Storefront in Berkeley (of course it is Berkeley).
You must log in or # to comment.
So I know nothing about Berkley other than there is a famous university there. Went and looked up this specific neighborhood (Elmwood) on street view.
To my European eye calling the entire district historic is a stretch, but I get it, there are some nice old houses there that might deserve individual preservation. But generally medium density housing fits quite well without breaking up the neighborhood character. They already have some at it fits quite well
This has nothing to do with historic preservation. Berkeley has even gone so far as declaring a parking lot as historic to block construction of an apartment building.
The state should take away their land use privileges and issue permits directly from Sacramento
That’s already the case, though a relatively recent change, called Builder’s Remedy. An incorporated city is granted the right to zone but if they do not have a state compliant housing element (an eight year plan for expected growth and housing to meet that) and if they deny building permits for that planned housing, then a builder can bypass the city’s permitting process. A city effectively forfeits their right to city planning if they don’t have an achievable plan for sufficient housing stock.
Berkeley has a state approved housing element. If this protested building is in the plan, then there’s not a whole lot the shop owner can do about it. They probably missed their council meetings in figuring out where to put housing during the planning of their city’s housing element. Or they’re upset that they lost in their local politics.
We need to do away with the paperwork and mandate stuff be allowed by right and skip the theatre of housing elements
Right. Because everyone loves it when their local government is over ruled by the state.
Berkeley was not only the first city in America to use racist zoning to prevent lower-income and non-whites from moving into wealthy neighborhoods – but the Elmwood district was the first neighborhood in the city to receive such treatment. That 1916 plan persists basically unchanged to do this day, with the Elmwood having the highest percentage of white residents in Alameda County. The State is acting well within its obligations to put a stop to such policies.
On this issue? Fuck it take away local control. It’s a failed policy that’s choking us to death slowly. Statewide zoning code now
And if the statewide zoning code doesn’t meet your approval?
Politicians at higher levels are not automatically more competent.
I always heard Berkeley was supposed to be “progressive”, but this makes it seem like they’re all NIMBY liberals… Which would you say is closer to the truth?
Definitely the latter.
Yeah NIMBY is hard to break.
California NIMBYs are the worst in the country.
The only problem I see is the buildings aren’t tall enough. If we want to end the cost of living crisis, we need affordable housing stock and lots of it. To get that, we need to build. To build to meet demand, we need flexible zoning.
The Bay Area should copy Tokyo, the largest metropolis on the planet which is also in an earthquake zone and has relatively affordable housing with excellent neighborhoods.
Tokyo is not even close to being affordable? A 25m2 1bd is still roughly 1400 usd per month. You can get it down to 800 usd ish if you only want a small 15m2 studio. Those kinds don’t come with any kitchen and you only have a mini fridge. And that’s just the rent alone.
Then you get hit with the tokyo salary which depending on the sector you work in could be 20 to 60 percent of a pay cut. The median salary is about 40k usd in Tokyo.
Like sure there are benefits but Tokyo is not affordable, just look at the rise of adults in their 20s and 30s living with their parents in Japan, and even the rise of unemployed throughout asia (south korea and japan leading this metric)
Edit: i forgot exponent sign is considered formatting
The retail salary to housing ratio is much better in Tokyo. Then add the much cheaper/extensive transit.
Tokyo is affordable, don’t cherry pick expensive areas
$1,400 a month for a one bedroom is quite good in comparison. San Francisco runs about $3,200/month for a one bedroom.
Hear me out: down zoning. We dig some deep ass bunkers and throw parks on top of them.
As a Brit, “zoning” has to be the second-stupidest town planning concept I’ve heard of this week
We have zoning and planning processes here in the UK too, called different things but doing the same job.
All building developments require planning permission.
This is required for construction of new property, extending and changing existing property, and changing the use of property, such as from commercial to residential or visa-versa.
As part of the planning process the authorities will look at what you intend to do, where you intend do do it, and ensure that makes sense. You can’t just smack a huge store in a residential neighbourhood for example, nor can you buy up retail property on the cheap and turn it into apartments.
If we didn’t have planning permission it would be an absolute nightmare.
What does this mean? What does zoning have to do with being American or not?
It’s not a thing here.
Of course it is. They just work differently and are not as stupid as the US zoning laws, but that doesn’t mean zoning laws don’t exist.
That’s quite the bold claim, do you have a source for that? Because last I heard, some politician wanted to introduce zoning last year and got shouted down because it’s an objectively terrible idea.
What politician tried to introduce what and where? Europe is not one single legislative body. This stuff differs from country to country inside the EU, but AFAIK every country has some sort of regulations as to what can be built where and how. The laws might differ in their specifics, but they’ll serve the same general purpose tailored to their own cultural and geographical needs. It’s not zoning itself that leads to US-style suburban hellscapes, it’s how they are defined and applied. European countries simply choose not to zone their land like the US does.
Anyway, here’s a sample of German zoning regulations for you as an example. It names industrial zones, agricultural zones, mixed residential zones, exclusive residential zones, etc. Again, they won’t work the same as the US laws, but they’re zoning regulations. You’ll see the word “Gebiet” a lot in there, which literally translates to “zone”.
I live in the UK. Wasn’t aware they were a thing in the EU, thanks for the info.
I would like to recommend to you this 20 min explainer of the exact issue by one of my favourite youtubers:
deleted by creator
It’s not at all just an American thing lol
Zoning is the most common regulatory urban planning method used by local governments in developed countries.[3][4][5] Exceptions include the United Kingdom and the city of Houston, Texas.
Didn’t realise it was so damn common. What a fucking shitshow!
Dude, calm down, you don’t even know what it is
I mean, it’s not a shitshow at all when it’s done correctly.
It can be an useful tool for sensible urban planning. It doesn’t have to be super rigid but it makes planning easier and more organized than some case-by-case basis system or not having a system at all.
Zoning is not a bad thing, bad zoning is. Zoning can stop there being massive polluting factories right outside people’s homes and outside of fragile ecosystems, for example. Outside of airports it requires builders to include AC so that people don’t have to have their windows open to cool their homes(because of the noise). The reason people love old European cities with all their character is to do with zoning laws.
The problem with the US, and us in Canada too, is that zoning is done incredibly poorly. Shitty neighbourhoods with little-to-no mixed-uses and two-story max buildings fucking sucks. I’m glad I live in Montréal in one of the three-story walk-ups with a Depanneur across the street and all the shops I need around the corner down my neighbourhood’s main street.
Anyway the point is that regulations and control or better than no regulations and control but we have a responsibility to do it well, something places like US are famously bad about.
You can have historic neighborhoods without cars. We’ve had them for millennia in the rest of the world.
This poster has a suspiciously good layout for the simple font and picture choice. It feels like astroturfing and the subject matter supports the idea.
What’s your issues with Disco Fitness? /s
Counts floors… of couse.
Mixed use urban developments are great and all but can we at least get a second type of building?
Good gravy that’s a big QR code
.jpg){kind=link}
#/media/File:Maquette_du_village_d'Hochelaga.jpg){kind=link}
