(A protest sticker in Oakland misidentifies the cause of the city’s homeless crisis. / photo by Scott Beyer)
1. Announcement
Market Urbanism and the Foundation for Economics Education are partnering on a special 6-session track focused on Market Urbanism at this Summer’s conference in Atlanta. Mark your calendars for June 15-18 (we are also going to try to plan some gatherings separate from the FEE itinerary on Sunday, the 18th). Here’s the description on FEE’s website:
Wherever you live, your city uses archaic regulations to restrict what can be built, and for what purposes buildings can be used. The Urbanism, Development, and Your Neighborhood track is a joint effort by Market Urbanism and FEE to shed some light on the vast spectrum of land use and transportation regulations that suck the vibrancy out of neighborhoods, cause traffic congestion, and constrain housing supply to the point we have an affordable housing crisis in cities across the world. This track provides you with the intellectual tools you’ll need to make a case for liberty in your own backyard and bring liberty to your streets.
2. This week at Market Urbanism:
New contributor “California Palms“–who is using a pen name to avoid any workplace drama from Nimbys in his home city–authored his first piece When NIMBYs Use Renters’ Health To Stop Rental Housing
Stay tuned, as Davis-style development laws are starting to appear on the ballots of big cities like Los Angeles, which will vote on Measure S (or the “neighborhood integrity initiative”) in March. I want to make sure you see exactly how much more difficult your community’s land use politics will become if you mistakenly go the Davis way.
Michael Hamilton How to finance a sanctuary city
Many cities will maintain their sanctuary status, since a large percentage of their workforce and entrepreneurial base are undocumented….Assuming that this decision robs sanctuary cities of federal funding, liberalizing land-use regulation and selling city-owned property at auction could give them a revenue windfall to offset the losses.
Michael Lewyn wrote two short pieces: The Sheer Craziness Of New York City’s Rent Stabilization Mandates and The Land Value Argument Against New Housing
One common argument against new housing is that permitting it causes land to become more valuable, thus leading to higher rather than lower rents. It seems to me that this argument is unpersuasive for a few reasons.
3. Where’s Scott?
Scott Beyer will temporarily leave the Bay Area this weekend to visit California’s Central Valley, including Stockton, Fresno, Bakersfield and, if he has the time, Sequoia National Park. His two Forbes articles this week were about San Francisco Suing Trump Over Sanctuary City Order and California State Senator Scott Wiener: “San Francisco’s Progressives Lost Their Way On Housing”
“San Francisco’s self-described progressives—the people who are trying to monopolize that moniker—they lost their way on housing at some point,” Wiener said, “and started aligning themselves with people who wanted no housing.”
4. At the Market Urbanism Facebook Group
Elizabeth Lasky shares a clever acronym PINO NOIR (“Progressive in name only, NIMBY-only in reality”)
Roger Valdez wrote States Challenge Cities, Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Industrial Complex
Asher Meyers on why Trump’s immigration crackdown has impelled LA to decriminalize street vending
John Morris on unjustified stadium expenditures
Corey Smith wants input on a slideshow he’s doing for Bay Area housing prices
Andrew Atkin wants to know our thoughts about the argument for stopping urban spawl
via Adam Hengels America Builds Way much parking near transit
via Len Conly with a similar share on “parking glut” near many TODs
via John Morris New Zealand’s relentless Housing Crisis
via Elizabeth Lasky selling New York and California on Yimbyism
via Christopher Young Hong Kong’s architecture of density
via Mike Field replacing urban highways
5. Elsewhere
LA Weekly’s comprehensive guide to every kind of Los Angeles Nimby
6. Stephen Smith‘s tweet of the week:
Does anybody know of any specific cases where Jane Jacobs supported densification of an existing residential neighborhood?
— Market Urbanism (@MarketUrbanism) January 30, 2017
