Share.

10 Comments

  1. Why the fuck would it be illegal to build apartments near transit. Bureaucracy like that is why we have a housing crisis

  2. I’m very confused as to why Marin would be against this. There’s not a lot of transit in Marin so I’d think the impact there would be minimal.

  3. Question if they had highspeed rail systems in place to get you from outskirts to the city, would you think people would be okay with living there? Would money move out to these outskirt communities thus freeing up housing in the cities? Now you don’t have to deal with the commute or the city, but still get to keep your city job?

  4. Makes zero sense to not have high density housing near easy access mass transit. They literally go hand in hand lol. Just like its insane to not have mixed use commercial/housing developments. Like huh? Does it not make sense to have high density housing, with commercial downstairs and mass transit next door? Like the fuck? lol

  5. I know Reddit hates context, but this bill gives the state authority over local governments to demand large housing units (6-9 stories depending on distance to transit stops, up to a half mile away, which is pretty much everywhere) be built *funded by local governments* and *staffed with union approved contractors.* In other words, it’s the state telling cities what to build where with the people they’ve chosen and the city has to shut up and pay for it. The cities are already broke…many from state taxing and pooling of what used to be local funds.

    Sure; they’ll wrap it in a package that makes it sound like it’s this boon for the underserved and anyone opposed is just being a NIMBY elitist, but it’s really Sacramento solving a problem that didn’t exist (state regulations and licensure are what are slowing housing permits and expansion, not local) with some totalitarian insanity. Anything to import votes, I guess.