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

Housing in the Bay Area

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 407 posts

Re: Housing in the Bay Area

#61

Post by dragonwriter »

jvm wrote: post #53
sytelus wrote: post #13

I highly doubt this bill would pass without severe modifications. The problem is that we have two groups in population: One who own houses and other who don't. First group don't want new houses and dilute value of their property. Politicans very well knows that making this group unhappy will end their careers. The second group is often in minority outside large cities. This is why its very hard to pass laws that woul…

> First group don't want new houses and dilute value of their property Increasing as-of-right development opportunities can potentially actually increase land values. Definitely bad for condo owners though.

It increases land values, but more new development decreases the value of older improvements on land.

Re: Housing in the Bay Area

#62

Post by HillaryBriss »

honkhonkpants wrote: post #40

When I look at this bill I have to wonder if it will really help. Outside of the city of San Francisco itself, almost nothing is being built, because the construction costs are too high. Not the permitting and planning costs, but the actual guys-with-hammers-and-saws costs. For example in Oakland there are number of properties that are fully entitled to build and have been sitting that way for years. So how does Brow…

I have seen hundreds of new apartment and condo units built within three miles of my LA neighborhood in the last four years. Dozens within a half mile.

What it has meant so far is additional traffic congestion, increased commute times for everyone, more demand for government education and emergency services and more air pollution.

I'm not quite seeing how the government can be taking enough money in to make up for the reduction in service levels and overburdened infrastructure. Based on the broken roads and sidewalks around my neighborhood and LA generally, it doesn't seem like it is doing that.

Re: Housing in the Bay Area

#63

Post by bduerst »

TJTorola wrote: post #28
sinak wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source?

I can't say for sure if this is what Foobarqux was referring to but this article https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11708873 came up a couple weeks ago which states > Tim Redmond of 48 Hills has argued that building more housing would make the problem [high housing costs] worse because the people who would move into it are likely to be wealthy newcomers whose demand for services will increase low-income employment,…

Maybe in rural America, but in SF it would relieve the downward pressure creating by outbidding.

Right now people are being outbid on homes they would normally win, and in turn are overbidding on lower-priced housing. Increasing the supply even at the high-priced end would help reduce the displacement.

Re: Housing in the Bay Area

#64

Post by MicroBerto »

sytelus wrote: post #13

I highly doubt this bill would pass without severe modifications. The problem is that we have two groups in population: One who own houses and other who don't. First group don't want new houses and dilute value of their property. Politicans very well knows that making this group unhappy will end their careers. The second group is often in minority outside large cities. This is why its very hard to pass laws that woul…

This is a big argument going on in Austin too. Housing prices are going through the roof, yet home owners don't want multi family units in their neighborhood.

I can't say I blame them, either. It's nice having some quiet - four families in the lot next door means 4x more noise, cars, dogs, parties, etc.

Difference here is that you can live insanely cheap in the suburbs, so most end up doing that, but with no reasonable public transport and no current ridesharing, it's a mess that will continue to grow.

Re: Housing in the Bay Area

#65

Post by carapace »

I'm in favor of how "building in the Bay Area is approved by discretion", I call it having some power over what gets built. "Democracy" y'know?

I'm from SF. I grew up here. I'm also a computer nerd.

To me, the tech "industry" has been ruining the city I love since the Dot-Com boom. To me, they are an invading army culturally speaking. In a very real sense my home is being destroyed.

The saddest part is, this city kinda sucks. It's not even a good place to locate a business. The city gov is soft-corrupt. The weather NEVER gets better. We're on a damned peninsula. If I were starting a company I'd go to Davis CA! People aren't coming here because it makes sense. This is just where the game is being played. They are drawn here like aspiring actors are drawn to Hollywood, but the prospects are just as glamorous and illusory. A few will strike gold, the rest will toil and vanish.

This is a town for freaks and weirdos. If you don't believe me, visit Civic Center. ;-) It is said "The people who are too strange for the rest of the country move to California, and the people to weird for California move to San Francisco." (If you are still too weird you go to Berkeley.)

What concerns me the most is that the newcomers might lack the environmental commitment, and tip the scales from valuing conservation to valuing rampant development. San Francisco is the largist metropolitan area with the most wilderness/open space around it in the world. The last thing we need is more lux condos and freeways.

