3 ms·

I'm not sure that you as a homeowner should have the right to dictate what type of housing nearby property owners are allowed to construct solely based upon you

by ch4s3 7y ago

I'm not sure that you as a homeowner should have the right to dictate what type of housing nearby property owners are allowed to construct solely based upon your proximity. > do we want to be knocking down turn-of-the-century craftsman and tudor homes Yes > They can bring a ton of character to a neighborhood. Who gets to decide what constitutes "character"? Who gets to decide that "character" trumps affordability? Who gets to decide when "character" supersedes property rights? Moreover a lot of these craftsman homes were pretty "cookie cutter" when they were built, and a lot of them were ordered from catalogues. These things change with age as facades are updated, repaired, and replaced. Our cities have been so slavishly devoted to fictionalized imaginings of their own pasts that we are impoverishing real people today.

btmiller 7y ago
This is so, so wrong it's delusional. The occupied homes that are left from 100+ years ago are there because they are solid construction. > Who gets to decide what constitutes "character"? Who gets to decide that "character" trumps affordability? Who gets to decide when "character" supersedes property rights? This is so ridiculous. Character does not come at the cost of affordability. And ok, would you still make the same decision to replace an SFH with an affordable condo if the current residents were impoverished? Spoiler: the new condo to take its place won't actually be affordable to the previous occupants. > These things change with age as facades are updated, repaired, and replaced Every aesthetic change I make to my century-old home honors the original character of the house. Most others do the same. > Our cities have been so slavishly devoted to fictionalized imaginings of their own pasts that we are impoverishing real people today. Your entire thoughts are so incredibly delusional that it's borderline offensive. Not fiction, and SFHs is not impeding housing for the impoverished. Downtown, SLU, and Belltown are going through an absolute explosion of housing growth. The city and real estate developers are the ones you should be targeting, they've got the biggest lever to make housing affordable.
- ch4s3 7y ago
  Single family housing in city centers with zoning that excludes other construction absolutely makes housing less affordable. It constrains supply considerably. Furthermore the age of those houses is irrelevant to any other concern here. I’d argue that is an aesthetic anyway, and shouldn’t be a primary policy goal. As for the condos, sure they don’t house the poor and no one makes that claim. They do pull middle income out of housing that can then be occupied by lower income residents. [1] You still aren’t addressing property rights. Preventing owners from freely exercising their right to build is a taking. Finally, I don’t think your ad hominem argument belongs here. [1] https://furmancenter.org/thestoop/entry/supply-skepticism-housing-supply-and-affordability https://furmancenter.org/thestoop/entry/supply-skepticism-ho...
  - rootsudo 7y ago
    Thank you, I'm glad someone else here also understands the housing situation in Seattle and that allowing rezoning and creating options to make MFH possible is a solution vs keeping the status quo of old cap Hill houses because "they were there for a while." This sort of conversation is common throughout Seattle now and people blame the city but really it's people who clearly fit the "NIMBY" type. And that's just sad. Land is land. Allow people want to do with it and if they want to build MFH expedite it and allow it. Same with this topic and people thinking it means we're removing land from discovery park.
- opportune 7y ago
  Once enough people like you get old enough your house will be getting torn down anyway
vineyardmike 7y ago
> I'm not sure that you as a homeowner should have the right to dictate what type of housing nearby property owners are allowed to construct solely based upon your proximity. So who should get to dictate what gets built? People that don't live there (and therefore don't vote?) > Who gets to decide when "character" supersedes property rights? Most cities have a council that decides this, and often with input from the residents who actively live there, and care about their hometown.
- philwelch 7y ago
  > So who should get to dictate what gets built? Whoever owns the land it's getting built on, and whoever's doing the building.
  - ericd 7y ago
    Seriously... For a country that supposedly prides itself on its individual freedoms, we have a surprising number of people who think they should get to decide what others do with their homes/land.

by ch4s3 7y ago

btmiller 7y ago

This is so, so wrong it's delusional. The occupied homes that are left from 100+ years ago are there because they are solid construction. > Who gets to decide what constitutes "character"? Who gets to decide that "character" trumps affordability? Who gets to decide when "character" supersedes property rights? This is so ridiculous. Character does not come at the cost of affordability. And ok, would you still make the same decision to replace an SFH with an affordable condo if the current residents were impoverished? Spoiler: the new condo to take its place won't actually be affordable to the previous occupants. > These things change with age as facades are updated, repaired, and replaced Every aesthetic change I make to my century-old home honors the original character of the house. Most others do the same. > Our cities have been so slavishly devoted to fictionalized imaginings of their own pasts that we are impoverishing real people today. Your entire thoughts are so incredibly delusional that it's borderline offensive. Not fiction, and SFHs is not impeding housing for the impoverished. Downtown, SLU, and Belltown are going through an absolute explosion of housing growth. The city and real estate developers are the ones you should be targeting, they've got the biggest lever to make housing affordable.

ch4s3 7y ago
Single family housing in city centers with zoning that excludes other construction absolutely makes housing less affordable. It constrains supply considerably. Furthermore the age of those houses is irrelevant to any other concern here. I’d argue that is an aesthetic anyway, and shouldn’t be a primary policy goal. As for the condos, sure they don’t house the poor and no one makes that claim. They do pull middle income out of housing that can then be occupied by lower income residents. [1] You still aren’t addressing property rights. Preventing owners from freely exercising their right to build is a taking. Finally, I don’t think your ad hominem argument belongs here. [1] https://furmancenter.org/thestoop/entry/supply-skepticism-housing-supply-and-affordability https://furmancenter.org/thestoop/entry/supply-skepticism-ho...
- rootsudo 7y ago
  Thank you, I'm glad someone else here also understands the housing situation in Seattle and that allowing rezoning and creating options to make MFH possible is a solution vs keeping the status quo of old cap Hill houses because "they were there for a while." This sort of conversation is common throughout Seattle now and people blame the city but really it's people who clearly fit the "NIMBY" type. And that's just sad. Land is land. Allow people want to do with it and if they want to build MFH expedite it and allow it. Same with this topic and people thinking it means we're removing land from discovery park.
opportune 7y ago
Once enough people like you get old enough your house will be getting torn down anyway

vineyardmike 7y ago

> I'm not sure that you as a homeowner should have the right to dictate what type of housing nearby property owners are allowed to construct solely based upon your proximity. So who should get to dictate what gets built? People that don't live there (and therefore don't vote?) > Who gets to decide when "character" supersedes property rights? Most cities have a council that decides this, and often with input from the residents who actively live there, and care about their hometown.

philwelch 7y ago
> So who should get to dictate what gets built? Whoever owns the land it's getting built on, and whoever's doing the building.
- ericd 7y ago
  Seriously... For a country that supposedly prides itself on its individual freedoms, we have a surprising number of people who think they should get to decide what others do with their homes/land.