First, I love that you are writing on here (even though you totally copied me). Second, I have a question. I agree generally with the building more housing movement but when does rebuilding in LA become infeasible? If these areas are highly flammable and are getting worse because of climate change, should the goal really be to rebuild?
I love that you are writing (and reading) on here!
Good question with a complicated answer. Ultimately, I agree that the state should make building a ton of new housing in safer areas easy, and it should help displaced people move to those areas. Should have made that clearer in the article.
But Newsom and Bass are already incentivizing “like-for-like” rebuilding. Conditional on some sort of rebuilding already happening, it would be better if they incentivized more sustainable, fire-resistant housing types rather than rebuilding single-family sprawl exactly as it was.
In the long run, managed retreat probably has to happen in some places. But historically Black Altadena wasn’t in a high-fire zone. Even if it was, I don’t think it’s fair to make people abandon their communities who were forced to live in risky areas by exclusionary policies. I’m a lot more comfortable abandoning the Palisades than Altadena. So at least some communities need flexibility and incentives to rebuild better and safer than before
I think some of the YIMBY reticence immediately post fire has been that we aren't sure what to say about building in fire prone areas. In addition, I think we have plenty of time to have a post fire rebuilding conversation because unfortunately it'll take a long time.
Fair point about the conflict over rebuilding in fire prone places. We still could have coordinated asks around making development more flexible in the rest of LA to absorb the demand spike though. Newsom’s emergency powers presented a unique opportunity
I think this is completely wrong. The worst NIMBY ideas, e.g. the LA Board of Supervisors initial proposal to suspend all housing laws in fire-affected areas, were killed by YIMBY pushback and media efforts. AB 253, one of our priority bills this year, and one that will massively speed up postentitlement delays, was pulled into the speaker's fire response package, and is sailing through the legislature. Ditto for the two dozen other bills in the Fast Track Housing Package. What, to your mind, would it have looked like for YIMBYs to have had influence?
I’m bullish on our ability to pass good legislation medium term. But we didn’t leverage crisis effectively short term. Newsom could have temporarily waived CEQA, the coastal commission, and most zoning rules throughout LA County AND streamlined permitting with the stroke of his pen, like ED 1 but more sweeping. Maybe that wasn’t ever politically feasible, but the major YIMBY orgs were not coordinated in their asks. The anti-market orgs coordinated unified asks and they got a rent freeze, eviction moratorium, and most of the rest of their wishlist. The best we did is play defense on their worst excesses
The legislative work is more important longterm, but it would be valuable to have a better playbook for future emergency response
First, I love that you are writing on here (even though you totally copied me). Second, I have a question. I agree generally with the building more housing movement but when does rebuilding in LA become infeasible? If these areas are highly flammable and are getting worse because of climate change, should the goal really be to rebuild?
I love that you are writing (and reading) on here!
Good question with a complicated answer. Ultimately, I agree that the state should make building a ton of new housing in safer areas easy, and it should help displaced people move to those areas. Should have made that clearer in the article.
But Newsom and Bass are already incentivizing “like-for-like” rebuilding. Conditional on some sort of rebuilding already happening, it would be better if they incentivized more sustainable, fire-resistant housing types rather than rebuilding single-family sprawl exactly as it was.
In the long run, managed retreat probably has to happen in some places. But historically Black Altadena wasn’t in a high-fire zone. Even if it was, I don’t think it’s fair to make people abandon their communities who were forced to live in risky areas by exclusionary policies. I’m a lot more comfortable abandoning the Palisades than Altadena. So at least some communities need flexibility and incentives to rebuild better and safer than before
I think some of the YIMBY reticence immediately post fire has been that we aren't sure what to say about building in fire prone areas. In addition, I think we have plenty of time to have a post fire rebuilding conversation because unfortunately it'll take a long time.
Fair point about the conflict over rebuilding in fire prone places. We still could have coordinated asks around making development more flexible in the rest of LA to absorb the demand spike though. Newsom’s emergency powers presented a unique opportunity
I think this is completely wrong. The worst NIMBY ideas, e.g. the LA Board of Supervisors initial proposal to suspend all housing laws in fire-affected areas, were killed by YIMBY pushback and media efforts. AB 253, one of our priority bills this year, and one that will massively speed up postentitlement delays, was pulled into the speaker's fire response package, and is sailing through the legislature. Ditto for the two dozen other bills in the Fast Track Housing Package. What, to your mind, would it have looked like for YIMBYs to have had influence?
I’m bullish on our ability to pass good legislation medium term. But we didn’t leverage crisis effectively short term. Newsom could have temporarily waived CEQA, the coastal commission, and most zoning rules throughout LA County AND streamlined permitting with the stroke of his pen, like ED 1 but more sweeping. Maybe that wasn’t ever politically feasible, but the major YIMBY orgs were not coordinated in their asks. The anti-market orgs coordinated unified asks and they got a rent freeze, eviction moratorium, and most of the rest of their wishlist. The best we did is play defense on their worst excesses
The legislative work is more important longterm, but it would be valuable to have a better playbook for future emergency response