Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Have Read Prop F

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 182 posts

Re: I Have Read Prop F

#61

Post by wutwatt »

bsimpson wrote: post #37
geebee wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a (slightly updated) repost of an earlier response of mine on this topic. Everyone has an opinion about airbnb. Here's my big worry. San Francisco's population of children has plummeted in my lifetime (I grew up in SF in the 70s). In this time, I think it has gone from about 22% to a current rate of 14% or so. I guess it's just important to me that SF continue to be a place people are from, rather than a plac…

I'm curious what you think of all the young people who move into the city after college and become roommates with one another. I've lived with people who make $50,000 per year, and with people who make 2 or 3 times that much. Because studios and one-bedrooms have become so expensive, we've started renting spaces with anywhere from 2 to 6 bedrooms. Having 6 adults who can afford to collectively pay $9000+ a month bidd…

Having 6 adults who can afford to collectively pay $9000+ a month bidding against you

very rare.

bidding against someone who's going to Airbnb the extra rooms

increasingly common.

Re: I Have Read Prop F

#62

Post by s73v3r »

fraserharris wrote: post #43
bsder wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But people certainly should have some degree of autonomy when it comes to their personal property. The question is, what is it? That is why we elect people. To answer these kinds of hard questions. > What I never understood is why short term rental regulations aren't modeled more closely off BnB laws than hotel laws. Part of the whole kerfuffle is because AirBnB was encouraging people to break the laws that actuall…

The heart of your argument is that there is some clear distinction between residential and commercial which doesn't actually exist. Residential properties have always been used for profit - its called an apartment. These visitors are renting in a residential area precisely because they want a residential experience. The "burden" on your neighbors from short-term visitors is highly overblown. What actual impact on the…

"The heart of your argument is that there is some clear distinction between residential and commercial which doesn't actually exist. Residential properties have always been used for profit - its called an apartment."

That's a completely different situation, and not at all relevant to this conversation.

"These visitors are renting in a residential area precisely because they want a residential experience."

And I want a pony. Why should I care what they want?

"The "burden" on your neighbors from short-term visitors is highly overblown."

You're gonna have to prove that.

Re: I Have Read Prop F

#63

Post by bsder »

Edit: Thread parent lost due to moderator detach: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10281311

Houston also has four freakin' beltways (I610, TX 8, TX 6, and TX 99).

Comparing a city that is the poster child for "sprawl" with a chunk of real estate that is more than a little landfill and locked on 3 sides with water is more than a little disingenuous.

Houston's second beltway would encircle San Mateo, some of Oakland, and Sausalito if transplanted to San Fransico.

If transplanted to San Francisco, Houston's fourth beltway (TX 99--currently under construction) would encompass almost all of San Pablo bay, Walnut Creek (maybe even as far as Concord), easily all of Oakland, Hayward, and Redwood City. And be more than 50% underwater.

The differences are more than the "gubmint reg-you-lashion" my good man.

Re: I Have Read Prop F

#64

Post by s73v3r »

thechao wrote: post #8
Marazan wrote: post #2

If you had to divide the world into people who are pro or anti airbnb then I am anti-airbnb. But prop F is horrible beyond belief.

I can't even possibly fathom any reason to be either pro or anti airbnb. It's like being pro- or anti- fuchsia, to me. Could you explain why you don't like airbnb? Did the CEO kick you in the puppies, or something?

I, for one, am absolutely sick and tired of companies thinking it's "disruptive" to ignore the law. Why do they think they're so special?

Re: I Have Read Prop F

#65

Post by noyounoyounoyou »

bsder wrote: post #63

Edit: Thread parent lost due to moderator detach: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10281311 Houston also has four freakin' beltways (I610, TX 8, TX 6, and TX 99). Comparing a city that is the poster child for "sprawl" with a chunk of real estate that is more than a little landfill and locked on 3 sides with water is more than a little disingenuous. Houston's second beltway would encircle San Mateo, some of Oaklan…

San Fransisco is no where near the top when you measure population density, other cities can fit more people in less space, San Francisco is not unique, it simply represents the failure of local laws.

Also, what's with constant 'gub' slurs, are people on HN little children who must insult people who are willing to criticize inept policy makers?

Re: I Have Read Prop F

#66

Post by selectodude »

bsder wrote: post #63

Edit: Thread parent lost due to moderator detach: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10281311 Houston also has four freakin' beltways (I610, TX 8, TX 6, and TX 99). Comparing a city that is the poster child for "sprawl" with a chunk of real estate that is more than a little landfill and locked on 3 sides with water is more than a little disingenuous. Houston's second beltway would encircle San Mateo, some of Oaklan…

The density of Brooklyn is almost double San Francisco, and I wouldn't consider Brooklyn a very high rise city.

Re: I Have Read Prop F

#67

Post by mylons »

timr wrote: post #46

It's really quite remarkable that you can know so little about something, yet be so judgmental about it at the same time. Go 'mericuh! Prop I is a temporary (18 month) moratorium in one neighborhood (the Mission), for only a limited subset of projects, coupled with the requirement that the city has to create a "neighborbood stabilization plan" by the end of that period [1]. It is not a "moratorium on building new mar…

sorry, tim, but this sounds like a moratorium on building new housing. nobody should support this.

Re: I Have Read Prop F

#68

Post by mylons »

timr wrote: post #46

It's really quite remarkable that you can know so little about something, yet be so judgmental about it at the same time. Go 'mericuh! Prop I is a temporary (18 month) moratorium in one neighborhood (the Mission), for only a limited subset of projects, coupled with the requirement that the city has to create a "neighborbood stabilization plan" by the end of that period [1]. It is not a "moratorium on building new mar…

I'm also VERY upset that I cannot downvote this into oblivion. Yet Another NIMBY.

Re: I Have Read Prop F

#69

Post by narrator »

jfb wrote: post #27
ak217 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worse than that. The California government is in a long-term constitutional crisis precisely because of the proposition system. The legislative burden from politicized, poorly written, un-repealable propositions paralyzes the state and local governments and budgets, and is the tyranny of the majority embodied. It starts with prop 13 and goes downhill from there. The only thing that will fix it is a constitutiona…

It all comes back to Proposition 13, which crippled local governments.

Imagine how many people who've owned their homes for years would be forced to sell and move elsewhere in San Francisco if prop 13 were repealed.

Re: I Have Read Prop F

#70

Post by raldi »

No1 wrote: post #31

I saw some campaign propaganda today. One side of the flier has a guy named Aaron Peskin imploring me to vote yes on Prop F and Prop I. Prop F is the mess thoughtfully critiqued in this write-up, Prop I is a moratorium on building new market-rate housing. Oh, and he's on the "more affordable rent" campaign platform, because if you want to make rent more affordable, clearly the best way is by preventing construction o…

The two candidates are diametric opposites regarding adding housing, improving transit, and working with the mayor. And the winner of this race will likely be the deciding vote on such issues in the Board of Supervisors, including the vote for who will be president, a powerful role that gets to appoint nearly half the members of important bodies like the Planning Commission. If you're in this district, please register to vote and read up on Julie Christensen and Aaron Peskin so you can make an informed decision in just over a month.
Post reply on HN