Live data from Hacker News

For $700 a Month, Sleeping Pods Make SF More Affordable

kqed.org

21–30 of 30 posts

Re: For $700 a Month, Sleeping Pods Make SF More Affordable

#21

non american here with a stupid question: why doesnt san fransisco build vertically? like 50 storey buildings

Some folks have actively fought against the "Manhattan-ification" of SF for many years. So much so they have a name for them "NIMBY" standing for not in my backyard. Now there are YIMBY folks too. It's a whole thing.

Re: For $700 a Month, Sleeping Pods Make SF More Affordable

#22
post #10

non american here with a stupid question: why doesnt san fransisco build vertically? like 50 storey buildings

There are some 50 story buildings. But cost increases pretty dramatically. Especially when you build on fill and mess up the foundation work [1]. There's a fairly consistent stream of tall buildings built over the years, not all of them are 50+ floors though [2]. There's gaps in building during economic distress, as you would expect. Because of the expense, high rises are either offices or luxury homes. It doesn't ma…

I'm not sure about the cost. A lot of Mumbai's middle class housing is 30-40 floor towers. These are flats that sell for well under 200k, most under 100k. Labor cost is lower in India, but most material and equipment costs are not.

Re: For $700 a Month, Sleeping Pods Make SF More Affordable

#24
They say sleeping pods, I say those photos look like any backpackers hostel the world over only with a curtain around the bed. Only difference is anyone in a backpackers hostel knows it's temporary cheap accommodation and doesn't try to glorify it making it in to something it's not.

Re: For $700 a Month, Sleeping Pods Make SF More Affordable

#29
post #22
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some 50 story buildings. But cost increases pretty dramatically. Especially when you build on fill and mess up the foundation work [1]. There's a fairly consistent stream of tall buildings built over the years, not all of them are 50+ floors though [2]. There's gaps in building during economic distress, as you would expect. Because of the expense, high rises are either offices or luxury homes. It doesn't ma…

I'm not sure about the cost. A lot of Mumbai's middle class housing is 30-40 floor towers. These are flats that sell for well under 200k, most under 100k. Labor cost is lower in India, but most material and equipment costs are not.

Another cost difference that you're not accounting for is building code. It would be entirely unacceptable for an SF skyscraper to fall down in a 7.9 magnitude earthquake. Likewise, fire safety is a huge factor in the US, and especially in California. Safe evacuation routes for people get more and more difficult to provide when the number of stories climbs higher, too.

Re: For $700 a Month, Sleeping Pods Make SF More Affordable

#30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Earthquakes. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/events/1868calif/vir... . There's even a movie starring the Rock about it. (San Andreas)

SF has tall buildings downtown, so that can't be it. A better question is, why are they only downtown and not so much west of there.

It's possible, just expensive. Just like everything else about SF.
Post reply on HN