Mark Noack, thanks for this article. Scott Wiener's proposal is just horrible. From the article:

"Under the new bill, housing proposals for those properties near transit [within one-half mile] would be immune to most local zoning restrictions, such as parking requirements and caps on the maximum density or height. The closest properties to a major transit stop could be built at least 85 feet high, according to the bill.

"The city has long relied on using a density-bonus system that allows housing developers to build higher and more densely packed apartments. In exchange, developers are required to help fund local improvements, such as parks, transportation or affordable housing.

"Wiener's bill would essentially take away the city's leverage to demand those concessions, Siegel told the Voice, and he warned it could trigger a political backlash. The bill, he said, would make it so that certain high-rise apartments wouldn't have to address valid neighborhood concerns, such as traffic, parking and construction impacts."

This bill sounds like it was written by developers. I just hope we have enough honest and sensible state legislators to obliterate this proposal.

MV Resident,

After studying California Political Science at San Jose State, I do not share your optimism.

THe reality is that money does buy policy in the state of California, along with the U.S.

We better get prepared for the fact that the state will override the local government, just like it did with Costa Hawkins.

Unless there is sufficient outcry by the citizens to overcome the political advantage the bill proponents have today.

@MV Resident

One of these days you're going to have to understand that there are a LOT of people around here squeezing into whatever nook they can that support bills like this, not just housing developers.

This bill is great. Sustainable growth is building densely around mass transit. Helps the housing crisis while promoting mass transit usage. Of course long-term homeowners that use Prop 13 to externalize increasing housing costs onto everyone else while blocking developments because of shadows will complain, but they've abused their advantageous position long enough. IMO, either be willing to pay taxes on the market rate of your home (so if you want to restrict new housing, you better be willing to pay to cost for it), or accept your cushy tax deal and lose your ability to block housing for others. You can't have both. Not anymore at least.

Is it an expressed condition for these high-rise apartment complexes that money be paid to Wiener directly or indirectly? Or have the payments already been made?

This conversation has moved to a new thread:
Web Link