Re:Governor Brown's housing proposal could mean sweeping Bay...
by davidw on Wednesday May 18, 2016 @05:25PM
(#11726102)
> desired
That's something to be careful with too. I certainly desire a couple of acres of rolling woodland in Palo Alto, but... yeah, that's probably not in the cards. Some people may not desire dense housing, but given the alternatives like moving back to Cyanide Springs, Oklahoma, they might find it's still ok.
Not desired by the people living there? Or not desired by other people in Dublin? These are two very different things.
> even the planned communities have a certain target ratio of public/garden/playground use space.
Maintaining a certain amount of public space in the form of parks/playgrounds/plazas makes sense, but that shouldn't translate into shooting down high-density housing developments.
> I think it's more a case of it's the 'burbs, and they'd like it to stay that way.
This kind of attitude -- the "let's keep it this way, forever" attitude -- is exactly why the bay area is now largely unaffordable. Sure, we'd all love it if we could maintain a certain neighborhood style AND have affordable housing. But we can't.
So, it comes down to what you value more: a style of neighborhood with more space between residents, or people being able to afford their rent without hour+ long commutes.