Sweat the Details: Lyle Solla Yates Discussing Race, Zoning, Planning, and the Future

Sweat the Details Podcast by Nest Realty cooperation

Race, Zoning, Planning, and the Future

In this episode we speak with Lyle Solla-Yates, who works in the IT industry for the University of Virginia, lives in Charlottesville, VA where he serves as a Planning Commissioner, and is an independent researcher. Since 2018, Solla-Yates has been, “Investigating the connections between white supremacy, segregation, and modern anti-housing policy in the US, focusing on Charlottesville, Virginia.”

This is a big and heady conversation, as evidenced by the extensive show notes. It’s the start of a necessary ongoing conversation that starts in many ways with how Realtors, originally known as “real estate men,”  were at the forefront of implementing racially based zoning and restrictions. And how those, combined with urban planning designed to effect racial segregation, continue today.

You can listen to this podcast here, and subscribe to the podcast here.

Highlights:

    • What is anti-housing policy?
    • How racial segregation was sneakily codified by housing type, lot size.
    • When did the boom start?
    • JC Nichols
    • “Real estate men” were part of the entire process of racial segregation
    • Who was Harland Bartholomew, and what was his role in establishing national zoning
    • Impact of transference of generational wealth
    • Systematic targeting of races to rend them
    • Urban renewal material is still being taught
    • Kelo v City of London
    • Transportation & single family zoning impact on segregation
    • What’s the opposition to housing types and integration
    • Return to urban and tighter communities

What should we be doing to in urban planning to enhance socioeconomic diversity?

How do we create the society we want?

If you enjoy our podcast, please share it with a friend or colleague, and rate us wherever you listen to podcasts.

Transcript

Jim:
This is Jim Duncan with Nest Realty and Sweat the Details. This week Jonathan, Keith and I were joined by Lyle Solla Yates, who was in the IT industry for the University of Virginia. Lives in Charlottesville, where he serves as a planning commissioner and as an independent researcher. This is a big and heady conversation and is the start of what is going to be a needed and necessary ongoing conversation, that starts in many ways with how realtors, originally known as real estate men, were at the forefront of implementing racially based zoning and restrictions and how those, combined with urban planning designed to affect racial segregation, continues today. We hope you enjoy the conversation, we did, and we’re looking forward to digging in more as the season continues.

Jim:
Hey everybody. This is Jim Duncan with Nest Realty and Sweat the Details, sitting here with Jonathan Kaufman and Keith Davis, our guest this week is Lyle Solla Yates and should have a really fascinating conversation. Lyle welcome, appreciate it.

Lyle:
Thank you.

Jim:
Tell us a little bit about who you are and what you do.

Lyle:
Sure. I’m a planning commissioner by night and as well as a researcher and I’m an IT guy by day. Just have a passion for planning, have an undergrad and graduate degree in planning. I think that land use is important to help people live.

Jim:
Very cool. So we were doing our research and we’re in new and interesting times now.

Lyle:
Yes.

Jim:
As we’re doing our research on who you are and what you do, we’ll put links to all this stuff in our show notes, but I’m going to just go ahead and read the pinned Tweet that you have from 23, January, 2018. You say, “I’m excited so many people are interested in my current research. I’m investigating the connections between white supremacy, segregation and modern anti-housing policy in the US, focusing on Charlottesville, Virginia.” So tell us what that means? I think that, for a lot of our audience, I think that the connection between white supremacy and housing policy is not something they would naturally pull that pin and join that together-

Keith:
Can I just say, Lyle when you’re saying this, I really want to focus on the fact that you call it anti-housing policy, that it’s not a focus on the housing policy at all. It’s the exact opposite is what you want to study. So, sorry.

Lyle:
Yes, that’s exactly right. Lots of people talk about African American history and lots of people talk about housing policy. I study the opposite, because I think that that’s more important in order to understand the shape of things. And actually, I’m delighted that people have gotten interested in this. I really thought that it would just be me, but it’s turned out to be of wide interest.

