Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Chris Elmendorf Profile picture
@CSElmendorf
Aug 21 • 7 tweets • 3 min read • Read on X
The sick irony:
- L.A. started out on right foot w/ its housing element
- then L.A. produced an *awful* rezoning program + faux analysis to implement it
- now L.A. is telling the Legislature, "don't pass SB 79 unless it exempts cities w/ approved housing elements"

1/6
This @TernerHousing post explains what L.A. did right initially, ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-p….

The key move was to reasonably account for sites probability of development during the planning period & discount nominal site capacity accordingly.

x.com/CSElmendorf/st…

/2
But when it came to rezoning, L.A. ditched the p(dev) adjustments in favor of made-up funny numbers.

L.A. also jacked up IZ, did nothing about Measure ULA, & effectively banned redevelopment of apartments.

@California_HCD gave the city a pass.



/3
In a recent white paper on state fair-share laws, I used L.A. as the prime example of fair-share planning gone wrong.



/4 mercatus.org/research/resea…Image
The plain truth is that even a good fair-share housing law would be tough for @California_HCD to implement, given asymmetries of information between cities & the state (especially post-adoption).

Ours is not well designed, and HCD has very limited technical capacity.

/5
To exempt cities from SB 79 so long as they have an approved housing element is great, I guess, if you want to perpetuate the housing shortage while pretending to do something about it.

I'll say this much for L.A.'s leadership: they've got chutzpah.

/end
@TernerHousing @threadreaderapp unroll

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Chris Elmendorf

Chris Elmendorf Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @CSElmendorf

Chris Elmendorf Profile picture
Aug 15
Very pleased that my paper w/ @ClaytonNall & @stan_okl, "The Folk Economics of Housing," has been published in the excellent new JEP symposium on housing markets. ⤵️

🧵/10. Image
link:

The tl,dr is that housing supply skepticism--which we operationalize as the belief that a large, positive, exogenous regional supply shock would not reduce home prices / rents locally--is pervasive, distinctive to housing, but weakly held.

/2 aeaweb.org/articles?id=10…Image
People give more internally inconsistent answers, within and across surveys, to questions about the price effects of housing supply shocks than to questions about other economic shocks / beliefs.

/3 Image
Read 11 tweets
Chris Elmendorf Profile picture
Jul 25
Just read @vincent_rollet's incredible paper on effects of upzoning in NYC.

Wow, wow, wow!

If CA were a well-governed state, we'd be offering Meta-like pay to bring folks like Vincent into @California_HCD & @Cal_LCI.

🧵/16, with the highlights.
Vincent develops a parcel-level, gen-equilibrium model of development in NYC, accounting for parcel traits like size/value of existing uses, & estimating n'hood & endogenous amenities, wages, builder cost function, extensive & intensive margins of the redevelopment decision.

/2
He obtains results not only the effect of upzoning on housing-supply and prices, but also on the distribution of welfare gains/losses across the socioeconomic spectrum and as between current and future residents of NYC.

/3
Read 16 tweets
Chris Elmendorf Profile picture
Jul 24
Here's the first of my two essays for @NiskanenCenter's "party of abundance" series. ⤵️

In the piece, @ProfSchleich & I argue that big-city YIMBYs should endeavor to forge a cross-issue, party-like faction & drive an urban quality of life agenda.

@GrowSF is the model.
🧵/24
The immediate response of many has been, "That's crazy! It's hard enough to win on housing."

/2
I get it. But hear us out. There are at least three good reasons for big-city YIMBYs to take on a wider range of issues.

/3
Read 25 tweets
Chris Elmendorf Profile picture
Jul 15
Inspired by this great pod ⤵️ , in which another nationally prominent progressive says, "of course I agree w/ state & local YIMBYs on 99% of their agenda," here's a seven-item test. 🧵.

1/10
For each policy choice, state whether (A) or (B) is closer to your own views, even if neither one is exactly right.

/2
#1. A state law upzoning major streets, commercial areas & sites near transit for multifamily housing should...

A) require 15% of new units to be deed-restricted lower income housing

B) impose a BMR mandate only if its cost is offset w/equivalent tax breaks for developer

/3
Read 12 tweets
Chris Elmendorf Profile picture
Jul 3
CA deserves its moment in the sun, but journalists should be paying more attention to the amazing Abundance policies -- and better Democratic politics -- of our neighbors to the north.

Washington State is killing it. Oregon's doing pretty well too.

🧵/20.
Three examples:

1⃣ Wash. State rid itself of project-level enviro reviews of urban housing on a 97-3 vote, via normal leg process.

In CA, it required a daring gambit by @GavinNewsom, tying enviro review reform to budget.

/2

2⃣ In 2002, CA repealed parking minimums near "major transit stops." But the bill gives local govts wiggle room to re-impose parking mandates unless the project meets certain targets for deed-restricted-affordable housing.

/3 Image
Read 22 tweets
Chris Elmendorf Profile picture
Jul 3
"Can you put a rough number on how much California's CEQA reforms will increase housing production?"

I've gotten this Q from lots of journalists over the last 48 hours (who sound frustrated w/ my answer), so here's a 🧵 laying out my thinking about it.

1/25
tl, dr: @GavinNewsom was right to call AB 130/SB 131 "the most consequential housing reform in modern history in the state of California" -- but even so, there's no defensible way to give a quantitative "this much more housing" answer to the reporters' question.

/2
In part, the CEQA-reform package is consequential b/c of what it signifies: that California is overcoming the seemingly intractable politics of a high-cost, low-supply equilibrium.

/3
Read 26 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(