100 year old Brown announces he is against measure S (Los Angeles: apartment, condos)

[NyWriterdude]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

Rephrasing your question into why people don't want to take public transit:

Because it doesn't go from where we are to where we want to go. If we had a real public transit system like maybe London or New York then maybe it would be useful. If I wanted to make use of L.A.'s system every trip would involve me going from home to downtown, and then to my destination. And then returning to downtown and transferring to the line leading home. And then a bus ride on top of that.

I don't really live in Los Angeles. I live in the part near my home. Travel time and freeway craziness makes any farther distances impractical. Having a half-ass transit system wouldn't change it, and IMO it's too late for L.A. to build a REAL transit system.

Not even.

30 years ago there was almost no transit system in China. Now the transit system in a number of Chinese cities surpass that of NYC. Many cities in Brazil, other parts of South America, India, etc have built their transit systems in recent years. Even Addis Abba in Ethiopia just opened up a mass transit.

Once mass transit is build, developers tend to acquire properties near it and density develops along mass transit.

Areas in NYC with little mass transit, have little density.

All the times I'm in LA when I do use mass transit, it's pretty crowded. It doesn't go everywhere though, so I often use Uber. But get this, in NYC itself I never take mass transit to the airport (too inconvenient) and there are other times when I don't use it. I'm someone who loves mass transit, but in cities with mass transit it doesn't mean that it's an all or nothing approach. I know people who bicycle across the town to work, though they'll often take transit when there's bad weather.

With more urban development, some people will choose to live closer to work, and depending on what kind of work you do, there are those that work at home. I think a lot of tech people in LA live close to work and at times work at home.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by NyWriterdude

There's no real water shortage in LA. Israel has more than enough water because they use desalinization and waste water recycling. There's no real reason why California can't adopt that on a broader scale.

California is a desert, and it's always had dry spells. But this winter has been rainy, and snow packs in the mountains have been doing well.

Spot on.

"Not enough water" is just another NIIMBY smokescreen.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by NyWriterdude

Rents are declining in NYC because of all the new apartments coming online. Ditto for SF and Boston. All you have to do is allow development on underutilized land, which LA is doing.

Overall rents went down in NYC but in some areas rents went up quite a bit .

This is a pretty interesting article it mentions how units in Brooklyn , Bronx and Queens went up quite a bit .
This makes sense since these boroughs are generally cheaper than Manhattan so the demand will go there .
The article mentions how there is a lot of competition in the luxury rental market with all the units that have been built recently so this could be a good thing for rents .


Luxury Apartment Rents Are Now Cheaper Than Regular Apartments In Some Neighborhoods: Gothamist



It's like in L.A when the housing market was starting to recover you saw big jumps in "non prime" areas of L.A because that's where the demand was going .

These neighborhoods didn't usually even improve or gentrify much. This was most noticeable actually in area outside of L.A county like the inland empire or in cities like Vegas or Phoenix where many properties went up 300% or more from the lows to the prices they are now .

All real estate is local of course .

Many people not having the expense of having a car and all the expenses that come with it help to allow people to live in NYC .

[Nema98]

Brown is barely 80, but I see you are trying to make fun of him and say he is old.

[Lovehound]

There is a simple solution to water shortage anyplace in the world near an ocean. Nuclear powered desalination plants. No I'm not going to get into the "no nukes" argument. Just don't put the nuke plant where a tsunami can overwhelm it.

Makes me wonder why they haven't thought of using nuke energy to pump seawater uphill to a high enough elevation to be safe from tsunamis. Like pipe is so expensive?

[CALGUY]

Originally Posted by NativeOrange

That's correct, but the point I'm making is that regardless of where the water comes from, continued sprawl is worse on infrastructure and demands more water than dense, urban development.

That is the stupidist think I have ever heard.

Water is water, and I don't care if you pump it one block, or 100 miles, it is still water.
If a family living in Highland park uses 1 gallon of water, another gallon could be used up in Santa Monica.

Doesn't make any difference how far the water travels, it is still a gallon of water.

New development will use more water period.

Bob.

[NativeOrange]

Originally Posted by CALGUY

That is the stupidist think I have ever heard.