Jim:
So how does it, I mean, eliminate a little bit, how does white supremacy lead to anti housing policy from a local perspective and global and sort of, how did that get… Not going to say how it got started, but who were some of the leaders of that in the early days, if you will, that have formed and formulated our cities the way as we know them today?

Lyle:
That’s what I’ve been really interested in. And we’ve had a lot of historians who have done a lot of great work here in the Charlottesville region. It really, in my view, it starts around the teens with what I call racial zoning or segregation, which you probably learned about in class and probably learned it in 1917, Supreme Court looked at it, said this is pretty unconstitutional. Buchanan V. Warley 1917, no more explicit racial zoning. You just, you have to shut that down.

Lyle:
So I went back and looked at the records of when the urban planners met in 1917 to talk about this. And they are all actually starting in 1918, early 1918, just after. And they were all freaked out. “What do we do? The Supreme Court is against us. Everything that we do is illegal. We have to think of new things.”

Lyle:
So the sort of big thinkers at that time talk about, “Well, there are different ways that we can get at racial segregation. We can look at sort of dimensional requirements. We can require the houses be only a certain size or a certain shape, certain distance from the road, take up a certain amount of space on the lot. Well, we could cap how many people are allowed in an area, control dwelling units per acre, or what we call density today. We could control type.” We could say, “Well, the only single family homes should be allowed.” We could say that, “Well, only lots of a certain size should be allowed. Small lots shouldn’t be allowed.” And all these are different ways of getting at racial segregation. We’re not allowed to say we are doing racial segregation anymore, but we can just do it sneakily. Although a bunch of places like Richmond, like Atlanta went ahead and just said what they were doing anyway, the courts didn’t like that. But as long as you don’t say what you’re doing, the courts are fine with it.

Keith:
Lyle, let’s take a step back. I mean, even if it was being banned from the court side, we certainly still had developers utilizing racial covenants. You still, as you pointed out, there were plenty of other ways around it. Density, things that today, as we talk about expanding densities, we talk about accessory dwelling units and neighborhoods, the same exact things are being done by urban planners right now to increase this issue, economic diversity within neighborhoods. So when did urban planners or when did developers really get into the act and say, “This is the path that we think the country holds for our future of real estate development.”

Lyle:
The time of change is really just after World War I. There’s sort of a boom. And it really gets going in the 20s when there’s a lot of development, a lot of subdivision. And that is led by the private sector, JC Nichols in Kansas City really kind of figures out how to do subdivision the way we understand it now. And then, just tells all the other real estate men, “Here’s what I figured out in Kansas City. Go copy it everywhere.” And they do.

Jonathan:
Go back to that. Real estate men, what are you talking about?

Lyle:
Oh, the real… Well, they call them realtors today. It’s a strange term. But in 1912 to 1917, there were the real estate men. It was a little bit clunky. It was too long. So they had to shorten it.

Keith:
And so the realtor community was not just complicit. They were absolutely part of the entire process.

Lyle:
Yes, essential. Did a lot of the real, not just the research and development and the marketing that was really essential, as well as the government relations, getting government leaders to understand and support it, getting the policy in place for-

Keith:
Unfortunately, I don’t have the dates at the top of my head, but I mean, the code of ethics that we operate under today is dramatically different from the code of ethics as it started, which part of that initial code stated that it was against the realtor code to place a person into a neighborhood, if it might cause strife, or I can’t remember the exact wording of what they’re doing. It was very clear. Racial segregation is our job. And that was what it started. Jim, do you remember when that was taken out? Was it the 50s?

Jim:
It feels like the 50s is when there was edited out, but I’m still… Yeah. Sorry. I’m still on the… I know, I’ve studied this a little bit, but it’s still painful to hear you say that the foundational, the organization that we all live and breathe under and from a practical perspective, is one of the, not the Genesis, but one of the key supporters from… They got us to where we are today.

Lyle:
I was shocked. I couldn’t believe it.

Jim:
So from a planning perspective, tell me a little bit about this, I’ll say character, Bartholomew. You’ve done a bunch of research on Charlottesville, but it’s not just a Charlottesville thing. This gentlemen was nationwide, worldwide. Who was he? And how did he lead us to where we are?

