3 ms·
It's all pretty similar really. In Euclid vs Ambler (which definitively legalized zoning), one of the Supreme Court justices described apartments as "parasites"
by davidw 4y ago
It's all pretty similar really. In Euclid vs Ambler (which definitively legalized zoning), one of the Supreme Court justices described apartments as "parasites".
You could get rid of that zoning that enables wealthy people to say 'no' to other types of housing. Sure, they can always buy up a big lot somewhere far away - fine, whatever. But where cities are growing, that kind of discrimination embedded in the local zoning code is not ok.
And you can legislate it away - Oregon was the first state to do so with HB2001, which re-legalizes up to 4-plexes in all our cities. In any neighborhood. A 4-plex in a posh neighborhood is still not going to be cheap, but it allows more integration than if it weren't legal to build at all.
- brk 4y agoWhat you are talking about is slightly different. There are plenty of communities where there are a variety of single-family homes, and MDU's. I actually live in one. However, the majority of the residents are of roughly the same economic status. Some have large homes and growing families, some are empty-nesters that downside to a smaller condo in the development. But for the most part, they are all of the same economic class. This is different than thinking there is going to be a large number of upper income single family housing units that would find living next to a Section 8 kind of development desirable. I know people who grew up in "affordable housing", and put in significant effort to get away from that kind of neighborhood, and would not want to live near one. This is a real challenge, and it can't be legislated away, the fix (IMO) is far deeper than zoning changes.