No mention of SB 827 from this group. Proponents of destroying existing residential neighborhoods with highrise apartments and condos - primarily for millions of additional high tech workers - will be quiet until November 7, 2018 (the day after the election of all members of the State Assembly and half of the members of the State Senate).

When I hear things like "building more types of housing" it sounds like "Top people will decide what types of housing will be built".

I'd much rather have the municipalities reduce the regulatory burden and not prohibit developers from building the types of housing that developers believe the market will support. Remember that for every new expensive unit built, there will be people vacating a less expensive unit. Repeat all the way down.

I have nothing against high-rise living complexes. I'm all in favor of more high-rises, provided that the ground will support them during earthquakes. (I live in a "liquefaction zone" so a high rise probably won't work where I am.)

Having visited Singapore many times, I can say that high-rise communities work well -- the difference is that people there OWN the places they live in. The government subsidizes first-time owners. And because they own them, they take good care of them. You can't have a real community with a majority of apartment dwellers.

The other difference is that in Singapore, the government builds the housing, too. It's public housing, which people here don't seem to like too much.

Who are these low income people working for, Mc Donalds? Are these the people we are building for?

@Hmm: Non white-collar (professional) workers. Restaurant workers, Construction workers, Grocery workers, Maintenance workers, Childcare workers, Retail store workers, to specifically name a few types of blue-collar workers.

I think the majority of these are, besides not being "white collar" are also of a non-white skin color. Perhaps that is why some white "white collar" people don't really notice them?

La Raza Cosmica