HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2020, 11:12 PM
craigs craigs is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 190
The city passed a law allowing garages to be converted to housing units as-of-right. There are still building codes to satisfy, and I would imagine a construction permit is needed, but no zoning variance is required if I recall correctly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2020, 11:58 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigs View Post
The city passed a law allowing garages to be converted to housing units as-of-right. There are still building codes to satisfy, and I would imagine a construction permit is needed, but no zoning variance is required if I recall correctly.
I know, but before the law changed there were hundreds (if not thousands) of such conversions done illegally and there's a process to get them legalized that most owners have not gone through.

All you have to do is scan real estate adds and you'll see plenty of "unpermitted inlaw unit" acknowledgements, quite a few of which are in former garages I'm sure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2020, 12:01 AM
plutonicpanda plutonicpanda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 557
Nice! We are moving to assimilate Hong Kong's cage apartments which I believe are even illegal there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2020, 3:22 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
7-hydroxymitragynine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,601
1968, California dreamin', 2020, Mamas and Papas leaving California.

Hopefully the fire gets put out in the future. Make the state livable again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2020, 8:32 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post

Hopefully the fire gets put out in the future. Make the state livable again.
No matter how you feel about SB 50 and California's various policies toward business, development and assorted social issues (and I am severely distressed by quite a few of them--nearly all it often seems), California remains a beautiful place, almost uniquely blessed by nature and in many ways also enhanced by previous generations (Highway 1, Golden Gate Bridge, the towers of SF and LA, the state's many parks (national and state) and so on. And while some large businesses are leaving the state for Texas suburbs and other low tax/low regulation spots, the concentration of knowledge professionals and entrepreneurs in California continue to create new businesses faster than any are leaving. In part this is because of high skill immigration (a remarkable percentage of knowledge-based businesses are led by immigrants). 90% of the state remains a great--maybe exceptionally great--place to live. Even parts of the infamously challenged cities.

And it's an interesting fact that while 27% of California (over 10 million people) is foreign-born, Gov. Newsome says the state needs 3.5 million new homes by 2025. There are several points to be made here: (1) Without virtually uncontrolled immigration, the state might not even have a housing shortage, however (2) very few of the people living in the state's tent cities and making up the population of homeless are immigrants. Assuming many of the newly arrived immigrants crossing the southern border bring very little with them in terms of possessions or assets, this tells you that the state's housing problem is not about poor people and maybe not even about too few homes (although a reasonable surplus of homes, which we clearly do NOT have, might help with the problem of affordability).

It really seems to be about an exceptionally tolerant attitude toward substance use/abuse and the resulting addiction and about a failure to deal appropriately with mental illness, both making treatment available to those who need it and making it compulsory for those who demonstrate an inability to shelter and feed themselves thus putting their lives and physical health in danger. And to at least some extent it may be about such factors as the gentle weather and the generous welfare benefit policies which the state can afford because of its continuing wealth and wealth creation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:50 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.