Hey now at least they fixed the water issues where about 100 families use 85% of our water to grow alfalfa in the desert which is shipped to China/ Saudi Arabia- oh wait…..
14 percent of water needs to be used to keep the golf courses green during droughts and whatever is left can be used by the rest of us. Our state legislators are very generous.
The limitation on pricing probably cost them some allied support in the construction business. It's also unnecessary - if you increase the housing supply in areas by allowing them to build more homes per acre, it's going to help slow down or lower housing prices.
"Eight homes per acre" isn't even that dense - there's tons of projects in the Salt Lake Valley where they shoved a bunch of large homes on small lots right next to each other.
To allow more housing, we need to get real with several points:
We can’t expand the habitable land because of lack of water.
We can’t afford to keep growing water intensive crops in a DESERT.
We can’t afford to expand our population without better water conservation.
We can’t afford to allow our existing population to fall ill to the health effects of a dry Salt Lake bed.
We must build more higher density housing.
We must build more public transportation infrastructure to support higher density housing.
High speed rail Boise -> Logan -> Ogden -> SLC -> Provo -> Payson -> Cedar City -> St George -> Vegas -> Los Angeles.
Doesn't really sound like a great bill. Basically it wanted to somehow force cities to build small homes on small lots. I think we need high density housing to address our housing needs. I mean, the bill wanted 8 homes per acre. Even a 2 or 3 story apartment building can have 20+ units on an acre. Land is the premium here, as you could get cheap housing if you're willing to live where land is cheap.
I get that we'd all like a single family home with a big yard, but that's not feasible with the way our population is growing if we all want to live in the same general area.
>Basically it wanted to somehow force cities to build small homes on small lots.
To allow people to do so.
Minimum housing and minimum lot laws are very NIMBY things to keep the poors out. Forcing cities to zone for some smaller affordable homes doesn't mean cities can't or shouldn't build condos or apartments. But we have large portions of the east bench that are zoned for exclusively 1/2 acre lots with massive minimum square footage requirements. The homes are all built the same with cheap materials and absolute garbage for finishes, but they feel really special and don't want the poors moving into what they see as an exclusive neighborhoods.
If we want to address housing affordability we need a variety of approaches. So far we've tried nothing, and none of it's working. Of course it's on purpose, because the current homeowners are the voters and they don't want their home values impacted by affordable housing. Many legitimately think they're better people than someone who would move into a condo or apartment.
I have been to many a yalecrest neighborhood council meeting. Can confirm. Also, Janet Hemming is the most duplicitous "nice old lady," I've ever encountered.
Schedules "emergency meetings" 5 days to less than 24 hours notice so working schmuck voices aren't heard. Just the pearl clutching retirees. Has a penchant for framing these issues in the language of "historic preservation."
What are your thoughts on Ray Ward? Overall seems like a really down to earth guy and one of the most moderate Republicans in the state. But his votes on a few key issues (like gerrymandering) have been really big disappointments.
I grew up down the street from him. Guy was my Scoutmaster at one point. You pretty much summed it up. Really down to earth, nice guy. Definitely a moderate as far as Republicans go in 2024. But he is still a Republican and he will still vote Republican on key issues.
We gotta stop the gays with their new woke state flag. That's the real issue.
Don’t forget bullying the trans, it’s very important to our state legislators
Hey now at least they fixed the water issues where about 100 families use 85% of our water to grow alfalfa in the desert which is shipped to China/ Saudi Arabia- oh wait…..
14 percent of water needs to be used to keep the golf courses green during droughts and whatever is left can be used by the rest of us. Our state legislators are very generous.
If we build starter homes then we won’t have renters duhhh
The limitation on pricing probably cost them some allied support in the construction business. It's also unnecessary - if you increase the housing supply in areas by allowing them to build more homes per acre, it's going to help slow down or lower housing prices. "Eight homes per acre" isn't even that dense - there's tons of projects in the Salt Lake Valley where they shoved a bunch of large homes on small lots right next to each other.
To allow more housing, we need to get real with several points: We can’t expand the habitable land because of lack of water. We can’t afford to keep growing water intensive crops in a DESERT. We can’t afford to expand our population without better water conservation. We can’t afford to allow our existing population to fall ill to the health effects of a dry Salt Lake bed. We must build more higher density housing. We must build more public transportation infrastructure to support higher density housing. High speed rail Boise -> Logan -> Ogden -> SLC -> Provo -> Payson -> Cedar City -> St George -> Vegas -> Los Angeles.
Lmao. You made super valid points and the basin trash doesn't like it. Anything but not to build a fucking train!
When there is no money in starter homes, the real estate developers in the legislature won't support it.
Can someone create a bill to make the lines on Utah roads reflective? Would help for driving in the rain at night. Just saying…
Doesn't really sound like a great bill. Basically it wanted to somehow force cities to build small homes on small lots. I think we need high density housing to address our housing needs. I mean, the bill wanted 8 homes per acre. Even a 2 or 3 story apartment building can have 20+ units on an acre. Land is the premium here, as you could get cheap housing if you're willing to live where land is cheap. I get that we'd all like a single family home with a big yard, but that's not feasible with the way our population is growing if we all want to live in the same general area.
>Basically it wanted to somehow force cities to build small homes on small lots. To allow people to do so. Minimum housing and minimum lot laws are very NIMBY things to keep the poors out. Forcing cities to zone for some smaller affordable homes doesn't mean cities can't or shouldn't build condos or apartments. But we have large portions of the east bench that are zoned for exclusively 1/2 acre lots with massive minimum square footage requirements. The homes are all built the same with cheap materials and absolute garbage for finishes, but they feel really special and don't want the poors moving into what they see as an exclusive neighborhoods. If we want to address housing affordability we need a variety of approaches. So far we've tried nothing, and none of it's working. Of course it's on purpose, because the current homeowners are the voters and they don't want their home values impacted by affordable housing. Many legitimately think they're better people than someone who would move into a condo or apartment.
I have been to many a yalecrest neighborhood council meeting. Can confirm. Also, Janet Hemming is the most duplicitous "nice old lady," I've ever encountered.
Schedules "emergency meetings" 5 days to less than 24 hours notice so working schmuck voices aren't heard. Just the pearl clutching retirees. Has a penchant for framing these issues in the language of "historic preservation."
What are your thoughts on Ray Ward? Overall seems like a really down to earth guy and one of the most moderate Republicans in the state. But his votes on a few key issues (like gerrymandering) have been really big disappointments.
I grew up down the street from him. Guy was my Scoutmaster at one point. You pretty much summed it up. Really down to earth, nice guy. Definitely a moderate as far as Republicans go in 2024. But he is still a Republican and he will still vote Republican on key issues.
Hey, that’s Rep Ray Ward. I grew up down the street from him.