I'm going to be calling those numbers, you can bet, but it will be to urge "con" on this abrogation of the weirdo-freaks ability to stonewall development. This is a good thing.

Y'all "young gods" will just have to figure out some other place to hatch the singularity. Move away. Build a floating "Seastead". Just please stop trying to cram a million more people into the Bay Area. It's not actually a good idea!

Also, I hear Portland is nice.

Re: Housing in the Bay Area

#66

Post by bobdole1234 »

carapace wrote: post #65

I'm in favor of how "building in the Bay Area is approved by discretion", I call it having some power over what gets built. "Democracy" y'know? I'm from SF. I grew up here. I'm also a computer nerd. To me, the tech "industry" has been ruining the city I love since the Dot-Com boom. To me, they are an invading army culturally speaking. In a very real sense my home is being destroyed. The saddest part is, this city kin…

Portland is ok, but I'd rather price you out of the market.

Re: Housing in the Bay Area

#67

Post by studentrob »

carapace wrote: post #65

I'm in favor of how "building in the Bay Area is approved by discretion", I call it having some power over what gets built. "Democracy" y'know? I'm from SF. I grew up here. I'm also a computer nerd. To me, the tech "industry" has been ruining the city I love since the Dot-Com boom. To me, they are an invading army culturally speaking. In a very real sense my home is being destroyed. The saddest part is, this city kin…

> Y'all "young gods" will just have to figure out some other place to hatch the singularity.

Lol. I've always found it amazing how many people run towards SV. Software is cool because you can do it from anywhere. To each his own, I guess.

Re: Housing in the Bay Area

#68

Post by fintler »

carapace wrote: post #65

I'm in favor of how "building in the Bay Area is approved by discretion", I call it having some power over what gets built. "Democracy" y'know? I'm from SF. I grew up here. I'm also a computer nerd. To me, the tech "industry" has been ruining the city I love since the Dot-Com boom. To me, they are an invading army culturally speaking. In a very real sense my home is being destroyed. The saddest part is, this city kin…

> San Francisco is the largist metropolitan area with the most wilderness/open space around it in the world.

It's high on the list, but it's not the one with the most:

  Vienna 51% 
  Singapore 47% 
  Sydney 46% 
  Hong Kong 40% 70% is the total green space 40% is protected
  Rio De Janeiro 40%
  London 38.40% Almost 40%!
  Stockholm 30%
  Johannesburg-Gauteng 24%
  New York City 19.7 % or 14% Park Score/World Culture Report
  San Francisco 17.9%
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1660203

Re: Housing in the Bay Area

#69

Post by apsec112 »

carapace wrote: post #65

I'm in favor of how "building in the Bay Area is approved by discretion", I call it having some power over what gets built. "Democracy" y'know? I'm from SF. I grew up here. I'm also a computer nerd. To me, the tech "industry" has been ruining the city I love since the Dot-Com boom. To me, they are an invading army culturally speaking. In a very real sense my home is being destroyed. The saddest part is, this city kin…

This is absolutely democracy. It's just democracy on the state level, rather than the local level. In this case, the state level is appropriate, because San Francisco's policies have an effect on all the surrounding cities, and all the other Americans who might want to live in SF. Would it be "undemocratic" to say that San Francisco can't unilaterally vote to stop paying federal income taxes?

In any case, cities will still have huge influence over what gets built, since every building under this law still has to comply with local zoning. All this law says is that cities can't pretend to allow development, and then arbitrarily block individual developers for no reason (or because they didn't pay enough bribes).

Re: Housing in the Bay Area

#70

Post by studentrob »

bobdole1234 wrote: post #66
carapace wrote: post #65

I'm in favor of how "building in the Bay Area is approved by discretion", I call it having some power over what gets built. "Democracy" y'know? I'm from SF. I grew up here. I'm also a computer nerd. To me, the tech "industry" has been ruining the city I love since the Dot-Com boom. To me, they are an invading army culturally speaking. In a very real sense my home is being destroyed. The saddest part is, this city kin…

Portland is ok, but I'd rather price you out of the market.

Honest question, are your local friends mostly software engineers or do they work in other positions?

Edit: cool I see the down votes. Is this an unfriendly question? Just wondering what the diversity is like in SF and if people care

Post reply on HN