Sam Alcorn

Fascinating read: www.researchgate.net/profile/Andr...

Listening to it for the many-ith time right right now. So many memories and emotions attached to it for me. Like a comfy old sweater. Every note is familiar.

Cover art of album New Forms by Roni Size & Reprazent (1997)

Perfect album that came out when I was 16:

Fantastic.

I was just about to post about this episode. @volts.wtf is always a good listen, but this episode with @alonlevy.bsky.social is _especially_ good.

My kid is a huge fan of those. Me too.

Is that the 1930 zoning ordinance?

One of the nice things about the statewide small-lot subdivision law (amended by SB 1123) is that, while it explicitly allows municipalities to adopt local ordinances about it, if they go beyond the state requirements, it doesn’t require local implementation.

From the first part of LA’s 1946 zoning ordinance: Sec. 12.04—Zones of this Article "A1" "A2" "RA" "R1" "R2" "R3" "R4" "RS" "C1" "C2" "C3" "C4' "CM" "M!" "M2" "M3" Agricultural Zone Agricultural Zone Suburban Zone One-family Zone Two-family Zone Multiple Dwelling Zone Multiple Dwelling Zone Multiple Dwelling Zone Limited Commercial Zone Commercial Zone Commercial Zone Commercial Zone Business Zone Limited Industrial Zone Light Industrial Zone Heavy Industrial Zone ZONING ORDINANCE No. 90,500 The Zones aforesaid and the boundaries of such Zones are shown ipon a map attached hereto designated as "Zoning references the a part of this Article, being and other part of this Article is if the matters and information set forth by said map were all ully described herein For Oil Drilling Districts and Regulations, see Article 3, Chapter !, Los Angeles Municipal Code.

LA’s 1921 zoning ordinance, which I can’t find a scan of online, apparently had 5 residential zones: A, B, C, D, & E. By the 1946 LA zoning ordinance, the letter “R” was used, but it’s not explicitly clear that it stands for “residential” there.

And the front setback of 10’ goes beyond the state law, which only talks about side and rear setbacks.

It looks like many of those items (the setbacks and elimination of step-backs) are SM aligning their local ordinance with the state law. But the local IZ exception for =<5 units does go beyond SB 684/1123, which does not affect local IZ.

That’s fantastic! Kudos to Santa Monica!

Another big problem with kitchens not being on an exterior wall is that the expense of running a duct to the outside for the range exhaust hood often leads to the use of “recirculating” vent hoods. This is the situation in the apartment where I live, which is not nearly as deep, and it’s awful.

The point is, the letter “R” in “R1” there was not for “residential.”

Note from Atlanta’s 1922 Tentative Zone Plan: “Unless Otherwise Specified: U1 Use District is in A2 Area District H1 Height R1 Race U2 Use District is in A4 Area District H2 Height R1 Race U3 Use District is in A3 Area District H1 Height U4 Use District is in A3 Area District H2 Height U5 Use District is in A2 Area District H5 Height U6 Use District is in A1 Area District H3 Height”

Atlanta’s 1922 Zone Plan, like Euclid’s, used “U1” for single-family dwellings, but those occurred in their “R1” race district:

The first page of Berkeley, CA’s 1916 zoning ordinance: Ordinance No. 452 N. S.: CREATING A BASIS OF CLASSIFICATION BY MEANS OF WHICH THE CITY OF BERKELEY MAY BE DIVIDED INTO DISTRICTS WITHIN SOME OF WHICH IT SHALL BE LAWFUL AND WITHIN OTHERS OF WHICH IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL TO ERECT, CONSTRUCT OR MAINTAIN CERTAIN BUILDINGS, OR TO CARRY ON CERTAIN TRADES OR CALLINGS. Whereas, the public interest and convenience of the City of Berkeley and the proper preservation of its public peace. health and safety require the classification of said City into districts within some of which it shall be lawful and in others unlawful to erect, construct or maintain certain buildings or to carry on certain trades, or callings, and Whereas, to properly effect said purpose, it is necessary to enact certain definitions of districts within said City as the same are reinafter set out. Now Therefore, Be it Ordained by the Council of the City of Berkeley as follows: SECTION I. Districts of Class I shall be that portion or those portions of the City of Berkeley in which no building or structure shall be erected, constructed or maintained which shall be used for or designed or intended to be used for any purpose other than that of a single family dwelling. SECTION 2. Districts of Class II shall be that portion or those portions of the City of Berkeley in which no building or structure shall be erected, constructed or maintained which shall be used for or designed or intended to be used for any purpose other than that specified in Section I hereof, and that of a two-family dwelling. SECTION 3. Districts of Class III shall be that portion or those portions of the City of Berkeley in which no building of structures shall be erected, constructed or maintained which shall be used for or designed or intended to be used for any purpose other than those specified in Sections I and 2 and that of a group dwelling, each habitation of which shall have a separate entrance on the ground floor level and of…

