HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2022, 4:50 AM
Altoic's Avatar
Altoic Altoic is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Florida
Posts: 584
“Builder’s remedy” ingites housing boom in Santa Monica, other cities are next?

Developers capitalize on Housing Element fiasco to force 3,968 undeniable units into the city’s pipeline
https://smdp.com/2022/10/12/new-15-s...using-element/



Quote:
Get ready for Santa Monica’s next development boom. Nearly 4,000 new housing units, including a 15-story residential building at Nebraska and Stanford, could be rubber stamped in Santa Monica after the City failed to produce a compliant Housing Element in 2021.

As of latest count, a 2,000-unit 15-story development is vested for 3030 Nebraska Avenue; a 222-unit 12-story development is vested for 2901 Santa Monica Boulevard; and an 11-story, 340-unit development is vested for 1925 Broadway. In total, 12 projects totaling 3,968 housing units have been submitted for approval since the City’s local zoning ordinances were suspended due to its Housing Element (a document that describes how the city will meet State housing goals) falling out of compliance.
“Builder’s remedy” could ignite housing boom in San Francisco
https://therealdeal.com/sanfrancisco...ancisco/'/

Quote:
Unless the state signs off early next year on the city’s plan for 82,000 new homes, builders could pursue the untested remedy to break ground, the San Francisco Business Times reported.
That would mean few constraints on housing development: no height caps; no density limits, no rules about where housing could be built.

Under the law, cities that are deemed noncompliant with their state-mandated housing plans lose the ability to approve or deny projects with affordable housing components – and those projects instead are automatically approved. It’s a function known as “builder’s remedy.”

Projects qualify if at least 20 percent of their units are affordable, or if the entire project is dedicated to moderate income tenants.
San Francisco discovered last week it had misinterpreted a state deadline to adopt a final Housing Element, or blueprint for meeting mandatory state-assigned housing production quotas.
Santa Monica approved a new Housing Element on Oct. 14, closing the loophole.
Interactive map for projects - https://public.flourish.studio/visua...ation/11457288.
__________________
MIAMI 13 U/C CHICAGO 3 U/C NEW YORK CITY 18 U/C LOS ANGELES 2 U/C AUSTIN 8 U/C (Per CTBUH)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2022, 4:58 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver
Posts: 4,915
A new way to look at this, given the framing from a quote above: California is forcing its municipalities to be Houston under certain circumstances. I love that this is actually working, and it is a shame that Texas will never do the same thing because California did it. Maybe it is possible to convince conservatives that this is financially responsible, allows developers to make more money where they want, and they can even stick it to the cities in the process. Anyone down to troll Republican State Reps down in Texas?
__________________
HTOWN: 2305k (+10%) + MSA suburbs: 4818k (+26%) + CSA exurbs: 190k (+6%)
BIGD: 1304k (+9%) + MSA div. suburbs: 3826k (+26%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 394k (+8%)
FTW: 919k (+24%) + MSA div. suburbs: 1589k (+14%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 90k (+12%)
SATX: 1435k (+8%) + MSA suburbs: 1124k (+38%) + CSA exurbs: 18k (+11%)
ATX: 962k (+22%) + MSA suburbs: 1322k (+43%)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2022, 6:31 AM
ocman ocman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Burlingame
Posts: 2,594
Well-deserved.

A little scheudenfreude for a NIMBY city that presented a half-assed unrealistic plan to the state and got it’s ass handed back to them. I forgot where I read this recently, but apparently at a city council meeting, one of the members wanted to complain about the builder’s remedy and all the other members quickly hushed him up, so as not let the word spread and make the disaster of a situation even worse.

