Exactly what LA's opponents of SB50 predicted when the bill passed....oh wait, they defeated it! They said the status quo was fine. http://bit.ly/2vrK032 @cayimby @AbundantHousing @SPUR_Urbanist @kimmaicutlerhttps://twitter.com/nkburns3/status/1271459696776409091 …
-
-
Replying to @beyondchron @cayimby and
It's like nightmare Groundhog's Day. Every year it's like this and every year Senators Allen, Hertzberg, and Stern prioritize wealthy homeowners over homeless and housing-precarious Angelenos.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @nkburns3 @beyondchron and
My concern is that streamlining new development in fire zones, where land is $$, is unlikely to benefit anyone but those who can afford it. That’d be the opposite effect of what I think we all want: to rectify housing injustices forcing millions into poverty.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HenrySternCA @nkburns3 and
Did you actually read the bill or did you just make up a last minute excuse to oppose it? I put the leg aides on this bill in direct contact with
@CAL_FIRE’s sole land use planner about 2 years ago to make VHFHSZs were protected from addl wildfire risk.@Scott_Wiener1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @HenrySternCA and
More housing in transit accessible, non-wildfire risk areas is an alternative to sprawl of WUI areas. This is just basic. If it can’t go up in already developed areas, California has to 3X available buildable land just to match population growth
@elpaavohttps://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-land-zoned-newsom-20190130-story.html …1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
If we sprawl out, it’s worse for emissions and worse for % of Californians living in the WUI.https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/climate/california-fires-wildland-urban-interface.html …
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.