3 ms·
If it wasn't illegal to build multi-family homes in 90% of urban land in America, people would figure out where to put them pretty quickly. People figured out w
by pchristensen 4y ago
If it wasn't illegal to build multi-family homes in 90% of urban land in America, people would figure out where to put them pretty quickly. People figured out where to put the single family homes when the land was occupied by farms and forests.
- frumper 4y agoPeople are willing to drive hours away to not live in apartments and condos. They already vote with their wallets. That said, California no longer has single home zoning, so we'll see in a decade how much it helps here.
- pchristensen 4y agoThey vote among the choices that exist and are legal to build. I have my doubts about the CA change. Zoning is one of many tools that local governments use to restrict housing. Water rights, parking minimums, setbacks, impact fees, environmental review, permitting, historic preservation, architectural review, etc, etc, etc. And in California, Prop 13 means its structurally unprofitable to allow construction of housing because over time the taxes on a home won't cover the cost to the school district for any children that live there. So its fiscally irresponsible for local govs to allow housing, regardless of any preferences the residents have.
- frumper 4y agoI understand what you’re saying about schools, but it just isn’t reflected in reality. New homes are built throughout the state still. Property taxes are readjusted on building renovations and sales so eventually these buildings will get reassessed. Another way schools are funded is through the state income taxes. It’s already the case that a majority of funding comes from the state. If anything a city would want to have old buildings torn down, converted or sold to developers because that would immediately increase current and future property tax revenue.