Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People choose to buy property in the suburbs to get away from high density housing. Abolishing single-family home zoning brings high-density housing to their neighborhood, or even next door. It's essentially bait-and-switch. Actually, it's worse than that. It's like telling somebody who owns a truck that they now have to drive a Prius.
Americans don't all fit into the same little United Nations box.
In most modern suburban neighborhoods, you can reach out your window and nearly touch your neighbor's house. The reality is that most people aren't "choosing" to buy in the suburbs "to get away from high density." Many choose to buy in the suburbs because it's what they can afford. There's plenty of suburbanites who'd love to only live a block away from work. They can't afford it.
People who live in blue states will have to get used to new neighbors. Neighbors who might be involved in crime, drugs and violence. No longer will an upper or middle class blue stater be able to use money to separate him/herself from the problems the people they voted for cause. The gangs, homeless, drugs will be on their streets. The poor people they say they are helping by voting left will be their new neighbors.
Suburbia is dying as energy becomes more expensive. Ranting about freedom and government won't make anything cheaper. Fire and drought will eventually depopulate most of California. People who really want to live in a burning desert wasteland can choose any abandoned house. Politicians need to pretend they are solving problems to get elected and paid.
In CA Newsom just passed this BS measure or whatever they are calling it here and it's nothing more than a kickback to the big money real estate donors to various political campaigns. There's far more money in throwing together a mid rise condo/apartment building than building single family homes.
The politicians get to virtue signal and pat themselves on the back for building new homes and they throw around terms like Diversity and Equity because a tiny percentage of the building will go toward low income families and they get to reward their donors.
You do stuff to enrich you and your cronies, you spin it using all of the new woke language and act like this is done to help people and finally, for the hardcore lefties that want to change American culture this is one more step in breaking down the current social norms.
Wins across the board for the lefty crowd.
Everything I said applies to the homeless issues. They push to build housing for the homeless is all driven by the same MO. The homeless industry is a new cottage industry and people are getting rich off of it.
The creeps of the world always seem to figure out how to game the system.
People standby and let it happen because they can't bother to think past what they tell you. What people tell you and what they do and what happens never really seems to line up when it comes to political issues.
This type of stuff goes way beyond R or D labels in my opinion. It's money, power, and greed.
Last edited by Chowhound; 09-24-2021 at 10:06 AM..
No longer will an upper or middle class blue stater be able to use money to separate him/herself from the problems the people they voted for cause. The gangs, homeless, drugs will be on their streets.
There are no single family homes in most of Manhattan. Yet, poor people cannot afford to live there for the most part.
Rich people always figure out ways to separate themselves from poor people.
In most modern suburban neighborhoods, you can reach out your window and nearly touch your neighbor's house. The reality is that most people aren't "choosing" to buy in the suburbs "to get away from high density." Many choose to buy in the suburbs because it's what they can afford. There's plenty of suburbanites who'd love to only live a block away from work. They can't afford it.
Now California is trying to pile all those neighbors on top of each other right next door. I'm SO glad I was able to escape California when I did.
People who live in blue states will have to get used to new neighbors. Neighbors who might be involved in crime, drugs and violence. No longer will an upper or middle class blue stater be able to use money to separate him/herself from the problems the people they voted for cause. The gangs, homeless, drugs will be on their streets. The poor people they say they are helping by voting left will be their new neighbors.
I completely support this in all blue states.
You realize people vote blue because they know how to adapt right? The red/blue divide doesn’t really follow state lines. It closely correlates with population density. The people who vote red do so because they want to put their head in the sand about how capitalists demand exponential growth to pay back their debts, not realizing that translates to population growth and changing cities.
Allowing property owners to develop their land if there’s demand is allowing free-market economics to address the issue of expensive housing in a state that has already suburbanized most of the developable land. I live in an old neighborhood that had multiple accessory units built before the pearl clutchers took over city planning in the 50s. My neighbor to the right has one. My neighbor across the alley has one. The neighbors to the right are coming over for a backyard fire this evening.
To be fair, it doesn’t abolish single family homes. The homeowner has to want to build higher density, and has to have the means to do so. It is giving homeowners more choice.
My hunch is that this will just lead to more HOAs with private single family covenants. So if you’re one of those HOA type people, merry Christmas.
Overall...I’m not wild about this. California does have a housing problem, and has, for a long time, needed something to alleviate that. But I’m not sure I like this statewide blanket policy. For one, it’s doubtful that a lot of areas have sufficient infrastructure, and I’m not clear as to whether permitting procedures would allow cities to put the kaibosh on developments that can’t be supported by said infrastructure.
Second, urbanists have always been glib about suburban development, failing to acknowledge that not everybody wants or fits into an urban setting.
Today California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill that effectively abolishes single-family home zoning in California - the Nation's largest state.
...........
I am curious about that statement......care to explain?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
