SD City Council passes Housing Parking Waiver (San Diego, El Cajon: neighborhoods, living)

[newgensandiego]

Originally Posted by CNYC

You must be a shill for the city or something. You basically took all my concerns and ripped them to shreds like they are a non issue.

Are you on the ballot for 2020 ?

The reality is that I fundamentally disagree with your assertions because they are not true or relevant for all San Diegans. They are an issue for some people and a nonissue for others. Not all 1.4million people have the same lifestyle, behavior, choices, etc. as you do. It's sad how Americans have such a hard time empathizing with people who are not like them. Obviously at the national level, but also at the local level with important issues like housing and transportation.

I am well aware that my opinion is in the minority amongst the larger San Diego community (and even more of a minority on CD). That doesn't mean it is invalid or my views should be ignored. The same goes for your concerns. They are valid and apply to people with lifestyle similar to yours. I've had the lifestyle. I've been in your shoes. There aren't other options. That's reality.

I love to research demographics because it is a constant reminder and humbling experience to realize that San Diego is actually a very diverse place and its many communities have very diverse needs. It can't be a one-size fits all approach to planning. Building high capacity transit in Alpine is just stupid. But maybe strategic transit investments in El Cajon could work. This parking initiative will be painful and contentious. There's no getting around it. The City needs to be on top of parking demand management on local streets or this could go downhill fast.

The alternative is a lot worse. Hundreds of thousands of more vehicle trips and 24-7 horrid traffic. That's not something I want, nor is it something you want. Selfishly, drivers should be trying to accommodate population growth in transit-rich areas. It means less drivers on the street.

Lastly, parking actually is very expensive to build. No joke.

[newgensandiego]

Originally Posted by expatCA

No one has a right to live in SD

Are you going to repeat this for the next 30 years as the regional population swells to 4+ million people?

What exactly is this debate achieving? Is it solving any of our present or future problems? Even if we agree or disagree, so what? I prefer to live in reality, not philosophy. You point isn't invalid (I agree with it), but what exactly do you think you are achieving?

[Feasible] solutions please.

[newgensandiego]

Originally Posted by newgensandiego

By the way, the vocal minority (no car ownership) still equates to about 100,000 households, which is 1/5 of San Diego's households.

The corrected amount is 33,000 households, or 7% of San Diego households. Not 20%. Very off, but not insignificant. 33,000 is still a large number. There are 62,000 in the county.

Of note, approximately 40% of San Diego households own 1 or fewer (none) cars. It seems like the current zoning requirements are very inconsistent with this fact- also validated by the city survey that showed demand less than capacity.

Reference:
http://docs.sandiego.gov/municode/Mu...Division05.pdf

Cities have traditionally employed a single parking code across the entire city and does a poor job at taking into consideration neighborhood-specific needs.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by newgensandiego

Are you going to repeat this for the next 30 years as the regional population swells to 4+ million people?

What exactly is this debate achieving? Is it solving any of our present or future problems? Even if we agree or disagree, so what? I prefer to live in reality, not philosophy. You point isn't invalid (I agree with it), but what exactly do you think you are achieving?

[Feasible] solutions please.

Eventually everywhere popular will be built out, so what is done then? That is the real question.



How do people who cannot afford to live in CA move there, or live there even if born in the State, as no plan will really reduce the cost of housing? Builders do not build to lose money and the building takes time, so n o huge increase in housing, SFH, Condo's or even Apts will expand the supply at a rate that will drop prices. There was a tremendous number of SFH and Condo's being built before 2009 and the prices kept going up and up. Now far less are being built so prices will not drop.



Transportation is definitely an issue but more mass transit will only make it worse, even if expanded to suburban areas where workers live. Building near where a large number of jobs exist can help, but only if the workers live near the transportation. Urban mass transit will not help the workers who live all over SD County. Can't develop it fast enough.



One solution is simply to stop building. Yes costs will go up, but the people who can afford it will live there and the ones who can't won't. That is common now, so no real change. There is a difference between reality and desire. Sad but true.