Lyle:
Harland Bartholomew? Very hardworking, educated, young man, bright future ahead of him, engineering degree, goes to Saint Louis as the first career planner. He was an urban planner for a job. It wasn’t just contract work. That was new. He was the first. They wanted him to build a city plan. They’d tried to do a lot of different things and nothing really worked out. There was a lot of embarrassment. They thought that comprehensive city planning was the future, copying some work that he had done in New Jersey. And he studied what had been done in Berkeley, done in Kansas City, and thought that, “Well, really, we could do aggressive single family zoning on a comprehensive scale citywide.” There would be other zones as well. But mostly single family, what we call Euclidean zoning today, he invented in Saint Louis and presented it nationally. And it was hugely influential. It caught fire. It just, it took over the country, took over [crosstalk 00:08:58]-

Keith:
Lyle, what are some of the things that specifically that he did that brought the segregation? Was it just making it a single family? I mean, taking away the multifamily was enough to segregate a neighborhood because of cost or-

Lyle:
Right. Yeah. So this is much closer to the end of slavery. So the wealth differences between African Americans and whites, although significant today, very big in the teens, really, really significant. So making different types of housing available to different groups at different prices in different places, really powerful at that time, determinative.

Jim:
And I mean, again, that transference of generational wealth from then to 2020 hasn’t really diminished because they started at a lower point and then single family zoning kept us separated until today in many ways.

Lyle:
Right. Just there’s so much time added onto it. It’s actually, I suspect Harland Bartholomew would be horrified that it’s gone as far as it has. When he’s talking about in 1917, 1918, he isn’t thinking about it as covering the world. He’s talking about it as a part-

Keith:
But Bartholomew then comes in and plans Richmond, works in the Charlottesville area as well. Did he not?

Lyle:
Yep. He did it, well in many, many, many places. The entirety of the state of Hawaii, Vancouver and Mexico City did consulting. Just unbelievably influential.

Jim:
So was transportation, I mean, tell me about the transportation component. I mean, it wasn’t just, here are the single family houses. It was like transportation networks that led to more segregation as well.

Lyle:
Yes. That was his big idea. And something he insisted on was comprehensive planning. He thought that land use planning and transportation planning should be done altogether.

Jonathan:
It’s a good idea.

Lyle:
Which actually-

Jim:
Makes sense.

Lyle:
… I think is a pretty good idea. Like good job Harland Bartholomew. Except he took the same biases, until they had no land use. He took that into transportation as well. So as soon as we began to talk about initially slum removal and then urban renewal, he realized that could be a huge moneymaker to run large transportation projects through historically African American areas or in the Pacific Northwest Asian areas in the Southwest, Hispanic areas.

Jim:
So he targeted races to rend them apart.

Lyle:
Correct. Systematically.

Keith:
And when… Sorry, no. I mean, [crosstalk 00:11:54] these policies that you’re referring are just us kind of being flabbergasted by thinking about anyone who could possible propose this type of policy today. So, how long did the urban planning departments actively seek segregation to continue to be a policy?

Lyle:
That’s a very-

Keith:
Because you think there’s some that still do?

Lyle:
So, I took a planning commissioner certification a couple of years ago, and there was urban renewal material in that, in the 2020s. So, yes, a lot of this material is still out there, is still being taught. Sorry.

Jonathan:
And what’s an example of what you say is still being taught? Just out of curiosity?

Lyle:
So, when I was learning to become a planning commissioner, we talked about blight removal and blight remediation, which is a very old term. That’s a term from the slum rule days in the teens, and we just passed it forward. It’s the same.

Jonathan:
It’s still there.

Keith:
And using eminent domain to take over neighborhoods for the public good.

Lyle:
Yes. Yeah, that was the Kilo decision. That’s still law.

Jim:
Maybe Kilo was in the last 20 years. 15 years ago, something like that. And that was… We’ll reference this in the show notes as well. But that was one that a significant eminent domain decision that had significant impact in that area and across the countries.

