Do commercial projects ever use GOV code section 65915.7, which gives them 20% extra height and 20% extra FAR if they pay to build an affordable housing project?
I somehow never knew this provision existed.
Do commercial projects ever use GOV code section 65915.7, which gives them 20% extra height and 20% extra FAR if they pay to build an affordable housing project?
I somehow never knew this provision existed.
Twitter has become useless.
How is it that I had to learn Rick Caruso is rumored to be buying Television City from TIKTOK!
Yep
04.03.2026 04:12 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0
Thereβs a lot wrong with this report: their methods of analyzing safety are poor: they donβt attempt to quantify the safety benefits of dual-stair reqs. But the most galling? A 7-12.5% cost savings is cited as meager.
10% decrease in hard costs would build A LOT of of housing in this state!
The report models evacuation times for small floor plate buildings with 1 stair vs 2, finding that evacuating with 2 stairs is faster.
Notably, it does NOT model evacuation times for the much larger floor plate buildings with 2 stairs that are allowed under current law for comparison, which is odd!
The FPEs did it the way I thought it should be done for the MN study, and came to the conclusion that seven stories and 6,000 sq. ft. per floor puts fewer people at risk in case of catastrophic failures than a big double-loaded corridor building www.dli.mn.gov/sites/defaul...
03.03.2026 23:29 β π 27 π 7 π¬ 1 π 0We argued a bunch over this in the work group. I said we need to compare small single-stair buildings to large two-stair buildings, since those are the worst-case scenarios under current/proposed codes. FD objection was that I was putting my thumb on the scales, and thatβs apples to oranges.
03.03.2026 23:24 β π 63 π 4 π¬ 6 π 0
How badly researched is the CA State Fire Marshal's report on single stair buildings?
It says that a 107' ladder that can reach 103' in height can at best reach the roof of a 7-story building, apparently thinking apartment buildings typically have 15' ceilings π€¦
Yes!
03.03.2026 23:29 β π 4 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0
A huge gap in CA law:
There's no current mechanism to dismiss clearly-frivolous lawsuits against housing projects. You have to take it all the way through trial, which may take years
Even worse, the NIMBYs don't need to pay the developer's legal fees once they inevitably lose.
(2/2)
I just learned about a galling new approach in the NIMBY toolbox:
File a meritless lawsuit against projects claiming a zoning code violation. It technically doesn't stop the project, but banks won't issue a construction loan if there's active litigation
(1/2)
Los Angeles
03.03.2026 22:39 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0@stephenjacobsmith.com Am I misreading this, or are they assuming an average floor-to-floor height of almost 15 feet?
03.03.2026 22:39 β π 8 π 0 π¬ 2 π 1
In short:
1) different areas are included/excluded
2) RFAR calculates FAR based on total lot area, whereas FAR calculates based on "buildable" lot areas (except for commercial-zoned parcels, where you can use total area)
In theory, it'd be possible in LA to have a building across three lots where FAR is measured differently on each third of the building.
03.03.2026 08:02 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0Don't you just love when Floor Area Ratio is measured differently on each half of a building?
03.03.2026 07:59 β π 11 π 0 π¬ 4 π 0
What makes this even more ridiculous is that the parcel actually had a multifamily General Plan land-use designation.
The zoning was literally "wrong."
The city lost a landmark court case on this issue all the way back in 1982!
Why did LA fight this project in court?
Surrounded by apartments, a hotel, & a bank, one of its parcels is zoned Suburban Agricultural
Despite state law saying they had to approve it, LA wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars to "protect" the RA/R1 zoning
Itβs so refreshing to hear someone telling the truth about the LA establishment, which has no higher goal than giving the appearance of doing something while doing nothing. A change from people who want to do as little as possible to people who want to see how much is possible.
03.03.2026 05:56 β π 79 π 15 π¬ 2 π 0If youβre following LA politics, make sure to follow @nithyaforthecity.bsky.social. Itβs a new account just created for the campaign, so youβre probably not following yet!
03.03.2026 05:46 β π 12 π 4 π¬ 0 π 0
the LA mayoral race is shaping up to be the most obvious local election in a while.
progressive YIMBY (Raman) vs. incompetent NIMBY (Bass) vs. insane NIMBY (Pratt)
Raman is like Zohran/Zellnor/Lander fusion vs. Cuomo (Bass) vs. Sliwa (Pratt)
45-story tower proposed for a vacant lot behind the Abundant Life Family Worship Church in New Brunswick NJ. Original abundance bros! If this is approved - and I think it will be - it may be the tallest building in Central NJ! 800 apartments, of which 160 affordable. patch.com/new-jersey/n...
03.03.2026 01:36 β π 36 π 4 π¬ 6 π 1The city lost the case, so now the project is going through permitting
03.03.2026 01:46 β π 4 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0She is among the best housing communicators in the country. Sheβs going to make an incredible Mayor of Los Angeles.
03.03.2026 01:22 β π 29 π 5 π¬ 0 π 0It's actually kind of jarring to see a Los Angeles city councilmember who doesn't think their job is to be either a cheerleader or a protest leader.
03.03.2026 00:25 β π 48 π 4 π¬ 2 π 0Why is the city of Los Angeles stopping affordable housing during a housing crisis?
03.03.2026 00:13 β π 503 π 95 π¬ 7 π 32Iβd assume this is essentially the first step towards a post-RHNA framework that is more accountable and prioritizes results over paperwork
02.03.2026 17:42 β π 2 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0If they chose to do it, that would be a 10x increase in HBβs housing production levels
02.03.2026 17:01 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0bsky.app/profile/cohe...
02.03.2026 16:43 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0