HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2018, 8:41 PM
CIA CIA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,675
Talking Secretary Ben Carson is joining the ranks of the YIMBYs, whether they want him or not

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...ant-him-or-not

Quote:
Ben Carson is aiming to become the nation’s highest-ranking YIMBY.

HUD Secretary Ben Carson argued that cities with the most restrictive land use regulations are the ones that suffer the worst unaffordability and homelessness, citing Los Angeles and San Francisco.
(Graeme Jennings/Washington Examiner)


That is, he’s aiming to encourage people to say “Yes in My Back Yard,” instead of “Not in My Back Yard,” or NIMBYism, as its known.

In recent weeks, the secretary of Housing and Urban Development has embraced YIMBYism and called for the federal government to promote it, surprising agency watchers and urbanists and pleasing the bipartisan coalition of reformers who believe that restrictive zoning and land-use regulations are to blame for the rental crisis afflicting the nation and closing off coastal cities to the middle class.

“What we’re trying to do, obviously, is create more affordable housing,” Carson told the Washington Examiner. “And we can’t do it if we continue to have all of these zoning restrictions and other regulatory restrictions. It just drives the price up incredibly.”

Carson argued that cities with the most restrictive land use regulations are the ones that suffer the worst unaffordability and homelessness, citing Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2018, 8:45 PM
CIA CIA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,675
Very interesting...

Quote:
The 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule prompted cities and counties to identify and remedy, through a variety of means, housing segregation. Failure to comply put local officials at risk of losing out on HUD community development block grants.

The rule could be reworked, though, to focus on narrowly incentivizing local governments to reduce land-use regulations and encourage housing growth.

Free-market groups have encouraged Carson to do just that.

“At a minimum, the federal government should not subsidize exclusionary policy,” analysts Salim Furth and Emily Hamilton of the libertarian Mercatus Center wrote in a comment submitted to HUD. “Why should national taxpayers foot the bill for rent subsidies where the rent is artificially high as a result of unreasonable limitations of private property rights?”

YIMBYism is a free-market stance in the sense that it promotes fewer government restrictions on home building and apartment construction.

Exclusionary housing policies, though, aren’t necessarily favored by Republicans or Democrats. Rather, they are promoted by established owners of all ideological stripes who have a vested interest in maintaining property values in their neighborhoods.

Democratic Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts have both recently put forward YIMBYish legislation to require cities and counties to ease housing regulations in order to be eligible for federal grants. In Warren’s bill, that provision would be paired with huge increases in federal funding for affordable housing projects.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2018, 9:26 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 16,913
Some of that could be used to argue for sprawl, with all of the problems and financial costs that entails.
__________________
"Alot" isn't a word.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2018, 9:37 PM
CIA CIA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Some of that could be used to argue for sprawl, with all of the problems and financial costs that entails.
How so? Sprawl is the ultimate in government subsidization.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2018, 10:15 PM
Obadno Obadno is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Some of that could be used to argue for sprawl, with all of the problems and financial costs that entails.
Right so suburban communities will have less ability to turn away denser developments andpotential commerical enterprises etc.

In phoenix this is a big thing, some people in the Phoenix Country club just killed a 15 story condo highrise as being out of cahrecter despite a ~20 story condo building exsisting literally on the other side of the golf course and 20-30 story office towers being less than a 1/2 mile away.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 1:39 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 1,337
Urbanism is the one subject I find myself being way more liberal than my liberal friends.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 5:34 AM
pdxtex's Avatar
pdxtex pdxtex is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,401
classist urban liberals and classist conservative suburbanites hate the same thing, poor people! at least suburbanites are more transparent about their disdain, they just moved away. carson is right, over regulation begets expensive and exclusive markets....
__________________
Portland!! Where young people go to retire.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 2:03 PM
dave8721 dave8721 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,976
I also see this as a tool that could help promote sprawl. Here is Florida many counties have regulations preventing sprawl outside of development boundaries. Those boundaries could be seen as "NIMBY" and preventing more housing. Without a doubt Miami-Dade's boundary squeezes supply and jacks up prices but its largely supported down here as we would rather not pave the Everglades and sprawl to Naples.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 2:44 PM
CIA CIA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave8721 View Post
I also see this as a tool that could help promote sprawl. Here is Florida many counties have regulations preventing sprawl outside of development boundaries. Those boundaries could be seen as "NIMBY" and preventing more housing. Without a doubt Miami-Dade's boundary squeezes supply and jacks up prices but its largely supported down here as we would rather not pave the Everglades and sprawl to Naples.

Florida has to be the most sprawled state in the nation. Whatever methods the state thinks it has to prevent sprawl has severely failed in the eyes of the rest of the country.