Berkeley’s 1916 zoning ordinance (the first to establish single-family-only districts) used “Class I, Class II, Class III, et c.:

Legend from Euclid, OH’s 1922 zoning map: USE U1 SINGLE FAMILY U2 TWO FAMILY U3 APARTMENT HOUSE U4 RETAIL & WHOLESALE STORES U5 COMMERCIAL U6 INDUSTRIAL

Other American zoning codes from that time similarly excluded apartments from areas designated for single-family houses, with separate zones for duplexes. This being after Buchanan v. Warley, these other cities used the letter “U” for “use.” See here the legend from Euclid, OH’s 1922 map:

An excerpt from THE ATLANTA ZONE PLAN Report Outlining a Tentative Zone Plan for Atlanta, by Robert H. Whitten, Consultant to the City Planning Commission. 1922 …The dwelling house districts, from which apartment houses are excluded, will include the larger portion of the entire area of Atlanta. Trade and industry are excluded from the residence districts. Churches, schools, libra-ries, etc., are permitted in the residence districts. Hospitals, sanitariums and institutional build. ings are permitted in those blocks of the resi. dence districts already occupied by similar build. ings. They will also be permitted in other locations with the approval of the board of zoning appeals. RACE ZONING THE residence districts are further subdivided into three race districts: R1 or white residence district. R2 or colored residence district. R3 or undetermined race district. In the white residence districts no house not occupied by a colored family at the time of the passage of the zoning ordinance can be thereafter occupied by a colored family. In the colored residence districts no house not occupied by a white family at the time of the passage of the zoning ordinance can be thereafter occupied by a white family. Servants quarters located on the same lot as the residence they serve will nevertheless be allowed in either district without distinction as to race…

• Do not attempt to surf a tsunami.

Good advice from the LA Times:

And around here (LA/Pasadena), there is no right to a shelter bed like is found in NYC.

There are work opportunities. A large part of the homeless population is employed.
There are programs with subsidized healthcare for people with low incomes, and SNAP can cover a portion of food costs.
SROs have not been built in quantity in decades.
In CA, # of homeless >>
# of shelter beds.

Like most problems that affect many different people, there are many different causes. But in the high-cost places with large homeless populations (like CA, NY, DC, et c.), the primary one is the high cost of rent. The EO is claiming to address the root cause, but doesn’t do anything about that.

I agree people need help, and should not live in tents on the street or do drugs. But if drug addiction were the primary cause of homelessness, the places with the most addiction would have the most homelessness. But that’s not the case. Homelessness levels track with the cost of housing.

How is saying someone is anti-Israel because they oppose what Netanyahu is doing (as I understand most Israelis do) any different from saying someone is anti-American because they oppose what Trump is doing?

If I were living on the streets, and might be arrested, attacked, stolen from, et c., at any moment, and there were someone near me selling something that would keep me awake and alert, wouldn’t that be more tempting to me than if I had a roof over my head?

West Virginia has the nation’s worst drug problem, but much less homelessness than L.A. To people who believe drug addiction is to blame for L.A.'s tent cities, West Virginia presents a paradox. It leads the U.S. in overdose deaths per capita. But it has a low rate of homelessness.

I’m thinking more of the root causes of it, since that’s what the EO is claiming. Once people get there, that’s a harder nut to crack. But the solutions for preventing homelessness and the treatment of people who are already homeless are separate things to my mind.

www.latimes.com/homeless-hou...

Bear in mind 2 things:
1) visible unsheltered homelessness is the tip of the iceberg
2) direction of the arrow of causation: certainly there’s correlation, but living on the street comes with all sorts of incentives to get high, especially on stimulants

End our apartment bans now!
A century is way too long.
A day would have been too long.
If you don’t know where they came from, I’ll give you a hint: The letter “R” in zoning designations didn’t start out standing for “residential.”
#OverturnEuclid

Trump’s EO on homelessness, like everything else coming out of the White House in 2025, is utterly deranged and misinformed.

The primary cause is the high cost of housing, which is due to the supply of it being too low. If you want to address the root cause of homelessness (which you should), make it so more homes get built.