Reply to "We don't really have housing options." Other cities have proactive land policies

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to ""We don't really have housing options." Other cities have proactive land policies–DC needs them too."

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I think any property owner should be able to build whatever fits on his property and doesn't spew noise or pollution.

Would this mean many in-town SFHs get turned into duplexes or fourplexes?

Probably.

Get over it.

Exclusionary Zoning is anti-minority, pro-sprawl, anti-environmental, anti-business, anti-economy. It should be outlawed just like housing discrimination, pollution, and other antisocial behaviours. [/quote]
If you want to live in a libertarian state, I would suggest you move to Somalia.

The reason we have zoning is exactly because property owners built and housed people in squalid conditions to maximize their passive income (“rentier capitalism”). Your goal is to reinvent the squalid conditions of 19th and early 20th century slums. [/quote]

Just so you're aware, there's a lot of daylight between allowing people to build accessory dwelling units on their property and Somalia.[/quote]
I guess the difference is that you want to control what people can and cannot do on their property. Got it. Thanks. [/quote]

I don't know if you're being ironic or something, but that is [i]your[/i] position. [i]You[/i] want to dictate that people cannot build duplexes on their SFH property. [i]You[/i] want to dictate that people cannot build accessory dwelling units on their property. [i]You[/i] want to dictate that multifamily housing shouldn't be build in Ward 3.[/quote]
Your position is that you want to allow people to build what they want but only if it meets the criteria that you want. Our positions are the same. We just disagree on the criteria. You just want to replace your judgment with others judgment. [/quote]

No, you're still wrong. If you want to keep your SFH in Ward 3, that's fine! But I reject your desire to exercise dominion over what other people choose to do with their properties.[/quote]
But you didn’t say that. You specifically said that noise and pollution should not be allowed. Therefore, you do not want to give people the ability to exercise dominion over their property. [/quote]

I'm not the same poster who said that. But, to be fair to the poster who [i]did[/i] say that, there's a lot of daylight between allowing property owners to build duplexes and allowing property owners to build smelting plants. Do you not see that?[/quote]
There is actually not a lot of daylight. It is a difference of opinion about how to regulate land use. To dress it up as a property rights issue, as I point out, is incorrect. [/quote]

There's a ton of daylight, you're being deliberately obtuse. For neighborhoods with residential zoning, I believe that you may build residences as you see fit. You wish to exercise dominion over others and would prevent SFH property owners from building duplexes. I can see that you're entrenched in your opinion, so we can leave it at that.[/quote]
Again, you concede that there should be limits to what people can and cannot do on their property. We differ in what that is. You want to change the status quo to fit your own prerogatives. You are not an advocate for property rights or freedom. You just want people to be able to do on their property what you want them to do and don’t want them to do what you don’t want. In that we are alike. [/quote]

Sigh, you’re a freedumb-er.

In fact, it is removing zoning rules to allow dense housing that makes people more free — by allowing them to live in more places.
NIMBY’s who want to keep our current insane zoning laws usually just are greedy and selfish and want their property values to go up without regard to the rest of society. It’s not so far off from the endpoint of embracing Koch-style freedumb. Then, you get Somalia, where everyone is selfish and so only the very rich have a good life. In contrast, American-style freedom involves doing what’s right for society.

In this case, that’s upzoning- so that current property owners cannot hoard all the available land and control new housing. In the Koch case, that means taxing the crap out of wealth and preventing billionaires from hoarding all the wealth.[/quote]

Curious fusion of GGW and Ayn Rand.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics