So smart. Balancing the reversal of historic inequities between urban, suburban development.https://twitter.com/petesaunders3/status/654726190662483968 …
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler
@kimmaicutler@petesaunders3 because a market based argument for addressing structural inequality would be something we'd dig in these parts3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tolles
@tolles@kimmaicutler Lead to loss of chance for city residents to build value the same way suburbanites did. Is that more equitable? 3/31 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @petesaunders3
@petesaunders3@kimmaicutler my take would be to try and bring value of inner city up; need to provide that uplift to the renters somehow1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tolles
@petesaunders3@tolles@kimmaicutler I don't see, eg in CA cities, this demand constraint. Huge demand all over, clear underspply+constraint5 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tmccormick
@tmccormick@tolles@kimmaicutler Is Oakland or Richmond as in demand as SV? Inglewood as in demand as Westside?3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@petesaunders3 @tmccormick @tolles SV is mostly single family detached and isn't budging on zoning so that's making Oakland attractive
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.