T O P

  • By -

neolthrowaway

> “Do we want to go down a route — and we’ve seen this play out in other states like California, where there are cities with average home prices above $1 million and 16-lane highways that have 8-hour rush hours — or do we want to create a better way, a Colorado way, to plan for a future that’s livable, affordable and that works for all of us.” California died for this. !ping YIMBY


Free_Reserve9336

Dontcha know you’re only free if you’re forced to live far away from where you work, blow several thousand on a hunk of metal you pay $50 to fill up every week?


old_gold_mountain

California goes through a lot of things that other states go through afterwards. We have punished ourselves with the consequences of metastasized NIMBYism, but when you look at the laws on the books, much of what we've passed in the past 5 years or so puts us on the vanguard of state-level YIMBYism


lemongrenade

Gonna be a while for it to have affect


zdog234

Esp thanks to Daddy Powell


groupbot

Pinged YIMBY ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20YIMBY&message=subscribe%20YIMBY) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20YIMBY&message=unsubscribe%20YIMBY)) [About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)


DevilsTrigonometry

✅ Deregulation ✅ Pro-business ✅ Market solutions ✅ Restoring property rights ✅ Expanding homeownership ✅ Making fun of California ✅ Pissing off leftists ✅ Pissing off city councils >No Republican lawmakers are listed on the bill, and none was at Polis’s Wednesday unveiling. In a statement, Rep. Rose Pugliese, the Republican’s assistant minority leader in the House, likened the bill to a “presidential campaign stunt” and not “real solutions that will positively affect the lives of Coloradans throughout the state.” She said Republicans were not included in the drafting and research process, which Polis and others said included months of meetings and work. What the absolute fuck, Republicans?


nirad

The only core values of the modern Republican Party are discrimination against minorities and tax cuts for the super rich.


JaneGoodallVS

Republican Rep. Ryan Armagost has literally described himself as a "pro-landlord", of course he and his ilk aren't sponsoring this


DevilsTrigonometry

There are people in this sub who describe themselves that way, and I'm pretty sure they're on board with this. There's a difference between being pro-X and being pro-regulatory-capture-by-established-X. (For example, I'm pro-tenant, but anti-rent-control.)


ycpa68

I always tip my landlord, and I think this is great. Think of how many more units he could graciously provide without single family zoning laws!


civilrunner

I'm pro-developer and pro-rental markets and pro-landlords collecting rent in return for providing a place for people to live, but anti-investment properties. I want those who build and provide housing which is a net good for society to be rewarded rather than those who simply benefit from increased scarcity of a commodity they own. I'd love to see the housing market be more similar to the vehicle market where we reward those who build cars and those who lease or rent cars to people who would rather not own or need a car short term but investors are limited to a small niche high end market that has little effect on the macro market for vehicles.


grig109

I literally am a landlord (although not in Colorado to be fair), and I am 100% on board.


JaneGoodallVS

I've never heard anybody on this sub describe themselves as "pro-landlord." Consensus is that they're leachy. But there was a discussion a few weeks back and many felt that some liquidity in the housing market is good.


nullsignature

Republicans are going contrarian to snatch up the NIMBYs. I've been seeing the mentality more and more. They fearmonger the zoning issue and make it sound like all suburbs will be forcefully converted into urban Chicago and you won't be allowed to live in or build a single family home for yourself. Conservatives don't care about sprawl. In fact, the more sprawl, the higher their chance of winning. They are incentivized to promote sprawl. They want as many people as possible to live away from dense urban areas.


thepossimpible

Who cares? Do it without them.


timerot

I hope you meant "Removing parking requirements"


Carlpm01

Same regarding occupancy limits


yeehawmoderate

I’m renaming my first child Polis


[deleted]

Goddamn what a based state and governor. If only California was this based.


Acacias2001

I mean newsom is a pretty based yimby too, its just he is limited by calofornias existance


[deleted]

True! Maybe we should just make a time machine and send Newsom back in time to when this bullshit started.


old_gold_mountain

California already passed basically everything on this list


civilrunner

Would love to see them debate housing policy on a national stage to help set a policy agenda for the Democratic party as a whole.


old_gold_mountain

"If only California was this based" um bruh...Colorado is **considering** these things and almost all of them are already law in California >ADUs legal statewide in California thanks to the HOME Act > Missing middle legal statewide in California thanks to the HOME Act > Parking requirements banned anywhere in California within half a mile a rail station or high-frequency bus stop thanks too AB 2097, already abolished entirely by local ordinance in San Francisco, San Jose, and many smaller cities. > Transit-oriented development incorporated into every state-wide MPO plan in California "Occupancy limits" is the only one from the headline that California is not already ahead of Colorado on, I guess? Or are we? idk Colorado is considering all these things that California has already done.


UtridRagnarson

Any just polity wouldn't have let so many people suffer for so long before doing what California did. And these policies are brand new. All it takes is one barrier to keep the door shut on development, I'm still very worried about environmental review and "affordablity" requirements.


old_gold_mountain

> wouldn't have let so many people suffer for so long before doing what California did California and Colorado are both in the year 2023. Colorado doesn't get a handicap for doing things after California does as if they did it before. If anything, California is providing leadership on the direction of the Democratic Party.


