- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:24 pm to SmileyVamp
quote:
Now, there are strong pursuits to get rid of single-family zoning, height limits, ADU codes, paring minimums, etc. to encourage dense free-market development.
possibly the most self-contradictory sentence since Cassidy's explanation of his vote on conviction
Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:27 pm to SmileyVamp
quote:
parking minimums.
that 200sq feet per unit is the problem in a city with , what, 50% "green space" requirements, vertical limits, etc. and all that price-gouging bullshite.Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:31 pm to SmileyVamp
Yeah. LA here- the market is ridiculous. What a lot of leftie boomers don’t understand, is that more development (done smartly) equals fewer wildfires. I once had one such person explain that fires were threatening houses because people were moving into fire territory. I pointed out that developing surrounding her own (she was evacuating) would act as a cultivated buffer and water features could be required for neighborhood developments. Every time I hear about 50,000 acres or whatever burning just outside LA, I can’t help but wonder why a townhome in Lima Linda costs just South of $1 million. Senseless. Also, the high density schemes are especially insidious as new high-density developments pretty much always include low income units.
Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:33 pm to SmileyVamp
The irony is that while they're going after more affordable housing, higher density zoning is almost always sought-after by developers since they can squeeze more out of the same piece of dirt.
Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:36 pm to SmileyVamp
Why are we clearing land to build so many house right now if we want to green? It’s crazy that democrats want to destroy the first to build house and then cry about climate change.
Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:39 pm to SmileyVamp
quote:
Development is terrifying for much of the American suburbanite population, especially in California.
That’s because they expect their inflated home to be their retirement trust. I just told off a boomer real estate agent yesterday. She showed me a $1.4 million dump, then when I asked about lowballing to account for renovations, she said that was already factored in, then proceeded to tell me what documents were needed for the offer. I replied I would wait for the market to pull back. She responded with a hyperbolic email saying “if I waited for the pullback, I would end up paying twice as much at a higher interest rate.” I told her off. Anybody know a trustworthy real estate agent in Los Angeles area, btw?
This post was edited on 2/15/21 at 9:24 pm
Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:41 pm to tjv305
quote:
Why are we clearing land to build so many house right now if we want to green? It’s crazy that democrats want to destroy the first to build house and then cry about climate change.
The suburban demographic are usually key voters. This means both Democrats and Republicans are not comfortable with pursuing pro-development policy as that would likely anger suburban voters.
Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:44 pm to tigerterrace
Learn ebonics.
Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:50 pm to SmileyVamp
quote:
worried about gentrification. Typically suburban folk
Totally disconnected and illogical stuff here.
Suburban folks are not worried about gentrification. Most suburban (you mean white, mainly) folk consider gentrification of shitty areas to be a good thing. It's only the super-woke who hate gentrification, because once a hood goes shitty, it must always remain shitty, because we can't have white people moving back in and investing their own capital into it.
Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:53 pm to SmileyVamp
Biden wants to end the 1031 exchange. That goes to show we are going to get even more anti-development policies under this administration.
Posted on 2/15/21 at 7:56 pm to SmileyVamp
quote:
The suburban demographic are usually key voters. This means both Democrats and Republicans are not comfortable with pursuing pro-development policy as that would likely anger suburban voters.
Well, they better buckle up with your "pro-development" policy when it drops high density/low income housing units smack in the middle of middle class homes in red states.
That's going to do wonders for home values.
Posted on 2/15/21 at 10:44 pm to Purple Spoon
Don’t get me wrong, I would love to go back there. However, most people don’t take into account what life in Montana would be like 12 months out of the year. So far away from a white sandy beach along warm gulf waters.
Posted on 2/16/21 at 2:40 am to SmileyVamp
This is nothing but Agenda 2030 to force people into overpopulated cities and an attempt to ruin nice housing areas with ghetto trash. It's more shitty policies to destroy the middle class. No thanks.
If you want more affordable housing, then cut regulations. This is as dumb as democrats trying to tax the country out of a deficit.
If you want more affordable housing, then cut regulations. This is as dumb as democrats trying to tax the country out of a deficit.
Posted on 2/16/21 at 3:30 am to SmileyVamp
A pro Sacramento post means you’re another commie bastard visiting TD
KISS MY arse
KISS MY arse
Posted on 2/16/21 at 5:10 am to SmileyVamp
Keep ruining California, no one cares and it’s lost as an American state at this point. Don’t fricking California the rest of the US becuase it does not work.
Posted on 2/16/21 at 11:35 am to SmileyVamp
Source: LINK
Ann Arbor mulls ‘unlimited height’ development zones
The government of Ann Arbor, Michigan is considering an unlimited height zone for the city to encourage dence development.
Ann Arbor mulls ‘unlimited height’ development zones
quote:
ANN ARBOR, MI — Should Ann Arbor establish new “unlimited height” development zones to encourage more dense housing and mixed-used development along transit corridors?
That’s a question city officials are exploring as part of a transit-oriented development zoning initiative, and it was the subject of community discussion and debate this week.
At a Planning Commission work session Tuesday night, Feb. 9, City Planner Alexis DiLeo gave an overview of what’s been proposed so far, noting the zoning project has been “on again, off again, back on again” in recent years.
The government of Ann Arbor, Michigan is considering an unlimited height zone for the city to encourage dence development.
This post was edited on 2/16/21 at 11:36 am
Posted on 2/16/21 at 12:39 pm to SmileyVamp
Cram as many in the cities as you can...keeps them out of my backyard. There isn't a medium to large city in my state worth a shite to live in.
Posted on 2/16/21 at 12:43 pm to SmileyVamp
quote:
Good news, San Francisco has gotten rid of parking minimums.
That's good news to me. Cram more into San Fran.
Posted on 2/16/21 at 1:15 pm to SmileyVamp
quote:Yeah. Everybody purports to adopt this beautiful, Christian, kind-hearted position until it happens to them. Then it's "Over my dead body". Stop making these people live off the gov't dole and teach them how to succeed then the problem (at least theoretically) goes away. But then so does the Democrat voting base. Follow?
Unfortunately, you have the NIMBYs (Not In My BackYard). People who refuse to allow development to happen because it would ruin the "character" of their neighborhoods and/or worried about gentrification. Typically suburban folk uncomfortable with change.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News