[newgensandiego]

Originally Posted by expatCA

One solution is simply to stop building. Yes costs will go up, but the people who can afford it will live there and the ones who can't won't. That is common now, so no real change. Sad but true.

Again, another non-solution. Is this politically feasible to implement? No.

Try again.

There is a difference between reality and desire.

Like your desire to cap our population and the hard reality that that is not a solution.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

There's a lot of new housing lately but I don't see any of it being affordable. Well, unless 5-600,000 dollars for a glorified apartment is affordable. This is completely out of reach for the average worker.

[eastcoastbias]

Originally Posted by newgensandiego

The corrected amount is 33,000 households, or 7% of San Diego households. Not 20%. Very off, but not insignificant. 33,000 is still a large number. There are 62,000 in the county.

Of note, approximately 40% of San Diego households own 1 or fewer (none) cars. It seems like the current zoning requirements are very inconsistent with this fact- also validated by the city survey that showed demand less than capacity.

Reference:
http://docs.sandiego.gov/municode/Mu...Division05.pdf

Cities have traditionally employed a single parking code across the entire city and does a poor job at taking into consideration neighborhood-specific needs.

So its 33,000 or 7% no (known) car ownership?


I'd be curious to know how much of the 7% if given the resources would buy a car. Truthfully if we keep subsidizing affordable housing and throwing resources at it we will build the wealth within some of that 7% where they will now own a car. I still think a good portion of that 7% actually have a car or use a car during any given week (work, grocery, entertainment, medical, etc.). I think you have two stark classes of people within this 7%- half that make money, bike, train and do whatever they can to save the environment and the other half would take a lifted truck that get 10 Miles per gallon if handed to them.


So you develop housing for let's say 5% of the population because your 33,000 number honestly a few of those folks have cars. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt some out of towners that don't do their homework (we see that on CD a lot) you will get another 10% that have a car but will still venture into these areas. They are saving money on a place or they don't read a lease. This number goes down over the years as the word gets out BUT hopefully it increases when the city expands transportation options, which should be goal 1a.


Its very difficult to figure demand, but the restriction assumes people living along transit lines (some of these desirable areas) prefer not to have car and or would take a discounted housing option to not have parking if they chose to have a car. So they get a "discounted" housing option for it what my opinion appears to be a big sacrifice (not have parking tied to a unit). I'm sorry everyone is talking about their situation but if you move into this zone and it takes you 2 hours round trip for a simple commute to work or a couple torn grocery bags or a couple parking tickets and a routine of driving well out at night and walking back in dangerous neighborhood to your home- its a sacrifice in different lights for loads of folks.

[T. Damon]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Eventually everywhere popular will be built out, so what is done then? That is the real question.

Transportation is definitely an issue but more mass transit will only make it worse, even if expanded to suburban areas where workers live. Building near where a large number of jobs exist can help, but only if the workers live near the transportation. Urban mass transit will not help the workers who live all over SD County. Can't develop it fast enough.

Really?!
So, just jettison all forms of transportation that is not private car ownership. Throw in the towel, the car won. Build more lanes, more parking lots, rip out the bike lanes, trolley tracks, BRT infrastructure and narrow or remove the sidewalks for Christ’s sakes - damn walkers! I’ve got my SUV and suburban house and my lifestyle is the only one that matters!

OK.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by T. Damon

Really?!
So, just jettison all forms of transportation that is not private car ownership. Throw in the towel, the car won. Build more lanes, more parking lots, rip out the bike lanes, trolley tracks, BRT infrastructure and narrow or remove the sidewalks for Christ’s sakes - damn walkers! I’ve got my SUV and suburban house and my lifestyle is the only one that matters!

OK.

Did I say that? Nope.

[newgensandiego]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Did I say that? Nope.

You're basically rejecting anything but that! So, yes.

Enjoy the "freedom" of being chained to a car, stuck in traffic, and searching for a parking spot.