Single Family Zoning

[T. A. Gardner]

As the argument goes, the impetus for single family zoning comes from a racist and exclusionary place. I'm just repeating myself now but the author argues the biggest driver for racial inequality has been single family zoning. She called out white people for this. I added on that a subdivision of these white people are those who are very vocal about America's racism and systemic racism and the need to be woke to historical injustice yet go very silent about single family zoning (because as the author states, they care about their property values and think any changes will hurt those values - which she says isn't the case).

Separate of all that in certain parts of the country we have a housing crisis. Yet we will not let the market work and thus we keep supply from meeting demand. That's where zoning and NIMBYism come in. The straw man argument is people think in a neighborhood full of million dollar homes that someone is going to come in and build a high rise of public/section 8 housing. That's just not the case. What the elimination of single family zoning can do is allow for more duplexes, triplexes and quadplexes to be built. They aren't a panacea to stop the housing crisis in and of itself but they add much needed supply in areas without available land and they are at a slightly more affordable price point. (Affordable should be put in quotes because in many areas those properties will be out of the reach of large segments of the population.)

NIMBYism is by no means exclusive to Boomers but Boomers are the leaders of NIMBYism. Boomers bought homes at comparably far more affordable rates than today and now are like "fvck the rest of you..."

Zoning doesn't create or prevent a neighborhood from becoming segregated or exclusionary. What does is social status, economic capacity, and access. That last is about how mobile a society or person within it is in terms of movement throughout that society. The privately owned automobile was a huge step forward in mobility for a society. People could choose to live in far more places than before. The current move towards remote work via the internet will have the same impact.

As for this: The straw man argument is people think in a neighborhood full of million dollar homes that someone is going to come in and build a high rise of public/section 8 housing. That's just not the case. It is untrue, particularly where the Left runs government.

For example, cities like San Francisco require section 8 housing (aka "affordable housing") to make up a percentage of any residential development or the developer has to pay a whopping big fee for not meeting it. It's sufficiently onerous that developers have largely stopped doing developments there.

https://sfplanning.org/project/inclusionary-affordable-housing-program

Would you build an apartment complex or building knowing that a percentage of the units had to rent for less than market value (that is, you lose money on them)?

California is going the same route in general too.

The result will be that scum, losers, and criminals will end up infesting a development and drive out those that can get out. It's all about people not wanting to live in a shitty neighborhood, or one with onerous rules.

If you look at the history of company towns, the most infamous were probably the ones Pullman made, people only put up with the rules in these because they had little choice. Those that could move out, eventually did leaving only those that for whatever reason were unable to find a way to likewise leave from under the thumb of their employer 24/7. It was never about race but about the rules you had to live by.

Much of the housing crisis today is due not to zoning, but rather due to building code and the cost of materials. You couldn't put up a subdivision of any sort using something like the level of construction and design that was used in say, the 1940's and 50's housing booms. That's why "boomers" largely own a home. They were affordable to purchase. That's no longer true. The "starter" home is a thing of the past due to a combination of building code and government interference in the market.

Today, the Joke administration is pushing apartments as the preferred housing construction. For developers, the subsidies and such that go with that push make it hard for them to want to do anything else than build high rise apartment complexes.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing... of Real Estate (NSPIRE) inspection standards.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Yes right!

Let me just remind you that scum, losers, criminals, and slum lords live everywhere, even in the nicest places!