It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Seattle wants to eliminate single family zonings to increase diversity

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:18 PM
link   
Why can't you people see past the end of your noses? This has absolutely nothing to do with diversity, the UN or progressivism.

This is about land grabs, development and money. They are using this term to distract people while they profit from your ignorance.
edit on 9-7-2015 by introvert because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:24 PM
link   
This happened in St. Louis years ago.

Pruitt-Igoe

There is a great documentary on this as well called the Pruitt-Igoe Myth, it's honestly one of the better and more honest documentaries I have watched. The unintended consequences were drastic and all but destroyed that portion of St. Louis until this day. Chicago also did a similar thing with the Cabrini-Green Projects. Again, both failed in tremendous fashion.

Seattle is punching their own ticket to become the next great American ghetto.
edit on 9-7-2015 by AbstractDreamz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:31 PM
link   
It has nothing to do with "Christian values", religious people do plenty of destruction around the world. It's about financia scamming and class and racial warfare. I'm all for class warfare against Wall Street, not against the middle class though.



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
This isn't about diversity. This is about an investment/land deal that will stand to make quite a bit of money and they are using certain language so that it appeals to specific group of individuals.


You're still trying to stem the tidal wave of verbal doom-porn diarrhea with logic and reason.

The facts don't matter here. The CPC crowd is working to forbid the use of terms like diversity and multiculturalism (which, being anathema to them, they define to be "tyrannical war on white people").

Forget that the people of Seattle, should be able to "do as they wish without outside interference" until, of course, they don't line up with wingnuttian dogma ... then it's "something has got to be done."



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

^^^^

"No student of history"



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Seamrog


^^^^^ a student of mythology and superstition.



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

How is changing housing zoning going to increase diversity?

Isn't that, in itself, racist by compartmentalizing races by financial classes?



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Living in Seattle at all requires an upper middle class income at best. (Cost of living is 24% above national average.)

The article is saying that the idea of eliminating single-family zoning is one of many ideas the CITIZEN'S COMMITTEE has submitted to the city adminstration.

How does a more efficient use of city land (multifamily units) suggest an attack on the middle class or even more ridiculously, on white people?


edit on 22Thu, 09 Jul 2015 22:44:33 -050015p102015766 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: CB328

How is changing housing zoning going to increase diversity?

Isn't that, in itself, racist by compartmentalizing races by financial classes?


Good point, the fact I didn't think of it is a shame. Seriously though, isn't this whole idea racist in the fact that they are saying that minorities cant afford/acquire or live in those fancy white people houses?


“We can still be a city for everyone, but only if we give up our outdated ideal of every family living in their own home on a 5,000 square foot lot,”


Except for the family who wants to live in a 5,000 square foot lot?



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Living in Seattle at all requires an upper middle class income at best. (Cost of living is 24% above national average.)

The article is saying that the idea of eliminating single-family zoning is one of many ideas the CITIZEN'S COMMITTEE has submitted to the city adminstration.

How does a more efficient use of city land (multifamily units) suggest an attack on the middle class or even more ridiculously, on white people?



Who do you think is the vast majority of single-family properties? Hint, they are the same color as milk.

Why not use the more logical solution of building out instead of building up?



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: AbstractDreamz

Isn't Seattle one of the cities that has raised minimum wage to 15/hour?



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: CB328

How is changing housing zoning going to increase diversity?

Isn't that, in itself, racist by compartmentalizing races by financial classes?


An $1,800.00 a month subsidy makes it pretty easy to move. I assume they will do something like this. They pay people to move where they want them to move.

dailycaller.com...

Feds Pay Low-Income Families $1800 A Month To Leave Poor Areas, Penalize Them If They Don’t

In a bid to get low-income Dallas families into more expensive neighborhoods, the federal government has cut subsidies for those who choose to stay in cheaper neighborhoods, and is offering those who move housing vouchers worth up to $1,800 a month.

edit on 9-7-2015 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

So it's a justification for tax increases.

I get it now.



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: infolurker

So it's a justification for tax increases.

I get it now.


I assume tax increases and "bluing" up some "red" voter districts.



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Not to mention ... this is not what it's being made out to be in this thread ...



In the recent draft of its recommendations, the committee argued for converting Seattle’s single-family zones into “low-density residential zones” allowing more types of housing, such as “small-lot dwellings, cottages or courtyard housing, duplexes and triplexes.”

After The Seattle Times made public a copy of the draft recommendations Tuesday, HALA Committee co-chairs Faith Pettis and David Wertheimer described the document as “outdated and inaccurate” andinsisted that the panel “has no intention of recommending the elimination of all single-family zones in the city.


Seattle Times

The "diversity" is in the types of construction proposed to be allowed; the cost of property (the market price of large lots is ridiculously expensive).

No one is proposing building "Cabrini Green" style housing in the heart of Seattle. Calm down white people. LOL.
edit on 23Thu, 09 Jul 2015 23:00:09 -050015p112015766 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: AbstractDreamz

Isn't Seattle one of the cities that has raised minimum wage to 15/hour?


Yep, that city has a life span of less than 20 years before it becomes a full blown Detroit.



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: AbstractDreamz

See the article I linked from the Times for more information.

This is just not what you think it is.

Single Family Zoning Seattle

The zoning type is very restrictive in terms of how large structures have to be, minimum lot sizes, etc. for the Single Family Zoning type.

There are more efficient uses of land without these requirements.

Essentially, the citizen's commission is asking for a lessening of restrictive zoning, allowing more FREEDOM in how people use their properties.
edit on 23Thu, 09 Jul 2015 23:05:00 -050015p112015766 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 11:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Not to mention ... this is not what it's being made out to be in this thread ...



In the recent draft of its recommendations, the committee argued for converting Seattle’s single-family zones into “low-density residential zones” allowing more types of housing, such as “small-lot dwellings, cottages or courtyard housing, duplexes and triplexes.”

After The Seattle Times made public a copy of the draft recommendations Tuesday, HALA Committee co-chairs Faith Pettis and David Wertheimer described the document as “outdated and inaccurate” andinsisted that the panel “has no intention of recommending the elimination of all single-family zones in the city.


Seattle Times

The "diversity" is in the types of construction, the cost of property (the market price of large lots is ridiculously expensive).
So what? I am sure there are people who can afford it because if they couldn't and there was no demand then it wouldn't be priced so high.

No one is proposing building "Cabrini Green" style housing in the heart of Seattle. Calm down white people. LOL.
You're missing the point. Those projects were "about" diversity in neighborhoods as well. The size doesn't matter, it's the idea that is doomed from the start.



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 11:03 PM
link   


So it's a justification for tax increases


Maybe, but jamming in more people will bring in more tax revenues.



posted on Jul, 9 2015 @ 11:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: AbstractDreamz

See the article I linked from the Times for more information.

This is just not what you think it is.


I read it. There is a much easier option that doesn't restrict people and that is building outwards.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join