4 ms·
Not to take a stance one way or the other, but I can provide background on why (in SF at least) these aren't mutually exclusive. More homes means either buildi
by tyre 10y ago
Not to take a stance one way or the other, but I can provide background on why (in SF at least) these aren't mutually exclusive.
More homes means either building on new land or adding density to existing land. There isn't much "new" land available in SF, but knocking down existing buildings is still very risky. Even if your proposed development meets every existing zoning regulation, it can be shot down.
So "more zoning control" here means putting more control in the actual zoning regulations, as opposed to allowing anyone to try and stop the process via ballot measure or legal challenge.
Increasing supply (building more or denser housing) will naturally decrease prices, which is where the investment bit comes in.
- JoshTriplett 10y ago> So "more zoning control" here means putting more control in the actual zoning regulations, as opposed to allowing anyone to try and stop the process via ballot measure or legal challenge. The phrase "more zoning control" sounds like increasing the amount and complexity of zoning regulations, rather than, as you suggest, removing unwritten rules.
- raldi 10y agoThat phrase is not from the submission.
- derefr 10y agoIt sort of does increase the amount and complexity of the (explicit) regulations, though; it's forcing unwritten rules to be written down. (At which point we would then have control over keeping or removing them.) "Make the re-zoning process more predictable" would maybe be a better slogan.