But let's assume you are correct. YIMBYism has got to be a net benefit. People have to live somewhere. Right now if they can't live within a city because of highly restrictive zoning, they're going to end up in the suburbs anyway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 2:45 PM
CIA CIA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,675
We can't loosen restrictive zoning regulations to allow for more multi-family housing to be built because that will lead to more sprawl...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 4:02 PM
Sun Belt Sun Belt is online now
Drenched in Sun
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The World's Piggy Bank
Posts: 2,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
Florida has to be the most sprawled state in the nation. Whatever methods the state thinks it has to prevent sprawl has severely failed in the eyes of the rest of the country.
I disagree. Every state sprawls. Florida allows for dense high rise development along their shores and many of the metros are physically constrained. It is a state of 20 million that is rapidly growing. When you look at the urban area map of Florida there are huge metros, separated by huge areas that are basically uninhabitable, which is quite different from other states that can sprawl all across their boundaries.

I would think that Georgia and N.C. are bigger offenders. Certainly anything east of KCMO is characterized by metros separated by low density settlements all across the land. This is not possible in a place like Florida [swamps, wetlands] and western states [mountains, federal lands, Indian reservations].
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 4:02 PM
L41A's Avatar
L41A L41A is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Peace Up, A-Town Down
Posts: 720
I do not agree that Florida is a sprawled out state when you are talking specifically to its metros. The topography of the state help to dictate that its metros are somewhat compact - you have the ocean, bays, lakes, swamps, rivers, national forests, etc that helps to control its metros from sprawling.

Florida is a state however that has sizable metros throughout its total area unlike many states with a large land mass.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 4:24 PM
CIA CIA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,675
Let's look at population density of Florida metro areas and compare to other cities in the rest of the country. They're lower than the average. Having a few beachfront condos doesn't equate to density. For one it's bad planning in the age of sea level rise and I bet a lot of them are vacation homes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 6:05 PM
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is online now
>~< , QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: South Loop, Chicago
Posts: 533
It doesn't help that many of the beachfront properties are seasonal homes or timeshares.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 6:08 PM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 3,585
I didn't even read the article, but being that this is Ben Carson, I'm going to assume that this is some kind of free market ploy that still keeps things status quo for the wealthy, like maybe along the lines of getting rid of zoning for middle and lower income neighborhoods to allow anything and everything to be built there, but not changing the zoning of wealthy mansion-on-3-or-more-acres neighborhoods.
__________________
I'm just a soul whose intentions are good.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 6:15 PM
dave8721 dave8721 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
I disagree. Every state sprawls. Florida allows for dense high rise development along their shores and many of the metros are physically constrained. It is a state of 20 million that is rapidly growing. When you look at the urban area map of Florida there are huge metros, separated by huge areas that are basically uninhabitable, which is quite different from other states that can sprawl all across their boundaries.

I would think that Georgia and N.C. are bigger offenders. Certainly anything east of KCMO is characterized by metros separated by low density settlements all across the land. This is not possible in a place like Florida [swamps, wetlands] and western states [mountains, federal lands, Indian reservations].
Those empty areas aren't uninhabitable, they are uninhabited. All the areas that are inhabited used to look just like those uninhabited areas. They are uninhabited due to government restrictions (draining a swamp isn't that hard, 95% of South Florida is drained swampland). I am using sprawl as a verb by the way as in to spread out. Florida metros are full of sprawl (the noun) in that they are car centric but they are constrained and do not sprawl (the verb) out to infinity like metros in the rest of the U.S, at least the ones on the East coast are. Keeping those limits is a daily fight against developers who want to spread subdivisions forever.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 11:04 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxtex View Post
classist urban liberals and classist conservative suburbanites hate the same thing, poor people! at least suburbanites are more transparent about their disdain, they just moved away. carson is right, over regulation begets expensive and exclusive markets....
Good, let's start with eliminating zoning laws and parking requirements.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 11:41 PM
Sun Belt Sun Belt is online now
Drenched in Sun
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The World's Piggy Bank
Posts: 2,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
Let's look at population density of Florida metro areas and compare to other cities in the rest of the country. They're lower than the average. Having a few beachfront condos doesn't equate to density. For one it's bad planning in the age of sea level rise and I bet a lot of them are vacation homes.
Miami is one of the most dense urban areas in the U.S. - Only LA, SF, San Jose, NY, Honolulu, Vegas rank higher than Miami.


Florida has crammed 20 million and growing into a state that is physically restricted by wetlands.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2018, 1:20 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxtex View Post
classist urban liberals and classist conservative suburbanites hate the same thing, poor people! at least suburbanites are more transparent about their disdain, they just moved away. carson is right, over regulation begets expensive and exclusive markets....
I think the basic reason is that while national politics are polarized and tribalized, for the most part local politics are not. Social issues barely even enter into things, and economic issues - for the most part - are "do we cut spending on government services or raise taxes?"

On issues like land use, except for maybe affordable housing, nothing fits into the existing left-right paradigm. So people are free to just favor their own narrow interests over everything else.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2018, 4:03 PM
Obadno Obadno is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by The North One View Post
Good, let's start with eliminating zoning laws and parking requirements.
Parking requirements is a big one.
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 5:57 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.