4 ms·

California politicians will do everything possible to relieve the housing crisis, except build new housing.

by umeshunni 3y ago

sokoloff 3y ago
Doesn't this law change work to support the creation of new housing units?
- UncleOxidant 3y ago
  I would think so. Not sure why there's so much negativity about it here.
  - ryeights 3y ago
    The idea is degrading. A generation of people for which the only feasible path to home ownership is living in a mobile/kit home in someone else’s backyard.
    - cheriot 3y ago
      Part of the political problem is people voting against any form of housing they don't want for themselves. What's degrading is people on the street because CA has such an extreme housing shortage.
    - UncleOxidant 3y ago
      First off, a lot of people jumped on the tiny home bandwagon in recent years, some seem to like them. Second, an ADU in a decent neighborhood would probably be a lot quieter than the various condo/townhouse/apartment options. Thirdly, it's not like they have to live in the ADU forever - if they could buy/sell it they'd actually have some equity built up for moving up to something bigger.
    - ryeights 3y ago
      To elaborate: this would be a fine policy IFF it were accompanied by other legislation that meaningfully improved the affordability of non-ADU homes as well.
      - UncleOxidant 3y ago
        Such as? Isn't the ADU going to be more affordable than the non-ADU home by definition (unless the ADU is actually larger than the house that was there first)?
      - sokoloff 3y ago
        Isn't that letting the perfect be the enemy of the good?
  - fleventynine 3y ago
    Grumpy NIMBYs. The state's ADU laws override local zoning requirements such as minimum setbacks, allowing their neighbors to build "horrible monstrosities" that "violate the spirit of the community".
miguelazo 3y ago
Plenty of new housing has been built-- luxury (mostly vacant) condos in downtowns and McMansions in the burbs. The real issue is affordability. Housing has been turned into a speculative commodity.
- epistasis 3y ago
  This is bullshit and lies. Almost nothing has been built compared to the past. There are not mostly vacant luxury condos in downtowns. As is this absolute canard "the real issue is affordability." Well obviously. But where does the unaffrodability come from? What gives landlords and home sellers the power to price far above average incomes? It's a shortage of housing. If there was enough housing they simply could not price at unaffordable prices, because there would be no buyers. The simple inability to see this is like some Jedi mind trick that landlords and real estate interests have played on the populace. We need to fully reject any ideology that has been saying that there's enough housing, because it's a bad and harmful ideology.
  - miguelazo 3y ago
    >But where does the unaffrodability come from? Hmm, maybe the type of housing being built.
    - epistasis 3y ago
      Again, absolute BS. No better example of this than LA. The type of new housing being built is small condos. Previously affordable housing is becoming unaffordable. That's not because of new units, that's because of a shortage. Crappy little homes all over the city spiral up in price. Meanwhile a small number of apartments and condos are built downtown, and people publish fake studies about how there are vacancies, and the studies have to be retracted within days. Everybody focuses on the new as if that's causing the problem, rather than seeing that there's massive massive overcrowding everywhere, lower income people are commuting massive distances, and what used to be working class neighborhoods have homes selling at prices that require household incomes of more than $500k/year. The problem is a massive shortage. (And massive corruption in the permitting process, how many LA pols are facing felonies now because of denying housing so that they can take bribes to let a few things through?)

California politicians will do everything possible to relieve the housing crisis, except build new housing.

sokoloff 3y ago

Doesn't this law change work to support the creation of new housing units?

UncleOxidant 3y ago
I would think so. Not sure why there's so much negativity about it here.
- ryeights 3y ago
  The idea is degrading. A generation of people for which the only feasible path to home ownership is living in a mobile/kit home in someone else’s backyard.
  - cheriot 3y ago
    Part of the political problem is people voting against any form of housing they don't want for themselves. What's degrading is people on the street because CA has such an extreme housing shortage.
  - UncleOxidant 3y ago
    First off, a lot of people jumped on the tiny home bandwagon in recent years, some seem to like them. Second, an ADU in a decent neighborhood would probably be a lot quieter than the various condo/townhouse/apartment options. Thirdly, it's not like they have to live in the ADU forever - if they could buy/sell it they'd actually have some equity built up for moving up to something bigger.
  - ryeights 3y ago
    To elaborate: this would be a fine policy IFF it were accompanied by other legislation that meaningfully improved the affordability of non-ADU homes as well.
    - UncleOxidant 3y ago
      Such as? Isn't the ADU going to be more affordable than the non-ADU home by definition (unless the ADU is actually larger than the house that was there first)?
    - sokoloff 3y ago
      Isn't that letting the perfect be the enemy of the good?
- fleventynine 3y ago
  Grumpy NIMBYs. The state's ADU laws override local zoning requirements such as minimum setbacks, allowing their neighbors to build "horrible monstrosities" that "violate the spirit of the community".

miguelazo 3y ago

Plenty of new housing has been built-- luxury (mostly vacant) condos in downtowns and McMansions in the burbs. The real issue is affordability. Housing has been turned into a speculative commodity.

epistasis 3y ago
This is bullshit and lies. Almost nothing has been built compared to the past. There are not mostly vacant luxury condos in downtowns. As is this absolute canard "the real issue is affordability." Well obviously. But where does the unaffrodability come from? What gives landlords and home sellers the power to price far above average incomes? It's a shortage of housing. If there was enough housing they simply could not price at unaffordable prices, because there would be no buyers. The simple inability to see this is like some Jedi mind trick that landlords and real estate interests have played on the populace. We need to fully reject any ideology that has been saying that there's enough housing, because it's a bad and harmful ideology.
- miguelazo 3y ago
  >But where does the unaffrodability come from? Hmm, maybe the type of housing being built.
  - epistasis 3y ago
    Again, absolute BS. No better example of this than LA. The type of new housing being built is small condos. Previously affordable housing is becoming unaffordable. That's not because of new units, that's because of a shortage. Crappy little homes all over the city spiral up in price. Meanwhile a small number of apartments and condos are built downtown, and people publish fake studies about how there are vacancies, and the studies have to be retracted within days. Everybody focuses on the new as if that's causing the problem, rather than seeing that there's massive massive overcrowding everywhere, lower income people are commuting massive distances, and what used to be working class neighborhoods have homes selling at prices that require household incomes of more than $500k/year. The problem is a massive shortage. (And massive corruption in the permitting process, how many LA pols are facing felonies now because of denying housing so that they can take bribes to let a few things through?)