Lyle:
Still happening.

Jim:
So, again, to echo Keith, the pauses are because this is not easy stuff to discuss and it’s kind of stunning to hear in such simple terms. So, transportation had an impact on everything. Single family zoning had an impact on everything. So, today you still have localities and looking through the lens of the Charlottesville area, it was not just Charlottesville, that are so focused on having exclusively single family zoning. What is the opposition to looking at more diverse housing types? And what’s a path forward to recognizing that in order to speak to a wider market, we need to have wider housing styles in the right locations close to transportation hubs?

Lyle:
You sound like me. The challenge, as I understand it, is we spent a lot of money convincing people that this was normal and good. And that anything different is bad and should be prevented. And we need to spend a lot of time and money convincing people that cities are okay.

Keith:
Which if we look at and we talked to the demographic shifts that we’re seeing throughout the country, and this is not… It’s absolutely present in many of the localities in which Nest operates and Charlottesville is certainly one as well. Until the Coronavirus, which has certainly raised another question that I think is at least a short term movement on this, but there has been a push with home buyers to return back to the city, right? There is the suburban world that kind of quest seems to be somewhat subsiding and there’s a larger portion of people who want to be within tighter communities. So, let’s kind of shift this, if we can Lyle, in terms of not just the history of our planning but our future of the planning. What can we do or what should we be doing in urban planning to enhance socioeconomic diversity? What is it that can happen? Just, what are some of the few things? Is it just allowing accessory dwelling units? Is that a big one or is that a minor one?

Lyle:
That’s an easy one. So, I do endorse it. Accessory dwelling, the idea is that you can allow people to build another home either inside their existing home, maybe behind, to the side, not terribly offensive visually from the street. People might not even know that person is there, but there is a home for someone who needs a home. That’s something I’ve endorsed in Charlottesville. We kind of have an ordinance but it’s very restrictive. It doesn’t allow, in many [crosstalk 00:16:08]-

Keith:
So here, we actually have, there’s the R1 and then, there’s also R1 Small. And R1, ironically, the smaller the lot, the more likelihood that you actually can place another house on the property. What’s the logic? Is it just that the wealthier people are in R1 and would block it if you tried to institute? Okay. So we’re getting a nod from Lyle for those who can’t see the face. But so, in this [inaudible 00:16:33] so it’s purely just a not in my backyard. This is all a NIMBY piece?

Lyle:
Yes. That drives land use decisions. It’s upsetting. It’s not the public-

Keith:
So, this past year, I don’t remember the legislator who proposed in the state of Virginia, a removal of all single family zoning, right? That you could no longer zone intentionally to do that. Is there life on bills like that in Virginia and in other states? Oregon did it, I think?

Lyle:
Oregon did it.

Jonathan:
Minneapolis.

Lyle:
Minneapolis did it [crosstalk 00:17:12]. Oh, California has talked about it several times.

Jonathan:
But was the impetus for that more of, let’s get it more denser or was it really focused on socioeconomic diversity and making cities more diverse? Because when I read the stories about it, and I read the story, we read the stories about it, we’ve actually talked about it in the past on this podcast. Most of it was just based on density. It seems like it was density. Yeah, we want to reduce traffic and things like that, but maybe that could have been what the reporter drew from it. So, I’d love to hear, Lyle, if you have any insight into that or you’ve kind of done any research on those decisions that have been made in the past year, if you think that the socioeconomic diversity was a big driver behind those decisions?

Lyle:
Right. I’m most familiar with Minneapolis. Those are the people I know best, and the story I understand best. But there, they really did a hard look at their history, really digging into, “Okay, why are we such a separated society? How did this happen? How did we become a city of haves and have nots? Who made those decisions and why?” And they didn’t like what they saw and it made them think that they needed to make a change. So, that was really an idea of justice and rights. I think it’s a much better idea than density.

Jonathan:
Density, yeah. Good.

Jim:
How fast did that come about? I mean, was it something that had been talked about for 30 years or is it something that came about in 18 to 24 months? I mean, what was that, the speed or velocity of that change?

