-
-
Is that $250B statewide? I was talking about SF demand only. I will say that https://www.sfcommunityhousingact.com/details seems to have at least engaged with basically reasonable numbers, but it takes 60 years to build 30k units. Sigh.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Not trying to be snarky, this is a genuine question: has YIMBY addressed the math of this in a meaningful way? I know we talk a lot about how the numbers are huge and insurmountable, but I haven't seen a long term game plan either.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @sashaperigo @xander76 and
Even if we built as much market rate housing as possible, studies have shown that market rates wouldn't come down to a point where'd they'd match today's below market rate prices for 50 years.
3 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @sashaperigo @xander76 and
I also don't see us raising $250B to build 85,000 BMR units through IZ programs, especially when I see some YIMBYs criticize IZ programs for raising the cost of building housing more than they discuss any other contributing factor.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
The point is IZ doesn’t scale and it’s been like a 15 year policy distraction from also needing to directly pay for social housing (in addition to building a lot of market rate housing)
1 reply 1 retweet 15 likes -
I don't think IZ scales either. but if you're going to make a solid case to take away IZ you had better have a well-laid out concrete promise to replace it with more subsidized units in a similar timeframe
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
I don’t think IZ should go away. Mixed-income buildings and neighborhoods are good. I just think the discourse around it is totally dishonest. Like if you get 40% of 1500 units but you need 1.3-1.7 million square feet of office space to get it, you’ve failed.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
no one will be surprised by my saying that there's no way out of this that doesn't involve wealth redistribution
3 replies 1 retweet 6 likes -
Oh, here was the comment I was looking for. I generally favor subsidizing housing through land increment and then handling services through other forms of progressive taxation. I think if you try to income tax your way out of the current property/land use situation, it’s like
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Setting giant piles of money on fire as property values rise by $100K (alameda co) - 700k (northern Santa Clara co) per year.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.