Submitted by magenta_placenta t3_10khw9m in Washington
Chronfidence t1_j5rhtuv wrote
Reply to comment by Theotar in Washington state might nix-single family zoning by magenta_placenta
Read the article.
Theotar t1_j5s7dqv wrote
My adhd, dyslexia, and covid brain fog make it a challenge. Reall helps if I can get my fellow Reddit users to help out by doing a brief description for me.
MoiJaimeLesCrepes t1_j5s8fcp wrote
it's really unclear that this would pass. It's an attempt to force higher density new constructions in urban environments.
I haven't heard of state-wide mandates for higher housing density.
In my opinion, densifying is not a bad thing, but the infrastructure isn't necessarily made to support it, so this could cause a lot of really bad traffic jams.
I can also see that people will go further and further out to get the single family homes they crave causing more exoburbs and suburban sprawl.
so, I applaud the sentiment, but I doubt that the measure will pass, and, if it does, that this won't generate a lot of problems.
edc582 t1_j5scvox wrote
Oregon passed legislation very similar to this in 2019. It probably hasn't been long enough to determine whether or not it has been worth it, but I don't really see the downsides. Yes, it could make traffic worse, parking worse, etc... but the idea is that you eventually reach a density where that is less important as transit becomes more feasible. They more or less needed to enact this since they have very strict land use laws and the urban growth boundary system (not a bad thing, but if you can't build out, you must build up).
As for applying it to the whole state, I think that's good as well. There are plenty of smaller communities that are in dire need of housing. Being able to build duplexes, triplexes and quadplexes is a good thing since it is impractical to buy several houses and try to put up a larger apartment complex. There is reason to believe there's less pushback from neighbors when we pursue infill projects like this.
Banning single family exclusive zoning doesn't mean single family homes don't get built, it just means landowners are free to pursue building more dense units per plot. It won't be without its problems, but housing costs are not sustainable now and it won't get better until we can build more. On balance I think it will be a positive for the state.
MoiJaimeLesCrepes t1_j5sfyaz wrote
oh ok, thanks. I understand better. I'll look up Oregon's case.
Chronfidence t1_j5ucdgg wrote
They have adhd, dyslexia and covid how tf are they going to read all of that
therealsmokyjoewood t1_j5we7kx wrote
This isn’t state mandated density. This is the state forbidding local zoning laws from banning density; I.e protecting the right to density.
Just think how Roe. V. Wade wasn’t ‘state mandated abortions’; it was a ruling that prevented states from banning abortions.
Chronfidence t1_j5uc9b1 wrote
Law allow 1 big house become 6 small house. Some 1 big house owners no want 6 small house next door and it makes them cry.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments