young people, restaurants, retailers and jobs back to city centers.

    But construction activity has tilted toward the high end. Many longtime residents have become resentful of new towers that cast shadows over their neighborhoods of single-family homes and push up rents. Average apartment rents nationwide have surged 26% since 2010, according to MPF Research, due in large part to strong demand after the housing crash.

    Now some activists are pushing back with actions that threaten to grind housing production in some cities to a crawl.

    The moves threaten to further constrict a tight supply of housing. Housing starts dropped 2.6% in January, the Commerce Department said Thursday. The number of single-family and multifamily starts per 1,000 households last month was about 36% below the 50-year average, according to Ralph McLaughlin, chief economist at Trulia.

    In Los Angeles, residents in early March are set to vote on a ballot initiative that, if passed, would suspend for two years any development that requires a modification to the city’s existing planning rules. Currently, such modifications are routine for new developments.

    Proponents of the measure say it would affect only about 5% of projects in the city.

    “People feel the system is rigged,” said Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which has poured some $3.7 million into promoting the measure. “It’s all about billionaires getting what they want.”


    Many of the patients served by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation are struggling with rising housing prices, he said.

    New barriers to development are rising in major cities, either through new regulations—such as requirements that developments include affordable housing—or through increased community resistance.

    San Francisco in June passed a ballot initiative that puts a 25% on-site affordable-housing requirement on most new residential buildings, which developers say will make many projects economically untenable. An independent analysis by the city’s Controller’s Office has recommended the requirement be reduced, based on the results of a soon-to-be-released feasibility study.

    In Oregon, the Portland City Council in December unanimously passed a similar ordinance requiring buildings with 20 units or more to set aside 20% of units for affordable housing, although it also provides some concessions to developers like tax waivers.

    In Boston, a plan by Mayor Marty Walsh to sell a city-owned parking garage to a developer to build one of the tallest residential buildings in the city is running up against stiff community opposition. Mr. Walsh said the sale would provide the city with a $153 million revenue boost, but opponents said the tower would violate a local ordinance by blocking sunlight over the Boston Common and Public Garden.

    Despite complaints in Los Angeles about a deluge of development, housing construction now is at only a fraction of the rate of the mid-20th century, before strict zoning rules were put in place. From 1950 through 1959, about 250,000 units of new housing were added in the city of Los Angeles, according to an analysis of census data by advocacy group Abundant Housing LA. From 2010 to 2015, the figure was 25,000, though the city issued permits for about 50,000 units in roughly the same period.

    Permits tend to lag behind completed units by a couple of years, and not all permitted units end up getting built.

    In the middle of the last century, zoning regulations were such that there was enough capacity in the city to build housing for 10 million residents, according to David Waite, a local planning lawyer.

    The adoption of “community plans” in the 1970s and a ballot initiative in the mid-1980s knocked that down to 4.5 million people, meaning Los Angeles is now almost at full capacity.

    Thirty-five community plans, each covering a separate neighborhood, govern how much development can occur in each. Updating community plans requires determining the anticipated growth for a neighborhood over two decades, writing new land-use policies, getting community consensus for the changes and conducting an environmental-impact report.

    The proposed rule up for vote in March, called the “Neighborhood Integrity Initiative” and referred to as Measure S, would require the city to update all community plans.

    The full implications of Measure S are open to some interpretation. Some officials and developers say that, if passed, no development will be permitted until all the plans are updated, which they say could take a decade. Others say the moratorium will run for two years or until the plans are updated.

    The Department for City Planning been trying for five years to update the community plan for Hollywood alone, but thus far has faced backlash from residents and a lawsuit.

    Developers and city officials said Measure S would effectively impose a moratorium on everything from apartment development along transit corridors to office space for a flourishing tech community and even homeless shelters.

    “This housing ban would drive investment out of L.A., kill jobs and stymie our efforts to move people off our streets,” Mayor Eric Garcetti said.

    Both supporters and opponents said Measure S has a good chance of passing.

    Updating the community plans will give citizens an opportunity to have input into the planning process, said Mr. Weinstein of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

    Because the existing zoning rules make it difficult to build projects along major corridors, city officials often change rules for particular parcels.

    For now, developers say the proposal is already having a chilling effect on new projects.

    “L.A. has been redlined from an investment standpoint in housing until this uncertainty is known,” said Sean Burton, chief executive of CityView, a Los Angeles-based developer. He said the firm isn’t planning any new projects until after the vote.

  11. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    What say you Rune from a liberal perspective?

  12. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vinland
    Posts
    39,851
    Thanks
    41,529
    Thanked 10,833 Times in 8,248 Posts
    Groans
    11,150
    Groaned 5,899 Times in 5,299 Posts
    Blog Entries
    17

    Default

    Your article says 5% of projects will be affected and only those which require variants from existing zoning.

    My perspective?
    Tough shit.
    It is the responsibility of every American citizen to own a modern military rifle.

  13. The Following User Groans At Rune For This Awful Post:

    Ass Man (02-17-2017)

  14. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rune View Post
    Your article says 5% of projects will be affected and only those which require variants from existing zoning.

    My perspective?
    Tough shit.
    Well basically all new development requires zoning variance. Are you saying tough shit people should live with higher prices or tough shit it should be built?

  15. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vinland
    Posts
    39,851
    Thanks
    41,529
    Thanked 10,833 Times in 8,248 Posts
    Groans
    11,150
    Groaned 5,899 Times in 5,299 Posts
    Blog Entries
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    Well basically all new development requires zoning variance. Are you saying tough shit people should live with higher prices or tough shit it should be built?
    Hardly.
    5%
    It is the responsibility of every American citizen to own a modern military rifle.

  16. The Following User Groans At Rune For This Awful Post:

    Ass Man (02-17-2017)

  17. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vinland
    Posts
    39,851
    Thanks
    41,529
    Thanked 10,833 Times in 8,248 Posts
    Groans
    11,150
    Groaned 5,899 Times in 5,299 Posts
    Blog Entries
    17

    Default

    The sky isn't falling Cawacko
    It is the responsibility of every American citizen to own a modern military rifle.

  18. The Following User Groans At Rune For This Awful Post:

    Ass Man (02-17-2017)

  19. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rune View Post
    Hardly.
    5%
    It says all new developments require zoning variances

  20. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rune View Post
    The sky isn't falling Cawacko
    No the sky isn't falling. But cost of housing is a huge issue in our state and it's causing people and businesses to leave.

  21. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    73,382
    Thanks
    101,892
    Thanked 54,754 Times in 33,624 Posts
    Groans
    3,154
    Groaned 5,065 Times in 4,683 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    No the sky isn't falling. But cost of housing is a huge issue in our state and it's causing people and businesses to leave.
    Don't worry, my friends moved here from Cali five years ago, but hated it, so they have moved back. My other friend moved to MO, hate it, they are moving back in September.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 162
    Last Post: 11-09-2013, 07:12 AM
  2. Spanish admit siesta is basically just a wank
    By cancel2 2022 in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 09-01-2012, 08:26 PM
  3. 40 points why romney and obama are basically the same candidate
    By SmarterthanYou in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 08-17-2012, 02:32 PM
  4. So basically... we have a site admin flooding the board with troll shit now?
    By Dixie - In Memoriam in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-05-2011, 01:23 AM
  5. Interesting development
    By tinfoil in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-02-2009, 09:17 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
  •