Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Snoo6435 t1_j9qww1o wrote

I hope their is a referendum put on the ballot against state interference in local zoning. In San Diego, developers can build eight story buildings without parking 25 blocks into neighborhoods.

−12

moonfox1000 t1_j9rhwwd wrote

Good, they should be able to build as high as they want. The market incentivizes housing that has parking so they would only be hurting the value of their own property by not building sufficient parking for their residents. The alternative is nothing but expensive SFHs for everyone to bid up.

21

Scrandon t1_j9ryeyf wrote

Wrong - while they will be hurting the value of their own property, they won’t only be hurting their own value when parking overflows into the surrounding area. Just gotta think a little harder, champ.

−8

Snoo6435 t1_j9rq1aq wrote

We won't allow developers to destroy century old historic neighborhoods by building rental units. Go somewhere else if you can't afford to live here or go out to the suburbs so you aren't living beyond your means. That way you can still make payments on your BMW's and Audis...when you should drive a beater in order to save for a down payment on a home.

−32

fml87 t1_j9rwqy7 wrote

Century old isn’t historic sorry, and old shit isn’t worth preserving for the 1% to enjoy and continue the march of gentrification.

18

worm600 t1_j9rx4yo wrote

Even if it was, the principle that because a building didn’t fall down for a while it needs to remain forever is not one worth defending. Take pictures.

11

Mississimia t1_j9rztor wrote

Yeah, driving a beater will really help make a dent in the 300k down payment. I hope the developers build that hypothetical 8 story building right next to your house.

6

summertime_taco t1_j9rfh4w wrote

Too bad they can't build higher.

11

Snoo6435 t1_j9rnauh wrote

Which historic neighborhood did you buy in? I didn't think so.

−14

summertime_taco t1_j9rselb wrote

Poor baby has to suffer the fact that people born after him need somewhere to live.

15

Mississimia t1_j9s03vy wrote

He's retired and doesn't even contribute to the economy and wants to price teachers and firefighters out of his neighborhood. Selfishness is a disease.

4

Joshau-k t1_j9rv1gr wrote

Parking isn't the issue, public transport is

9

molotov_cockteaze t1_j9skwet wrote

Nah. Cities and counties have had decades to get this NIMBY shit handled on their own and the proof is in the pudding; they've almost unanimously failed and hordes of lifelong Californians have had to suffer the consequences from your entitlement. The state has been threatening to step in for years so here we are. Hopefully as many eight story buildings as humanly possible get built before any such ballot initiative is a glint in Steph Curry's eye.

9

Snoo6435 t1_j9v66l2 wrote

Currious... how old are you? Im guessing gen Z. since you appear entitled. Are you a CA native? Are you a homeowner so that you are invested in our community? Destroying history so that people moving here from outside the community can afford to rent is rediculous. If you can't afford to buy or rent, then move away.

−1

Job_Stealer t1_j9sropc wrote

This comment right here is why as a CA planner, I hate ballot box planning. Non professionals voting on matters that they dont have time to understand that become non caring the moment it gets passed.

This is such a mischaraterization of the current SD land use regulation and general plan that I'm assuming you live somewhere like Chula Vista or Oceanside.

It's not even a referendum. You're referring to an initiative!!!

9

Snoo6435 t1_j9v4dda wrote

Are you saying that the city didn't change rules to allow 8 story apartment buildings up to one mile from transit hubs into historic neighborhoods? And that no onsite parking is required? And that the neighborhood planning groups aren't included in the process? I seriously like to know. BTW, my home is in Mission Hills. My degree is in landscape architecture and planning from Cal Poly.

What is a referendum California?

In California, a ballot proposition is a referendum or an initiative measure that is submitted to the electorate for a direct decision or direct vote (or plebiscite).

0

Job_Stealer t1_j9vffd7 wrote

Hello fellow Mustang alumni,

Unless you have a minor in CRP, I have never met a LARC that has any idea about the planning process outside of anecdotes, and that's what I wished CAED did more of. Integrating our allied professions.

A referendum is "the power of the electors to approve or reject statues or parts of statutes..." Cal. Const. Article II 9(a). The power of a referendum only applies only to NEWLY enacted legislation and is subject to constitutional limitations. In local government respects, they are used to reject an ordinance or resolution that has been RECENTLY passed (30 days before they take into effect). Also, they can't contradict state law.

Have you seen your city's general / specific plan? Have you read your land use matrix? Probably not. I don't expect the average individual to do. That's partially why public planners exist. But unless I see specific language allowing for that specific type of development you are talking about to occur, your statement is considered a pretty uncredible NIMBY argument. In fact, Mission Hills is a very wealthy neighborhood of sfh next to the downtown specific plan area, from what i recall. This means that the neighborhood will eventually become high density over time. It was designated as a Tier 1 in respect to the housing solutions portion of the city's complete communites approach. THIS ITSELF WAS A PRODUCT OF AN EXTENSIVE AMOUNT PUBLIC OUTREACH EFFORTS.

Those local ordinances you mention are an extent to comply with SB10, which is a state mandated statute. There has been recent debate within the planning field here whether or not the state is overreaching in its power. I'm on the side that it is. HOWEVER, we have had an official housing crisis for the past decade. If cities try to designate "historical neighborhoods" for the sake of blocking high density development (especially wealthy places that want to keep the poors out), then they get what's coming to them with current state law. However, well planned places will integrate a plethora of intensity of land uses well, even if they're "historical neighborhoods".

You're right to an extent of the overreaching power of the state and the lack of public participation in planning. It's a problem as commissions are overrepresented by a rich minority and public hearings are only being visited by landowners or old, advantaged individuals.

https://www.sandiego.gov/complete-communities

1

plummbob t1_j9rkmc3 wrote

>In San Diego, developers can build eight story buildings without parking 25 blocks into neighborhoods.

​

​

bummer its not 10 stories. housing for people > housing for cars

3