4 ms·
WA House passes bill banning single-family zoning
- solarmist 4y agoThis is a misleading headline. Banning single family only zoning.
- yboris 4y agoUnsure I follow. The title is "banning single family zoning" means it no longer exist - which seems equivalent to "banning single family only zoning". Direct link to bill page: https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=1110&Year=2023&Initiative=false https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=1110&Year=2023...
- solarmist 4y agoI read it as requiring multi family residences, which would be extreme and unwanted by all.
- themadturk 4y agoNo, it would only ban zoning that allows only single family homes, as zoning laws often do now. It would not require multifamily homes. The article points out that similar laws in California so far have resulted only in limited change to home building.
- advisedwang 4y agosolarmist is suggesting the title sounds like zoning now forbids single-family houses, whereas it actually bans requiring single-family houses (ie them being the only type of residence allowed).
- yboris 4y agoI thought that's what "single-family zoning" means: a requirement to have nothing else besides single family houses. Eliminating this category of zoning means you can no longer mandate "only single family houses". I'm unsure if zoning laws behave radically differently, but I'm thinking the best model is what they have in Japan: http://urbankchoze.blogspot.com/2014/04/japanese-zoning.html http://urbankchoze.blogspot.com/2014/04/japanese-zoning.html Things that can only be built in "low rise residential" zones can still be built in "neighborhood commercial", etc. See chart: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-sV5ETXDs_8M/Ux-axBTuF2I/AAAAAAAAAsE/E6gs6uJr_8M/s1600/ZonageInclusifJ.JPG http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-sV5ETXDs_8M/Ux-axBTuF2I/AAAAAAAAAs...
- vndsodfogis 4y ago"single family zoning" means zoning that is only for single family housing. there is nothing misleading about the title.
- _aavaa_ 4y agoTo someone not familiar with the technical meaning "bill banning single-family zoning" reads like "a bill which imposes a ban on allowing you to build single-family houses".
- vndsodfogis 4y agojust because someone doesn't know what words mean it doesnt mean that the words are misleading
- _aavaa_ 4y agoIt absolutely can, as evidenced by several comments here. As a second example. If you tell people that an object is inflammable. I would except that some non-negligible portion of people to assume that the object is not flammable.
- more_corn 4y agoIt’s misleading because it implies that single family homes will be banned.
- adamredwoods 4y agoIt was to me. I am not familiar with zoning terminology.
- Tagbert 4y agoFrom the article… “ The Washington state House of Representatives late Monday passed a bill that would legalize duplexes or fourplexes in almost every neighborhood of every city in Washington, potentially bringing an end to local zoning rules that limit large swaths of cities to only single-family homes.” This is to increase the housing supply. It looks like it is simply going to erase the distinction between single-unit and multiple-unit residential zoning so that developers could put in either in any area designated as residential. this would still need to pass the Senate and similar bills have failed to pass in recent years.
- ROTMetro 4y agoYay, new homes will be zoned Rural Residential with a minimum lot size of 1 acre. Good job, you decreased housing density!
- kwere 4y agoi think developers have deeper pockets to take low density land/property and redevelop it where it makes economic sense, no? the only low density housing that beat as pricepoint condos are Manors in the millions, but those are a minority of housing.
- zjp 4y agoCalifornia please follow suit...
- oluwie 4y agothere are already several cities in California where this is either law or in the process of becoming law. it would be great state wide though