New California Laws: Good or Bad?

[Nathan Gesner]

There are some improvements here, like reusable applications and protections for domestic violence victims. 

One of my greatest concerns is population density. By adding these ADUs in already-dense neighborhoods, I would anticipate an increase in crime, heavier traffic, the inability to keep up with utility demand, and other problems. I just don't see how this can be a good thing. The state is also mandating Landlords accept common household pets.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/op...

[Bob Ritner]

As an architect and REI investor in California for almost 30 years this is a subject that is near and dear to my heart. My view is that California is FINALLY in deregulation mode, albeit selective deregulation with all of these newer housing laws and I think this is a very good thig. Many folks in this country and on this site, including me, are "free market, less regulation" types. However, when it comes to land use many of these same folks follow a contradictory "more government regulation is better" NIMBYism philosophy. Most of the cities and towns throughout the US and Europe that people really enjoy living in, and visiting were substantially developed before there was even a concept of zoning regulations. The development of cities was organic and new projects filled needs as the needs grew and changed. If a corner grocery store was needed, some enterprising individual built one and both the neighborhood and the business were rewarded. If someone built something that was not needed it was a financial failure and abandoned or repurposed. The market determined all of this, not the Zoning Code. When people think that they can successfully "Plan" a city you need look no further than the planned cities of Phoenix, Post WWII Los Angeles, Dallas/Ft Worth and many others as an example of what this over-regulation accomplishes. Who has ever visited the endless suburbs of LA or Phoenix and thought "wow, this is my forever home!". It is inconvenient, resource and land inefficient, and you need to get in a car to do almost anything except go to the bathroom. Riding a bike can be suicide. I am not advocating no zoning; for instance, we would not want a battery factory or porn shop next to a preschool, but we are far over regulated when it comes to land use. Real world examples of my observations of these inefficiencies and the problems with over zoning follow:

1. LA county has many, many areas that were developed post WWII with small 1100 sf 3 bedroom houses on huge (for LA) pieces of land... think 10k to 12k square foot lots in neighborhoods where the population has aged and the schools are CLOSING. Roads are wide, and sewer, water and power are in place. Yet zoning regulations were preventing anything but building a BIGGER single family house! New laws finally allow lot sub-dividing, ADUs, JADUs etc. on these properties and maybe the existing infrastructure will be more efficiently utilized and more supply will reduce housing cost.

2. As an Architect, I have seen firsthand zoning and environmental laws used by project opponents to discriminate economically, religiously and racially or to try to squash business competition or eliminate labor competition more times than I can count.

3. I have been involved in multiple projects where it really made sense to add housing as a component of a large commercial project but it was not allowed by the city. Case in point; we designed two projects in downtown Pasadena 10 years ago; a full block hospitality development and a full block commercial project. It made strong economic sense (because of an unfulfilled need) to incorporate housing into both of these projects but it was denied. Even 10-12 years ago we could see the demise of office space coming (the trend started long before COVID) through reduced demand but the city wanted to protect it's antiquated idea of a "Financial Office District" against the scourge housing.

4. When I sold my business, I moved to the back unit of a duplex in the beach community of San Clemente that I have owned for 20 years. It was single story inefficient, and the land very expensive, but the zoning laws prevented me from doing anything. Along comes the California ADU law and voila, I added a 3rd unit on a new second story with an ocean view, my daughter was able to rent the back unit from us and I have a tenant in the other unit. Yes, we use incrementally more utilities, but the street could handle 10 or 15 more of these without any quality of life degradation.

5. Yes, this next level of deregulation will require infrastructure to be upgraded and more efficient public transportation and some people will not be happy but it is ultimately necessary to let the market forces play out a bit to solve the self-made supply and demand problem that we have. The state is encouraging the highest density development along existing and anticipated public transport corridors so under utilized single story strip malls can be replaced with multi-story mixed use projects. This is a bold de-regulation effort by the state that will better utilize our limited land, water and power resources, allow many people to live closer to their jobs if they choose to do so. Without a doubt, it will make certain areas more densely populated but  if people really want "rural", then they are free to move from LA to Ojai and if they want endless seas of single family tract houses on 7,000 square foot lots they are free to move to Phoenix.

6. I have a couple of friends whose parents or in-laws were aging and would possibly have had to go to some sort of low level assisted living facility because living in the same house was not ideal. The ADU laws allowed them to build a back yard apartment that gave everyone a little space for the sake of spousal relations. It was a very affordable option that gave a better quality of life to the family, in no way degraded the neighborhood. It is ridiculous that city zoning did not permit these prior to the state stepping in and de-regulating. All of the ADU projects I have seen have been generally well done and do not degrade neighborhoods and I am surprised that more are not being constructed.

These are but a few firsthand experiences over the course of my career that helped form my view on this subject. I wish that these new laws were even less limiting and that the residential construction on commercial lots could be market driven instead of regulated, zoned, low income housing but at least it is a step in the market driven direction, as I believe that the market is generally the best long term planner.