
回
32.2K posts

回
@3_under_scores_
🚲🚇🚶 🇺🇸🇨🇴




I'd support IZ in some circumstances, where we'd have strong confidence that it would not deter construction of market rate homes. But that's hard to define. Just for luxury buildings? Just the most expensive neighborhoods? Haven't seen good policy solution to make a distinction.

Maybe someone can devise a system that applied IZ only on projects that were rented or sold at a percentage above average prices. But then measuring that, determining thresholds, all would be difficult problems. Easy to imagine circumstances changing faster than policy, too.






After 2021, Portland raised the IZ requirement from 10% to 25%, requires developers to set aside 25% of new residential units for affordable housing As a result, affordable housing fell almost 99%






San Francisco is considering cutting their IZ requirement to 5%. Meanwhile, Pittsburgh still requires 10% in several neighborhoods. The 10% requirement has been shown to kill housing production in Pittsburgh neighborhoods where it applies. sfchronicle.com/realestate/art…


I think the YIMBY movement employs an inadvertently dishonest sleight-of-hand in talking about "Paris-scale density". Well, fine, if we're talking about Paris-style building, I'm all for it, and likely voters would be too (as they have been in the past). But what is actually on offer is quite different: they wisely interpret calls for "Paris-scale density" as something more like "Sejong City-scale density".











