Post

Conversation

upzone the coastal elites
@about_dave
The NIMBY demand letter, while absurd, did get me thinking. Sb330 requires a housing project that "demolishes" housing to replace it, with any affordability restrictions (and rights of return/relocation). How does that apply to disaster rebuilds though?
Quote
Chris Elmendorf
@CSElmendorf
Replying to @CSElmendorf
basically every state housing law: the HAA, the Housing Element Law, the Density Bonus Law, the commercial-corridors upzoning laws, the parking-reductions-near-transit law, the 5-hearing limit & objective-standards definition of SB 330, and more. 4/5
Show more
Image
Image
7,128
Views
David Watson 🥑
Post your reply

upzone the coastal elites
@about_dave
Are landlords going to be required to rebuild and re-rent at a rate particularly affordable to the impacted household, as sb330 generally requires. So landlords would have to rebuild, at full cost, then relet at likely a lower rent? that creates a massive takings issue...
253
upzone the coastal elites
@about_dave
In that context, the local demand to void the density bonus is bananas. If the law is going to take so much public value out, we need to fund it more, not cut off additional revenue that was supposed to fund affordability.
234
upzone the coastal elites
@about_dave
Listening. She's currently attacking ADUs. Falsely describes it as a requirement to have ADUs, rather than a requirement to let homeowners have ADUs if they want. Apparently safe to rebuild regular housing, but not ADUs.
71
Gary Benjamin
@garyraybenjamin
SB 330 and SB 8 will require replacement of prior market-rate units with new affordable housing units unless the project consists of a single-family home replacing a single-family home or the owner can definitively prove that there were no low income renters in the past 5 years.
38K