4 ms·

If by me you mean low-income renters.. then probably #10, where the bona fide for-profit developer explicitly opposes affordable housing fees. You offer no supp

• wahern 8y ago
  The evidence was in the article: And yet SLSs are dying in Los Angeles. Los Angeles has run out of missing middle zoning, and they are not creating any more of it in plan updates. The city has recently looked to tighten rules on the development of SLSs. Recent increases in fees (See rule #10) has hit SLSs hard. Entitlement applications for SLS have dropped. New developments increasingly skew toward luxury sky-rises precisely because smaller, mid-rise, middle-income projects have increasingly grown unprofitable. It's a vicious circle: the more exactions imposed on the developers the bigger and more expensive the units need to be in order for the project to be viable, which fuels resentment and political pressure for more exactions. The problem with BMR requirements is that though they make politicians appear responsive to voters and tough on developers, the greater effect is that they permit politicians, voters, and developers alike to avoid difficult decisions. Such as, for example, expanding rent control, changing master zoning plans rather than relying on negotiated variances (a costly process), investing in transit, reducing parking requirements, etc.