Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonF
There are no easy answers to this problem. We live in Larchmont, which is a neighborhood in the middle of the city. Downtown, K-town, the studios, Beverly Hills, Century City, etc...are all 20 minutes away (or closer) in rush hour. So it is a desirable place to live and there's a lot of interest from builders.
It's one thing to build an apartment building in a neighborhood zoned for such things - where the developer can also build an underground garage. But having Sacramento impose on our neighborhood a density requirement "by right" that doesn't require local approval is a bridge too far.
Here's a picture of our little home. All the property lots are small. Cramming a 4 unit structure on one of these lots is a bad idea, and not because of "nimbyism". Where the hell are all these new residents going to park? Since the lots are small there would be no space for a driveway/parking lot and on-street parking is already full. I get that the housing shortage needs to be addressed but to impose an arbitrary set of requirements on a neighborhood that was built 100 years ago to accommodate single family homes is not practical.
|
Designing neighborhoods around cars is what created a lot of this mess in the first place. A neighborhood that’s already a century old was presumably designed around pedestrians - meaning that it’s a perfect fit for more density and public transportation solutions.
The far-flung “exurbs” are just not environmentally sustainable.
P.S. That’s a lovely home.
https://medium.com/radical-urbanist/...s-b3bf9e6bfafc