> If a community wants to remain SFH-only, that is their right

This is an opinion, not a right codified in statute, and state laws can be enacted to override local planning ability to prevent upzoning. People who live in their community are entitled to affordable housing (again, my opinion, maybe not yours). Property owners leave, property owners die; the path to success is to simply continue to grind against the nimby machine.

https://www.yimbylaw.org/

▲

SoftTalker 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I disagree that people are entitled to affordable housing where they desire to live. There are neighborhoods I could not afford to live in, and I am not entitled to live there. I live where I can afford, and this is the case up and down the market. If I want to live in some community, it's up to me to be able to afford it.

That said, if I can afford to buy property and want to build higher-density lower-cost rental housing on it, that should generally be my right as well.

	▲	tptacek 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		The issue isn't that some communities are expensive. The issue is the deliberate engineering of extra housing expense extrinsic to the market itself using the force of law, which is a capability home rule grants exclusionary communities if not policed carefully.

▲

bpt3 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It's an inherent right, otherwise CA wouldn't have to pass laws to override it (which is an overreach IMO).

No one is entitled to affordable housing in any specific location.