logoalt Hacker News

epistasisyesterday at 8:26 PM7 repliesview on HN

It's amazing how little has changed in recent years in LA. The massive downzoning of the 1980s had its effect: prevent efficient land use, and channel money into the hands of landlords and homeowners from all newcomers.

LA is a ridiculously unaffordable place to live, not because it's nice, but because of an artificial shortage of built space, due to a monopoly on the permission to build.


Replies

slgyesterday at 11:28 PM

>The massive downzoning of the 1980s...

To put numbers to this for those who aren't aware, LA was zoned for roughly 10 million people in the 1960s and by the 1980s it was zoned for roughly 4 million. It's part of the reason the city has had population growth slow to a crawl. It was decided some 40 plus years ago that LA should stay under 4 million people, so it has even til today. But the number of people who want to live in LA is constantly growing, so housing prices continue to rise and as a result lower income people are slowly but surely being pushed out of their homes and out of the city entirely.

show 1 reply
kfarryesterday at 8:33 PM

And don’t forget prop 13, there’s negative incentive for property to change hands and develop.

show 2 replies
21asdffdsa12today at 9:02 AM

There must be a incredible incentive to build "pod-housing" basically take a overpriced suburban home, excavate out into the depths and build sleeper-coffin like homes, then in the morning, its 3 minivan of shuttleb-busses going "to schools" - and in the evening back.

Basically build affordable housing illegally

MikeNotThePopeyesterday at 10:51 PM

I have a dumb question. What is the eventual of efficient land use? Say we bulldoze a bunch of single family homes and get 10x as dense. Now we have 10x as many people per square kilometer. Is that an efficient use of land? Will there be someone saying at 10x population density that it's an inefficient use of space? If yes, what would they propose instead?

show 4 replies
WD-42today at 2:58 AM

I was just down there and saw multiple massive development projects going on. Like huge new neighborhoods.

Of course they aren’t in LA proper. But it seems like people that want to live in SoCal want the suburbs. You talk like LA is this artificially small place except that it’s more like a neighborhood in the middle of sprawl at an almost unimaginable scale.

Not saying any of this is good. In fact it’s terrible. Personally I feel like the entire LA metro area is about as close as you can get to a real paradise lost on earth. Maybe one of the most naturally beautiful places on the planet, bulldozed over for a maze of 6 lane uncrossable suburban streets and cookie cutter McMansions.

show 1 reply
gradus_adyesterday at 9:06 PM

To be fair NYC has taken the opposite approach and rents are extremely high there as well

show 5 replies
golem14yesterday at 10:56 PM

There is also a completely unreasonable shortage of water for a much bigger city.

show 2 replies