Water is water, and I don't care if you pump it one block, or 100 miles, it is still water.
If a family living in Highland park uses 1 gallon of water, another gallon could be used up in Santa Monica.

Doesn't make any difference how far the water travels, it is still a gallon of water.

New development will use more water period.

Bob.

That's not the point. 250 people living in a single multi family building use way less water than the same amount of people living in lower density sprawl, and it requires way more public infrastructure to supply water to those people. No one living in the apartments has a lawn to water which alone cuts the amount of water used dramatically. Here's an article with a picture to give you an example: Sprawl Costs the Public More Than Twice as Much as Compact Development – Streetsblog USA

The article uses Halifax, Nova Scotia as an example but mentions that water infrastructure for suburban development costs the city $197 per household annually vs urban development which costs the city $42 per household.

You also keep ignoring the fact that people don't just stop moving somewhere because you stop building for them. Out of the above two scenarios (suburban growth vs dense urban growth), which one sounds less wasteful and more accommodating in your opinion? Whining about growth won't stop it.

[CALGUY]

Originally Posted by NativeOrange

That's not the point. 250 people living in a single multi family building use way less water than the same amount of people living in lower density sprawl, and it requires way more public infrastructure to supply water to those people. No one living in the apartments has a lawn to water which alone cuts the amount of water used dramatically. Here's an article with a picture to give you an example: Sprawl Costs the Public More Than Twice as Much as Compact Development – Streetsblog USA

The article uses Halifax, Nova Scotia as an example but mentions that water infrastructure for suburban development costs the city $197 per household annually vs urban development which costs the city $42 per household.

You also keep ignoring the fact that people don't just stop moving somewhere because you stop building for them. Out of the above two scenarios (suburban growth vs dense urban growth), which one sounds less wasteful and more accommodating in your opinion? Whining about growth won't stop it.

OK, class is in session.
I urge all those who never took a physics class, to attend.

Los Angeles has millions of homes and businesses, all use water.
Now Los Angeles wants to further development, and ad thousands of NEW apartments, and office/ shopping areas close to these apartments.
Now, these NEW structures never had water before, and now built, they will need it.
Simple question, will that cause more drain on the water system?
Where will the supply of water come from for these NEW developments?

For the sake of arguing, let's say each new business and apartment uses 50 gallons a day.
Multiply that by the amount of new units, and offices, as well as business.
Doesn't take a genius to understand that new development will tax our already compromised water system.
Class dismissed.
A yes vote on S will help to maintain our water supply.


Bob.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

Jerry Brown, Gov. Moonbeam? He was born in '38. Did you go to school in LAUSD? Should'a taken math.

Or you got a different Brown in mind?

Have you ever heard the term; Tongue in Cheek? Of course he isn't 100, but it seems he is; He has been around forever and before him, there was his father. God save us all.

[NyWriterdude]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Overall rents went down in NYC but in some areas rents went up quite a bit .

This is a pretty interesting article it mentions how units in Brooklyn , Bronx and Queens went up quite a bit .
This makes sense since these boroughs are generally cheaper than Manhattan so the demand will go there .
The article mentions how there is a lot of competition in the luxury rental market with all the units that have been built recently so this could be a good thing for rents .


Luxury Apartment Rents Are Now Cheaper Than Regular Apartments In Some Neighborhoods: Gothamist



It's like in L.A when the housing market was starting to recover you saw big jumps in "non prime" areas of L.A because that's where the demand was going .

These neighborhoods didn't usually even improve or gentrify much. This was most noticeable actually in area outside of L.A county like the inland empire or in cities like Vegas or Phoenix where many properties went up 300% or more from the lows to the prices they are now .

All real estate is local of course .

Many people not having the expense of having a car and all the expenses that come with it help to allow people to live in NYC .

Big areas of Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx were rezoned for new construction and lots of new buildings have just opened or in various stages of construction. Rents will be dropping there as well. The increase in Brooklyn and Queens is most of the new apartments near the East River were luxury, and at first they did draw people from Manhattan. Now with the explosion of new units under construction, supply will go beyond demand and those prices will fall.

Btw, the parts of Brooklyn and Queens that increased the most were decayed industrial areas were pretty much all new buildings were built (office buildings, condos, rentals, retail).