![]() The arguments are similar to those that killed high-profile bills to erode single-family zoning in recent years, including the controversial SB 50, which would have allowed fourplexes in most single-family zones and, in some cases, larger apartment buildings in those neighborhoods. ![]() And they say it would do so while not providing housing to those most in need and, in some cases, would accelerate gentrification. They also argue many of the units are likely to be smaller than the existing house and, accordingly, more affordable, bringing online more attainable options in areas near jobs and good schools.īut the bill has drawn strong opposition from many cities and single-family homeowner groups across the state, which say they fear it would destroy quiet neighborhoods with large, out-of-scale projects. Proponents say SB 9 would add needed supply to ease a housing shortage - decades-long in the making - that has driven up California home prices and rents, but do so in a gentle way that’s largely compatible with each neighborhood‘s character. With California’s economy reopening, rent in Los Angeles and other big cities is beginning to rise. It analyzed several potential scenarios, including converting an existing house into a duplex, keeping the house as is and putting a unit or two in the backyard, or demolishing the house and building up to four new homes.īusiness The falling rents of COVID times are behind us. The Terner Center, whose research focuses on how to increase housing supply, reached its estimates by examining construction costs, land values, parcel size, market rents and home prices, as well as other factors. “It will make a modest but important impact over time,” he said. Garcia called the bill “a modest reform.” County, a slightly higher proportion of single-family lots, 6.7% of the total there, would make sense to add units on. ![]() It would make financial sense for property owners to add those homes on 5.4% of the state’s 7.5 million single-family lots - or 410,000 parcels now zoned for only one traditional, single-family house. The Terner Center study found that, under the bill, a total of 714,000 new homes would make financial sense to build, and it would take years to build them - if they ever are, since not all homeowners would want to sell or develop their own property. If approved, it would go to a final vote in the Assembly and then to Gov. ![]() SB 9 passed the state Senate and is expected to be taken up in the Assembly Appropriations Committee by Aug. The letter was submitted to a different legislator.īecause of the way unit development would pencil out, the study found that “the vast amount of single-family parcels across the state would not see any new development,” said David Garcia, policy director at the Terner Center, which supports the bill written by Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego). JA previous version of this article said Livable California submitted an opposition letter to Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins. It was Atkins’ office that provided that information.Ĥ:49 p.m. JA previous version of this article attributed to Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins the statement that cities in California could prohibit home demolitions under Senate Bill 9.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |