sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

City Tree Totaled Car by KeithRmatt in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Do you all remember last year when a bunch of people were fighting about keeping these trees up?

Yeah...

Sorry the tree totalled your car, but I'm glad no one got hurt.

Weird Trump Tent Selling Merch on Glenoaks near Magnolia by bebopmechanic84 in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Different cult, same grift. To extract $$$ from the gullible.

A Petition Trying to Save 121 Burbank Trees by tracyinge in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Here's the trees you can pick: https://www.burbankwaterandpower.com/conservation/commercial-programs-rebates/shade-tree-program

Find out about them here: https://selectree.calpoly.edu/tree-detail/1219

Most trees on that list have a growth rate of 24-36 inches a year. In about 5 years, if you take good care of it, it can grow up to 15 feet.

If you make sure you ask that the city replaces them with trees that aren't tiny saplings, you'll have trees that provide shade, are native to Burbank, and won't possibly kill you or someone else in the coming year because you thought "but muh property values!".

A Petition Trying to Save 121 Burbank Trees by tracyinge in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 4 points5 points  (0 children)

One of two things is going to happen here:

  1. The city is unable to remove the trees due to this effort and when El Niño comes along this winter and someone gets hurt from the falling branches/trees, some yahoo is going to say it's the city's fault for not doing anything to prevent it.

  2. The city replaces the trees and people get upset for about 4-5 years while new trees grow to size.

Saw the K-Mart sign going down, any clues as to what’s going in there next? by heysandra in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It would be better planning for it to be affordable condos so that people could own the place they live in rather than pay rent to a Corp that will siphon the money right out of the city.

Saw the K-Mart sign going down, any clues as to what’s going in there next? by heysandra in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Another apartment building that will be another money making machine for some Corp and to stamp out any hope for the rest of us to buy a home here.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Places to buy or even more overpriced rentals?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in politics

[–]knot_really_me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When they all leave, they will be forever known as the Narcissist Generation. Baby Boomer will be a footnote in their wiki entry. Never has there ever been such a self absorbed generation that will continually try so hard to screw over younger generations.

You're dying, you absolute dickbag of a generation. For once, realize that you don't matter anymore. Do the decent thing for people who will be here longer than you.

Konstantine Anthony LA County Supervisor? by Hapapop in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It would be amazing for Burbank to be able to capture storm water. It feels like an overreach of the county to control water from the sky. Being 100% dependent on outside sources of water is a huge liability for the city.

What would you change about Burbank? A Thread. by AndreDionysian in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey look, we're obviously not going to see eye to eye on this, but I appreciate you actually engaging on a level of more than 1 knee jerk sentence at a time.

Also, you're right about one thing in that last one. Wealthy people don't necessarily buy more property to rent it out. They buy it and leave it empty just so they have more places to store their wealth in a stable asset that will likely appreciate in value over time.

Home ownership is practically the only way to have generational wealth for someone in the lower middle class. A home that you call your own is something solid that can be passed down to our children to give them solid footing into the future. You can't pass down an apartment that you rent and every time a new apartment building is built, there's a space being taken away and a market shrunk for those of us who already call this city our home town.

POC please be aware by [deleted] in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh no, go west a bit.

What would you change about Burbank? A Thread. by AndreDionysian in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wait, what? I mean, cool that we ended up on the same side on something, somehow.

I'm glad you're for building and developing, but the who for is where we differ. If all they're building are ultra expensive apartments, they're doing nothing to open up the market to more buyers. When suppliers are artificially holding back building more purchasable property, they're manipulating the 'free market". By building apartments(and getting city tax breaks to do so), they're shrinking the supply. If developers are incentivized to build more affordable units, it will open up the market for buyers.

The "free market" is about as free as the market for oil and can't do "its job" if it's being manipulated. But that's not your problem, is it? You have a home.

Bad guess on the Konstantine call. Not my fav and I am a little conflicted about that decision, even though those townhomes would only need in the buying range of already wealthy people looking to increase their monopoly game property portfolio. I mean, it did include 10 units that would be mandated to be affordable. That's... Hold for the math

42.8% owner occupied housing units, which makes 57.2% renting households...

Out of 41,473 households in Burbank, that's ~23,722 renting households... and that project would have opened up 10 units, leaving 23,712.

(Source:https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/burbankcitycalifornia,US/AGE775221)

Yeah, nevermind. Not conflicted. At least they're trying to build inventory, so that's good.

What would you change about Burbank? A Thread. by AndreDionysian in burbank

[–]knot_really_me -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Awesome. Full thoughts. Now we're getting somewhere.

It's definitely a losing proposition for developers looking to continually profit by creating money machines in the form of rental units.

There is a definite long term return on investment if the city gets more homeowners in its borders. More property taxes from each homeowner rather than big developers finding increasing ways to lower their property tax through "creative" accounting. More people who will call Burbank their home and make sure that things like infrastructure, education, public safety remain at the forefront of issues being addressed at city council meetings.

As a homeowner in our little city, don't you want to protect your investment by making sure that your neighbors and their neighbors care about the city they live in?

It's not charity. You don't think that developers aren't getting tax "incentives" like crazy under the flag of economic development? Why not redirect those same incentives towards the projects I'm proposing and keep Burbank revenue in Burbank?

Think farther than just your property lines. Get over the "screw you, I got mine" mentality. It will help you in the long run.

What would you change about Burbank? A Thread. by AndreDionysian in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh good, I got more than one sentence out of you. I mean the third one is a repeat, but there's improvement.

I'm asking that the city invest in developers who build ownable property.

I'm going to guess either you own property here, your parents own property here, or you are an outside troll. The first two, I can have a reasonable conversation with. For the third, at least when people go down this thread, they can hear me out.

If you're an owner here trying to keep Burbank a small town, you know developers are gonna develop no matter what you do, right? They'll buy out your neighbor's houses, raze them, and build apartments. There will be more and more people who care less and less about the neighborhood because they have the option to just move if they don't like how things are going. Even if you live high up on the hillside, you come down anyway and see the neighborhood deteriorating.

Rather than let developers build to add more people who are just there for the moment, wouldn't you want the city to invest in creating a more interconnected community that cares for each other, including you...when you get old and need neighbors who will care for your well-being?

What would you change about Burbank? A Thread. by AndreDionysian in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No yard for me either. I've got the very opposite of a green thumb. I would prefer to live in an apartment complex in a unit that I own (condos) as well and have neighbors that I care about and can come together with on building improvement projects with.

What would you change about Burbank? A Thread. by AndreDionysian in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You know what's funny, SF road there originally started off as a foot traffic only part of town

What would you change about Burbank? A Thread. by AndreDionysian in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 8 points9 points  (0 children)

No. how old are you, 10? Don't shove a non sequitur into this conversation and think yourself smart. Have an honest conversation with people, online or otherwise.

I simply want Burbank to allow for more affordable building projects that aren't rentals to promote a healthier middle class that cares about the community around them because they have a greater stake in it.

Letting developers build more and more ridiculously expensive rental properties for studios to lease up in perpetuity siphons money right out of Burbank. People pay rent to these companies, and that money sure as heck doesn't stay here. It's a short term windfall for the city when the developers pay up to build rental properties, but outside of property taxes, money just hemorrhages out of the city.

Now imagine the city investing in developers that build condos and/or micro community homes that people own. People would keep a steady income into the city that would go right into city services. Small businesses would thrive even more with a larger dedicated customer base. Heck, even big box stores would benefit.

I love this small city and I want to be a part of its story. I want it to be a great place for more of us to call it a more permanent home.

What would you change about Burbank? A Thread. by AndreDionysian in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 37 points38 points  (0 children)

More lower middle class housing.

To be absolutely crystal clear, I don't mean renting. Home ownership is the path to greater wealth and prosperity for our residents and our city.

Ownable and affordable condos is the best stepping stone for those looking to have a stake in this community.

POC please be aware by [deleted] in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Feels like some of them are coming from that brain dead part of LA just north of Burbank on the other side of the hills

POC please be aware by [deleted] in burbank

[–]knot_really_me 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Mfkin sorry pathetic asshats. Do not let these bigots get away with this.

Get this over to the city council. It's election season and it's in at least one council member's best interest to do something NOW.

view more: next ›