Which is why it wasn’t a solution, his suggestion was not to enforce regulations until there was a problem, in lieu of doing anything to stem the problems.
What I’m suggesting, and what’s being blocked here is not putting up tower block next to residential single family homes in regular out of the way residential only areas. It’s building smaller apartment complexes and mixed used spaces in vacant areas or commercialized mainstreets.
So would you rather have 6 people in the house next door and a couple dozen Starbucks, bank branches, and realty offices on your main street and nothing else? OO wait maybe a Walmart. Or not have those things and instead have reasonably priced exurban style mixed use housing in among those commercial spaces, on the edge of parks, and putting vacant lots near the same to similar use? No where near your house (or if near your house you were already right next to this shit).
It’s the difference between sprawl and only investment grade luxury vacation homes, and a functional downtown or village environment.
As much as I’m all for mixed-use zoning in commercial areas, in my area at least it is unlikely that rentals in such buildings would be anywhere near affordable for the people in the house next door.
Unlikely here as well. But it could be done. And one of the critical things about it is you have to build enough to drive the price of such things down. Where they are limited, and built explicitly as 2nd or 3rd homes, or targeted for sale. Prices remain high.
To a certain extent these issues are down to effectively a housing shortage in these boom areas. Your never gonna be able to make more waterfront, so that sort of thing will always carry a premium. But you can make more middle class and rental housing.
You just need to be less concerned about saving some nebulous “character” of the place (often to be gated off for the wealthy), than you are about the standard of living of the people around you.
Functionally where I’m at, more people are going to show up. More people will move here. Because of cost and lack of jobs they’re almost always older people. Their kids already off to college. Or they’re at or close to retirement. Young locals almost universally leave. Even those with jobs here. I know young farmers who commute to their fields. What housing that’s build is luxury market targeted at vacation homes. Or replacing or removing existing living space to make room for larger more expensive versions of the same.
All in a fairly rural area that outside of small villages built up around fishing industries long dead, never had much call for urban planning. Available housing goes down, as the population grows. And there’s resistance to any attempt to shift or control the housing situation. Because property value is king.
That would be nice. I mean those big metal doors on the basement wall with the circuit breakers behind 'em. I guess I meant metering the power, rather than supplying it.
You know, I wonder if rich neighborhoods get these kind of helpful letters from the power company: “This is how much electricity you’re using compared to last year, and to your neighbors. Shame on you for buying our product. If you keep this up we may have to actually build out infrastructure, instead of giving bonuses to our top executives.”
a well-documented similar example is an accommodation for refugees in Blankenese, one of the richer districts in Hamburg - the neighborhood was liberal and refugee-friendly until the city decided to open an immigration center near the mansions…
my ex-boss lives in a Renaissance hunting castle. after a few kilometers of damper-killing forest track this is more or less the first view when entering the clearing.
I think that is my main complaint against most McMansions, is that they try to emulate the Old World way that buildings would grow with time, but it is so obvious that the structure was built all at once. It is one thing to tack on an addition decades later, but another to simply take the portico from A, slap the wing from B on without integration, and so on.
They try to emulate buildings that have a story behind them, but instead it just looks like someone slapped together clipart with only a basic understanding of Photoshop and went home early.
I get these mailings every month. They go straight into the burn bin. Fuck those assholes for attempting to castigate me for buying what they’re mandated to produce.
You wonder if everyone in the neighborhood is told “You’re using more electricity than everyone else in your neighborhood. And all your kids are above average.”
I have suspected this, but haven’t asked any of my neighbors yet. Unfortunately, the neighbor most likely to be annoyed by this sad attempt at shaming is out of town until next weekend.
Because when you buy the property you sign paperwork to that effect. Either on joining the HOA, or as part of the purchase from the developer. Often times home owner association membership is explicitly included in the property deed as well. So you are required to join the HOA if that’s how things are managed. Particularly when a house already included in that group is resold later.
So you’re bound by contract basically. Now personally I don’t see how any of that holds up in court. It obviates a lot of personal freedom and property rights crap that Americans have a hard on for. But the courts here have been really friendly to Coop boards, HOAs, gated communities and the like. Though most of the prominent cases seem to come about in places like Texas, Florida, where courts are… weirdly amenable to this sort of thing. Here in NY the HOAs at least seem to lack that kind of pull. Though in stand alone developments and coop situations they tend to have a lot of control. The HOAs by me tend to be small, cheap, and mostly exist to manage communally owned property. My neighborhood has a couple of small pieces of park land, including one with beach access. Our only real restriction is no live stock. Which chaps my ass because I’d like to get a couple of chickens.
Where these things don’t have the force of law or court precedent behind them its basically social pressure from neighbors and whatever entity controls/enforces community standards. So when your neighbors and group board are constantly delivering formal written complaints. Knocking on your door to complain. Holding special meetings to discuss “the problem” with you. And may be able to fine you. Send workers to make changes to your property without your permission. And eventually may file an expensive (for you) law suit. People tend to fall in line.
We seem to have very little of that near me though. One neighbor shows up to meetings every month to demand we do something about the drug dealing illegal immigrants ruining our property values. She’s referring to the two Hispanic families renting the large house across the street from her and her husband. These are very nice, very legal, people. Shit some of them were born here. They own a landscaping company, keep their property and house incredibly nice. Do yard maintenance for some of the old folks in the hood for free. Helped my dad fix his truck. Meanwhile the complaining couple have a bizarrely built house with mismatched siding, a dead lawn, and chain link fence. When they moved in they didn’t lay down grass for 2 years. The run off from their improperly graded property caused a lot of damage to the storm drains and killed 2 or 3 people’s lawns. I think they expect the association has the sort of power that they do in the developments the husband used to build. And is typically of the communities further West where they arrived from. Basically our association has responded by dis-inviting the complainy couple from block parties and BBQs.