Lyle:
My sense, from start to finish, is about five years. That’s my impression, which in-

Keith:
It’s fast.

Lyle:
… landing planning circles, that’s fast.

Keith:
All right, so what are some other goodies that you guys are working on? What would have, what may be a more difficult decision, but would still have major impact?

Lyle:
So, one very frightening idea that we’ve talked about in Charlottesville that they’ve done in Arlington, is to allow different housing types near transit, what’s called transit oriented development. The idea being if people can take transit, they will. If they live near it, if they work near it, they won’t drive. If it’s not convenient to drive, they won’t do it. A lot of skepticism about this. People feel that if people have the ability to drive, they will regardless of reason or logic, and they have some evidence for that as well. But if you look at Arlington, it works.

Jonathan:
Well, I mean, I think you’re seeing now the number of people who are riding bicycles now because of Coronavirus is skyrocketing. Bike shops are slammed. I went to my local bike shop and they said, “Yeah, we can get you in, in about six weeks for some maintenance.” I mean, you read countless stories about how bikes are proliferating. And I got the new magazine from Trek today and the whole thing is talking about going by bike. So, I think that we have an opportunity maybe to capitalize on bicycles, not new, transportation trends to sort of push this stuff forward.

Jonathan:
I mean, how do we do it? Lyle, you tell us. I mean, not again, not just Charlottesville but throughout the country. How do we affect better, more effective transportation and housing planning, because it’s not transportation, it’s not housing. They’re necessarily intertwined. Because you get a cheap house that’s a 75 minute drive, that’s not a cheap house. You get a more expensive house, that’s a four minute walk, or four minute bike ride, that’s a much more affordable solution for that buyer.

Lyle:
So, another essential one is don’t force people to pay for parking, allow them to pay for parking. But don’t make them. If people want to ride a bicycle, if they want to ride transit, allow that. Something we mandate in Charlottesville pretty much everywhere now, if you want to build a lot of homes, you’re building a lot of parking and those people are paying for that parking, regardless of whether it makes sense, regardless of whether there’s a need.

Jonathan:
[inaudible 00:21:21] what’s the general ratios of the number of units or number of square feet in a building for equals X number of parking spots. You’re advocating that that’s kind of an archaic approach to things?

Lyle:
It was intended for Greenfield, large lot, suburban locations where everybody would be driving. Not everybody lives that-

Keith:
What has the impact been around the university where parking, there was higher density allowed with less parking? What has been the important on street parking, on traffic? Has it had the impact that the city had hoped it would have in reducing the number of students bringing cars on grounds?

Lyle:
We don’t know.

Keith:
[inaudible 00:22:08] Lyle, how can you say you don’t… We still don’t have a clue how many people are bringing cars?

Lyle:
I have my own guess.

Keith:
Well, certainly there’s enough study on Rugby Road of traffic, right? I mean, we know how many cars there are in the fall and spring terms versus summer. Right?

Lyle:
Yeah, a fair number.

Keith:
So, it is going up or down? We don’t know.

Lyle:
I don’t know. That’s a good question.

Jim:
I mean, what is your theory Lyle?

Lyle:
My personal impression is that if you build it, they will come. If you don’t build it, they won’t come. If you don’t give students parking, they will not park where they aren’t parking. That makes sense to me.

Jonathan:
You mean, they’ll walk or ride bikes if they can’t have a car?

Keith:
They won’t bring the car.

Lyle:
Yeah! Right, because there’s no place to put it. They leave it at home.

Jim:
And again, that’s not just universities. I mean, that’s cities and even the excerpts where you’re seeing vast amounts of parking, but now, well today, today’s Thursday, everything was busy. But usually, everything is empty right now. People are still surviving and they’re still getting things. Is this a thing that we capitalize going forward through the rest of 2021, ’22?

