iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 30/07/2026

Yes, IIRC cities that pass SB79 ordinances effectively only need to allow for 50% of SB79 density for the next few years. Full SB79 would kick in in ~2030

050

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 19/07/2026

Do you know what "365-day limit on environmental reviews" actually means? Maybe you can force the lead agency to vote on the EIR within 365 days, but can you force them to prepare it faster? (If they need more time, can't they just say they're doing "pre-work" and the timer hasn't started yet?)

020

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 02/06/2026

Does anyone have recommendations for things to see/do in Montreal or Quebec City?

112

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 25/05/2026

Hmm, do you find the total numbers or the number of permits per 1000 more useful? I haven't really thought about what to show in the tooltip in the comparison view

110

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 25/05/2026

Thanks for flagging!! I should fix this I think this is because the bars for Brighton are all less than 1 per 1000, and I hardcoded the y-axis ticks to whole numbers (1 per 1000, 2 per 1000, etc)

100

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 19/05/2026

Why are the light green site excluded?

100

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 23/03/2026

Is that a 5 foot front setback? Looks smaller but maybe it's just the angle

010

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 02/02/2026

Sorry, I haven't been checking Bluesky! I updated to October data on Jan 14

010

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 03/01/2026

We don't have the full 2025 stats yet because of the government shutdown, but as of August 2025 Detroit was on track for another banger year of housing permitting housingdata.app/places/MI/De...

080

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 16/10/2025

The Anthropic Biology of a LLM paper had examples of writing poems where at the start of a line, the KV cache already pointed toward words it might want to end the line with (and I think the set of words narrowed as it got closer to the end of the line)

040

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 30/09/2025

this is like, playing all the diatonic triads in sequence?

100

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 29/09/2025

SB 35 doesn't let you ignore the city's inclusionary rate leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_...

120

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 27/09/2025

Rise and Fall of American Growth, p. 114 has this chart

152

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 27/09/2025

Wake up babe new Jeremy Bernstein just dropped

010

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 26/09/2025

Can you make these public?

110

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 25/09/2025

Ahh okay thanks, that makes sense!

000

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 24/09/2025

These are the only examples I've seen bsky.app/profile/cohe... bsky.app/profile/cohe...

010

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 24/09/2025

Both cases refer to the "aggregate density" or "total capacity for units and floor area" as specified in Section 65912.157, and 65912.157 makes no reference to low-resource areas

110

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 24/09/2025

My read is that either you meet 50% of SB 79 capacity throughout the city, and then all low-income sites are exempt, or you meet 40% of SB 79 capacity near a majority low-resource stop, and then other sites around that stop are exempt (the word "low resource" is not used anywhere else in the bill)

110

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 24/09/2025

I'm not sure. TOC only gives a 35-80% density increase. It does nothing in single-family zones, and in duplex zones (which are a big fraction of South LA near transit) it only allows 3-4 units. To comply, TOC would have to allow 40-60 du/acre on average across all SB 79 sites

120

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 24/09/2025

They can, but because low resource is like 75% of the transit stops in LA, they would need to go to 200% of SB 79 density in the non-low-resource stops to reach 50% of SB 79 zoned capacity overall

130

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 24/09/2025

3 stories in all single family areas near transit statewide (and taller if you use SDBL) is already a huge accomplishment and would have been unthinkable 5 years ago! I think of that as the main accomplishment, and the fact that it'll be 5-7 stories in the 2030s as the cherry on top

130

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 24/09/2025

IMO the low resource exclusions aren't that big, it just means cities can pass an alternative plan this RHNA cycle with 40% of SB79 density in low resource areas and 50% in other areas (or <40% in low resource if they do >50% in other areas). And they still have to get to 100% in the 2030s

230

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 21/09/2025

is that the sequel to Her?

100

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 21/09/2025

Wait that's awesome!! IIRC Seattle housing production fell when they added neighborhood villages and MHA at the same time, great that 5 years later people agree the latter was a bad idea

010

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 21/09/2025

Why don't these zones have MHA? So formerly single-family lots don't have MHA but formerly commercial/multifamily lots have it?

110

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 21/09/2025

This is wild to me, but really good to know! If this pattern continues to hold after this rezoning I'm sure Building Code Twitter will have great case studies to motivate further building code improvements (and anti-YIMBYs will have great examples to point to about why upzoning doesn't work)

110

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 20/09/2025

So FAR 1.6 townhouses are more profitable than FAR 2 apartments? Is the fee-simple/detached premium just that big?? (Would 6 or 8 larger units be more profitable than 10 1000 sq ft units?)

120

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 20/09/2025

whoa that's insane!! what's the typical SFH lot size? and how much MHA is required?

110

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 19/09/2025

He said "he might not be SAYING that now" not "he might not be saying that NOW"

000

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 19/09/2025

This one doesn't sound like a joke in the delivery www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUc3...

youtube.com

Trump: These people are CRAZED LUNATICS

YouTube video by Fox News

110

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 18/09/2025

Is the zoom open to the public? How would I find the link?

100

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 15/09/2025

You think they'd rather let 65912.157 go into effect in 2026? Even though it requires twice the density, has HAA/SB 423 streamlining, 1-3 extra SDBL concessions etc? While a 65912.160 ordinance could be a half density incentive program with a super high inclusionary requirement?

120

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 15/09/2025

Ironically then it's actually better if the city uses 65912.160 to rezone to 60 du/acre (50% of 120 du/acre)? And then in 2033 they can increase it to 120 du/acre (but without the 30 du/acre or 5 unit minimum)

110

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 14/09/2025

This is how we know you're a Berkeley native

010

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 13/09/2025

We'll include sufficient fireproofing/sprinklers so the firemen won't have to work in double shifts

020

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 13/09/2025

The screenshot says something about sending teen and preteen kids of farmers to the White House for internships in exchange for loans

000

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 13/09/2025

These are pretty in line with newish (5-8 year old) buildings in downtown Oakland

110

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 13/09/2025

No idea what that is but it must be a good California housing bill if it has ascending numbers (35, 2345, 2234, 1123, 79)

120

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 13/09/2025

This is what I get if I do that, does this look right? It's pretty similar to the HUD numbers for the Bay Area but much lower for LA, San Diego, and Sacramento

120

Sid Kapur @sid-kap.bsky.social · 13/09/2025

These seem wrong though, the low-income numbers in this PDF are close to 80% of median while HSC 50053 says you need to use 60% of AMI. Would 60% of the median income row in this PDF be correct?

110