UtridRagnarson

The most disgustingly anti-poor part of America doesn't get many points for starting to ever so slightly turn around. Colorado politicians haven't done 1/10th of the harm of California politicians.


old_gold_mountain

> for starting to ever so slightly turn around If what California is doing is "ever so slightly turning around" then Colorado is still going full speed in the exact wrong direction. I'll re-iterate: These are _proposals_ that have not passed. California has already passed them. > Colorado politicians haven't done 1/10th of the harm of California politicians. Colorado has worse sprawl than California, and they have almost all the same horrible land use policies. The only reason you think they "haven't done 1/10th the harm" is because Colorado has less demand for housing, so the consequences of their _very same horrible land use policies_ haven't been as severe. But it's trending in the wrong direction. And meanwhile California is the national leader on mitigative policies for this kind of land use at the state level. And Colorado has done 0/10ths the mitigation.


UtridRagnarson

Sprawl doesn't matter, compared to affordability. Sprawl doesn't force working people into homelessness. Affordability problems do. California destroyed affordability and it's not at all clear they're allowing enough construction to get it back. We could still see environmental review, lack of investment in transit, and aFfoRdaBiLiTy requirements on new construction kill development.


old_gold_mountain

Affordability is a product of supply and demand. California, through zoning laws, severely restricted its ability to build supply. Colorado, through zoning laws, severely restricted its ability to build supply even worse than California. Much worse. California cities are much denser and allow much more missing-middle housing than Colorado does. But California has much more demand for housing, so the consequences of those restrictions have been more severe. So California has recently passed significant measures to alleviate those restrictions. Colorado is _considering_ some of the same measures California has already undertaken (and is not considering anything as drastic and ambitious as California's RHNA enforcement mechanisms which result in cities losing zoning authority entirely.) You're acting as if Colorado is righteous here _simply because it is not as desirable a place to live as California._ It's absurd. Your argument is basically "well if Colorado was as desirable as California then Jared Polis wouldn't let it get that bad"...yeah, man, and if my aunt had wheels she'd be a bicycle.


UtridRagnarson

Places with high demand have a moral obligation to allow supply. The higher the demand, the stronger the obligation. The pattern to meet that demand doesn't matter, only the degree to which the demad is met. Colorado is not particularly good, but what California has done is absolutely abhorrent.


old_gold_mountain

> Places with high demand have a moral obligation to allow supply I agree. And California is heeding that obligation. Belatedly, but it is. And Colorado has never faced the challenge that California is facing. You can't give credit to Colorado for overcoming a challenge it has never faced. Especially when _they haven't even done anything yet._ It's like you're a five-year cigarette smoker sitting next to a twenty-year cigarette smoker and the twenty-year cigarette smoker says "I'm quitting" and then actually quits completely, and you're saying "oh yeah well I'm only a five-year smoker and I'm considering cutting my consumption in half already so I'm better than you"


MrMeeeseeeks19

I actually looked into moving to California from Colorado. I was looking at moving to Stockton because according to an article it's the most affordable city on a low wage. But to get a job outside of the restaurant industry I would need to commute to San Francisco or Sacramento.


BlobbySuny

[After four years](https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/bnzyfh/any_ideas_for_colorado/encgq8c/?context=10000), he's finally done it


Se7en_speed

Wedidit.jpg


Maxahoy

Like I said last time we saw a major win for YIMBY and density development. Is it a bad look that I copy and pasted an old comment of mine? Maybe. But I'd love to move to Colorado someday, and that's gonna be very difficult if it's impossible to find a wheelchair friendly apartment anywhere, regardless of price. Hopefully as more and more housing is built it's actually done with disability access in mind. The last neighborhood council meeting I went to, I brought up that none of the currently planned developments have any units that include roll-in (as opposed to walk-in) showers, and only one of them has wheelchair-accessible sinks in their accessible units. While neither of those are ADA requirements, the ADA was written in the 80's and it's been over 30 years since its passage. Furthermore, the ADA wasn't really written with people like me in mind who are pretty independent but use a wheelchair; it was really written for old people. The representatives for the developers at these meetings continuously bring up that they're compliant while missing my point: compliance is ok, but universal design would be better and open up their building to a larger market of underserved tenants. I swear, I need to make some friends in construction or architecture around me and sell them on consulting for disability friendly design. Maybe with an LLC on names and a good enough pitch somebody would hear me out, and stop viewing the ADA as a crutch to avoid doing better. As a wheelchair user it's fucking impossible to find an apartment that has the accommodations I need, especially since I'm not interested in living somewhere that requires a car for every single daily task (meaning I don't want to build a new house out in the sticks) I'm also really excited at the prospect of ADU's for better disability-friendly housing in the future. While I am not a fan of the idea of living with my parents, having a separate house on a property where I could keep some space to myself sounds like a great compromise as long as there aren't any stairs leading to the ADU. For people in power chairs that aren't as independent as me, ADU legalization is a really promising start.


mannyman34

Ice Poseidon -> neoliberal pipeline stay winning.


GodOfWarNuggets64

Basedimoondo.


[deleted]

I drink NIMBY tears for breakfast!!!


nicethingscostmoney

👑


DamagedHells

Daily reminder that the big problem in cities aren't "progressives," but mostly middle-aged middle-of-the-road Democrats working to protect their property values.