Lyle:
That’s something I’ve been really interested and excited about it, is many cities all around the world, not just in the US, have started to look around and say, “Oh, we’re not really using this six lane highway. We’re not really using this three blocks of parking. Maybe we could have people have businesses there. Maybe we could have people sit down and eat a meal or get around by foot. Maybe we can make space, maybe we can rearrange and sort of adapt the city to what’s happening in the world right now.” Which I think is great. That seems really smart to me. We’ve done absolutely none of that in Charlottesville but many places are doing great things. Look at Paris, don’t look at Charlottesville, look at Paris.

Jim:
I mean, Paris has opened up massive amounts of roads to bikes and pedestrians. And I’ve seen the battles between New York City and Paris and New Yorkers are advocating for more and looking at Paris as the enemy, if you will, of New York.

Keith:
Jim, remind me and maybe Lyle will know as soon as I start talking about it. Somewhere in Europe had super blocks. Yeah! Can you talk about that for a second because I’ve seen photos of it, but I don’t know how it works or its purpose, but I think if I can…

Lyle:
It’s very close to my heart, and actually, we have a super block in Charlottesville. This was popular in the United States. The Spanish copied it from us. It’s true. The downtown mall in Charlottesville started as a super block. The urban renewal folks thought that was a great idea-

Jim:
So, my role is to ask the dumb questions. What’s a super block?

Lyle:
Super block, so imagine a simple city block, like in New York City. Then, take a bunch of blocks around it, lasso them altogether and cut out all the cut through traffic. Now, all the space inside those mini blocks, that’s space for playgrounds, that’s space for places to eat a good meal or just relax.

Jonathan:
And walk, have less transportation, noise, pollution, et cetera. So, where else has that been done around the world and how do we do it more here?

Lyle:
Actually, I’m really excited about what they’re doing in the Netherlands, [inaudible 00:25:43], where else? Groningen, have taken huge sections of the city and said, “You can drive to them, but you can’t drive through them.” So, people who live there don’t have to worry about through traffic possibly hurting them or at least being very noisy or unpleasant. They’re just, they can be in their city, safe-

Keith:
Well, I will say the one place, as you’re saying this, and I haven’t thought about it before just now. And so many I’m off on the similarities, but the one place that we see in the United States where this has absolutely taken hold is every college campus, right? The colleges who own their own grounds, have built their walls around their grounds. Now remove the cars, remove the roads, make walkways instead and you basically have circles of roading around every campus that the cars can go to and they’re you’re required to walk through the campus, which just makes for more interactions between people and it makes for a lighter mood, if you will. Certainly less noise, less pollution. So, it’s a cool thought.

Lyle:
I’m a big fan. The University of Virginia has done that. UC Davis is another great example. I feel bad for the students sort of living that urbanist dream life and then having to go to an American city and realize like, “Oh, actually there’s no… It’s not like that in the real world.”

Jim:
You have to drive everywhere in the states.

Lyle:
Yeah, very strange.

Jonathan:
Yeah, I think one thing I want to touch on and we’re nearing the end of our time. I think that… And this is putting a big question on you. One of our many roles as realtors in our community is to be aware of and focused on affordable housing, which affordable is a sliding scale. I mean, are there any one or two things that you would… I mean, there’s no easy, “What can we do?” But what are one or two things that we could say, “This is a thing that we should be aware of and working towards to affect this type of change, to facilitate more affordable housing in our locality, obviously, but across the country.”

Lyle:
So, something we really did right in Charlottesville was commissioned a housing needs assessment, where we just looked really in a detailed way, what’s missing, where are the problems? What are the failures? So, we could really say, “Oh, actually we’re pretty good at this kind of high end condo for this kind of person. But not really good at say, rural houses, for this kind of person.” And once we actually knew where the problems were, that really helped us guide policy because every place is going to have slightly different problems. Though, I bet they won’t have a lot of single family zoning. Just a guess.

Jim:
Okay, so start with the needs and work from there. Yeah, God, and the pause, again, lots of pauses in this episode because it’s just there’s really big topics we’re dealing with. I mean, the last question I’ll say is you talked very early on in this conversation about how in the 1718 the zoning went from the Supreme Court said, “You can’t do this anymore.” So, people, the realtors said, “Okay, great. How can we affect this same thing in a different way?” Are you seeing the coverage restrictions and some subdivisions that we see, that they still have some latent racism in there, to put a point on it.

