San Francisco is basically 7 miles by 7 miles. How much of what is there are you going to tear down to accommodate the influx of tech? Since gold rush times San Francisco has seen ebb and flow of populations and boom and bust periods. There is continual change, that said if it allows continual teardown of existing buildings and building of high rises, might as well be in Manhattan.
What's the Matter with San Francisco?
31–40 of 100 posts
Re: What's the Matter with San Francisco?
#32Austin is going through some similar issues. After a generation or two of anti-growth city leaders and crazy growth the last ~10 years, our roads are crowded, the public transport is a mess, and housing is going through the roof. Now they're playing catch up trying to make up for 25 years in the next few.. and it's physically impossible.
* I moved here 5 years ago, so I admit to "being part of the problem."
Re: What's the Matter with San Francisco?
#33the city reveled in its diversity, with groups claiming distinct neighborhoods
So I'm not the only one who thought that was an odd line?
The neighborhoods in SF are very distinct. The Marina and the Mission are very different from each other. This makes the city as a whole diverse.
Bikes of San Francisco: https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4084/5112789301_da50dca4bd_b.j...
Re: What's the Matter with San Francisco?
#34It seems to me one of the biggest problems is rampant NIMBYism.
This was voted down and is something of an inflammatory comment but there's truth to it. You see it throughout the Valley and the entire Bay Area. It's why there is little density in the Valley in my opinion, why the public transit isn't very good among other things. I'm afraid it's hard to change. People who paid so much for their Valley homes certainly do not like the idea of the supply dramatically increasing and…
But a big piece of it is sf getting fucked by the nimbyism elsewhere.
viz Mountain View: they just authorized something like 3.4 million ft2 of office space between LinkedIn, Google, etc while supposedly they're giong to add 1.5k to 5k housing units. In the future. Where are the other, say, 15 to 20 thousand people going to live? Mountain View doesn't give a shit, but a bunch of them are going to have to life in sf, because that's where there's housing.
Re: What's the Matter with San Francisco?
#35The problem to me is that people want an amazing city with a booming economy and gorgeous landscapes to be "affordable" for the man on the street. I think our progressive politics IS to blame: for deluding San Franciscans into believing such a thing is possible.
And in addition to all those things, they want to do it in a fixed land area with low density housing for everyone.
It's the ol' iron triangle. In this case the corners are something like "Affordable, desirable, no growth, pick two"
Re: What's the Matter with San Francisco?
#36[deleted]
While I agree with many of your indictments of liberal policies, your statement about drug addicts gives you away as someone who has little experience with addicts, except perhaps from a distance. Anyone who has spent time around more than a handful of addicts knows that the addict experience spans the range of human personality types: slothful, industrious, peaceful, violent, smart, and dumb. Go to an AA meeting and…
[deleted]
Re: What's the Matter with San Francisco?
#37The problem to me is that people want an amazing city with a booming economy and gorgeous landscapes to be "affordable" for the man on the street. I think our progressive politics IS to blame: for deluding San Franciscans into believing such a thing is possible.
I agree. How embarrassing for them that they even think they're worthy to be in the same geography as those who live in SF. Poor people should go to poor cities without economic resources, jobs or infrastructure. Say Detroit! That way they can be with other poor people and know their 'place'. Residents of those cities can barely wait for the influx to take what few jobs they have and drive down already low wages, tha…
Hmm, it seems like you've forgotten Detroit's history. Why it became your go-to example for a failed city.
Re: What's the Matter with San Francisco?
#38California: incessantly talks about the need for equality more than anyone else in the world; creates least equal, most economically stratified society in the United States where all except the independently wealthy feel uneasy.
Texas: makes fun of Californians who constantly preach about inequality; creates a pretty equal, egalitarian society that most citizens feel comfortable in.
Re: What's the Matter with San Francisco?
#39The problem is that San Francisco is/was at the epicenter of two cultural explosions (the hippies and the hackers, to put it bluntly), and they kind of clash just a little bit.
Please don't confuse the frat boys with business degrees with the hackers who have strong roots in hippie culture.
Re: What's the Matter with San Francisco?
#40San Francisco is basically 7 miles by 7 miles. How much of what is there are you going to tear down to accommodate the influx of tech? Since gold rush times San Francisco has seen ebb and flow of populations and boom and bust periods. There is continual change, that said if it allows continual teardown of existing buildings and building of high rises, might as well be in Manhattan.
Manhattan island is 33 square miles and its population is 1.6 million. San Fransisco's population is 800k. There's a lot of potential room for growth before it becomes Manhattan.