This is a city that’s been successful at keeing the city from growing, adding only 4000 units of housing since 1970! And they reluctantly got about that many approvals from this single event.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2022, 6:42 AM
Altoic's Avatar
Altoic Altoic is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Florida
Posts: 584
Four more 12-story projects en route due to Housing Element snafu
https://smdp.com/2022/10/19/four-mor...element-snafu/
Quote:
According to City staff, the applications for all but one of the 16 vested projects — known as “builder’s remedy” projects — came in between Sept. 30 and Oct. 14. They now total 4,562 total new housing units, of which 941 are affordable. The tallest of the new projects is 15 stories high; another five are 12 stories high, one is 11 stories and two more are 10.

Within days of the news breaking, neighborhood groups from all corners of the city have jointly signed a letter stating they are “extremely upset” over new projects and urging city council “to hire outside legal counsel … to conduct an independent review and then present the Council with options and remedies” that would result in the development projects being rejected.

The chances that these 16 new projects will be rejected is slim, according to both HCD and the City of Santa Monica’s planning department.
16 new projects officially.
__________________
MIAMI 13 U/C CHICAGO 3 U/C NEW YORK CITY 18 U/C LOS ANGELES 2 U/C AUSTIN 8 U/C (Per CTBUH)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2022, 7:15 AM
mrnyc mrnyc is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 9,852
well thats pretty crazy. lol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2022, 10:37 AM
CaliNative CaliNative is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 3,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Altoic View Post
Developers capitalize on Housing Element fiasco to force 3,968 undeniable units into the city’s pipeline
https://smdp.com/2022/10/12/new-15-s...using-element/





“Builder’s remedy” could ignite housing boom in San Francisco
https://therealdeal.com/sanfrancisco...ancisco/'/



Santa Monica approved a new Housing Element on Oct. 14, closing the loophole.
Interactive map for projects - https://public.flourish.studio/visua...ation/11457288.
About time Santa Monica was forced to allow new housing, especially affordable. Can hardly wait to see what happens in Beverly Hills.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2022, 11:29 AM
Sgt_Pepper Sgt_Pepper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5
Massachusetts needs some of what Cali is having. Healey take note!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2022, 11:38 AM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 9,993
Looks like Ontario is about to pull the same move as California with the province forcing municipalities hands on development, even if not with the same mechanisms as California. Details will apparently be out next week.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2022, 6:52 PM
jd3189 jd3189 is offline
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 5,419
From what I have been hearing and dealing with, "affordable" housing isn't all that affordable. And it's not just building more units. You have to build infrastructure that can sustain more population density. And that requires building less freeways and more cycling paths and public transportation within proportion.

A single family home in California will always be expensive and out of the reach of all but the upper third of middle class workers and above. Even if you could build enough SFHs to ensure that the total average cost will be closer to the national average, it would add heavily to existing traffic and decreased quality of life.

Now, I'm glad stuff is getting forced down the pipeline finally, but this isn't the full solution and I believe this will only make things worse with NIMBYs. No need to build extra housing everywhere, especially in towns and cities with car centric infrastructure. If you build close to areas along transit lines that have a ton of underutilized land ( ex. massive parking lots in park and ride stations, power centers, shopping malls, and strip malls, among others) , you would invigorate the cores of many places and avoid having to contend with residents in established wealthy enclaves who will shit on any project that may affect their property values. And, again, more missing middle housing so that people have more options between an overpriced old 3 bedroom house and an expensive new apartment unit.

California, as well as the rest of the country, needs to overcome its suburban car culture, at least when it comes to combating against many of the issues it faces today. All of this shit is connected: housing unaffordability, homelessness, traffic. There's no one shot solution, but there is a lot of different things that must be done overtime to at least make things better for average working class Americans at baseline.
__________________
Working towards making American cities walkable again!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2022, 7:15 PM
badrunner badrunner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 2,552
As long as they're not putting up a bunch of cheap looking condo towers on the beach .
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2022, 11:46 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,594
Agreed. Those are not pleasant to walk around. Mixed use mid rises are much better. 15-20 stories is fine.

I don't know why people think drab 30 story buildings are better just for a skyline. Doesn't help at street level.
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 6:11 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.