Lyle:
Absolutely.

Jim:
Is that something that they’re speaking out, neighborhoods are speaking out against? Or are they just letting the sleeping dogs lie, as these things just, people ignore them over the years?

Lyle:
I grew up in a streetcar suburb that was almost certainly segregated white. And pretty much everybody around me was a lot like me. And I sort of took that for granted as normal. And I suspect that’s true for a lot of people. They don’t really wonder like, “Gee, it’s weird that it’s just people like me around here.” Why would… They sort of take it for granted that the Supreme Court called it degoire segregation. It seems natural. You have to question it.

Jim:
Yeah, I don’t have a good response to that. I think the episode we had last week was a vastly different topic, but to one of the things that we took away from that is we should all be curious about everything with which we interact. And we should question things around us. So, I think that’s sort of my takeaway that I’ll sort of lead into Jonathan, if you want to take the closing question.

Jonathan:
Sure. So, I’d like to maybe take a little spin on our typical closing question. We typically say, “What’s the one detail that you sweat on a daily basis?” But I want to spin it a little bit, maybe talk a little bit more from the perspective of a collective. So, I’ll say what’s the one detail that we as a collective society should sweat when it comes to housing planning, and creating more associated economic diversity in our communities moving forward? What’s kind of the one thing that we should all be paying attention to and really focusing on? And I know that one, maybe one thing, won’t move the needle that much. It’s going to take a lot of things to move the needle. But if you had one place to start, one detail that we should be really focusing on, what would that be?

Lyle:
When thinking about land use regulations, ask you’re, “Is this getting us to this as a society we know we want to be?”

Keith:
Yeah.

Jim:
Yeah. That’s great. Keith?

Keith:
Well, I think my hesitation on that and I don’t disagree with that as an ultimate goal. I think my concern is, is that I think there are a lot of people who would like our society not to be the society that I want to live in. And so, if they are the people in power and in control of the land use, then we’re going to land up with world that is directed by that. And I was reading recently about the fact that it is illegal to in… and I don’t know if this is a national, if this is federal or if this was done by states, but that you cannot dictate where a sex offender can live. That sex offender has the right to live anywhere. However, there are some restrictions to what they can be done, such as sex offenders can’t live within school districts, they can’t live within certain radius of around schools or around public parks. And so there are now neighborhood developers who are developing their neighborhoods that have parks, very tiny parks, that are situated exactly precisely a quarter mile from one another as a radius, so that there is nowhere within the large neighborhood that someone who’s a sex offender can legally go.

Keith:
And I think as long as you have anybody who’s willing to think through the planning process to isolate, segregate and to restrict to that degree because of what they’re trying to do, I have a problem thinking about you’re saying that we should be trying to develop the world we want to live in because that scares me because that line takes and brings us to exactly where we are right now. And that’s my hesitation.

Jim:
Keith, that was a really long way to get around to advocate for people to get onto their local planning commissions and to vote local elections. But I like where you took that because it’s not… It’s a lot of little details are going to get us the society that I think that we… I won’t say that I think that we want because I think that’s a really broad term, but I think it’s to get us to the society I think that we should want. So, I’m going to close it there guys and say, thank you very much. This was… I think this is going to be a part one of a multi phase conversation because we’ve got a lot of work to do. So, Lyle, I want to say thank you, Jonathan, Keith.

Jonathan:
Thanks Lyle.

Jim:
Until the next one, appreciate it guys.

Jonathan:
Thanks Lyle.

Lyle:
Thank you.

Written by
Posted in 501 Nest Realty, Asheville, Atlanta, Charlottesville, Fredericksburg, Greater Louisville, Greensboro, Jackson, Lake Norman, New River Valley, Overall Nest News, Raleigh-Durham, Richmond, Roanoke, Shenandoah Valley, Wilmington
Tags: , ,
0 Comments

Leave a Reply

Archives

Categories

Join our Newsletter

×