Re:Sculpture of Housing Prices Ripping San Francisco Apart
by cbhl on Thursday July 21, 2016 @05:44PM
(#12140326)
> Nobody is going to be gentrified when the old dirty warehouses in south SOMA get replaced.
FWIW, the city thinks that warehouses and auto body shops are an important part of its jobs plan for non-techies. Apparently it pays better than working in the service industry.
Re:Sculpture of Housing Prices Ripping San Francisco Apart
by SilasX on Thursday July 21, 2016 @05:14PM
(#12140125)
Agreed. I hate how people keep casually mentioning that "oh, you could just build up n% of the low-rise areas", as if convincing all those neighborhoods to go along with it and replacing all those buildings were somehow easier -- politically or otherwise -- than 20 SoMa/FiDi high-rises.
Re:Sculpture of Housing Prices Ripping San Francisco Apart
by baddox on Thursday July 21, 2016 @05:30PM
(#12140235)
Ideally the political solution would be only a single step that allows property owners to build x-story buildings in certain zones. That shouldn't require the persuasion of every single neighborhood, because "neighborhood" shouldn't be a political unit with the ability to stop a property owner from building a structure that is permitted by the larger government's (i.e. the city's) zoning laws.
Re:Sculpture of Housing Prices Ripping San Francisco Apart
by hkmurakami on Thursday July 21, 2016 @07:18PM
(#12140723)
>Nobody is going to be gentrified when the old dirty warehouses in south SOMA get replaced.
Well, there was a decent uproar when a large wholesale flower market was slated to be shut down.
With high rise buildings, all you need to do is convince ONE place to build a bunch of them. Perhaps in a place such as south SOMA, which is packed with industrial warehouses that could be replaced with apartment sky scrapers.
Nobody is going to be gentrified when the old dirty warehouses in south SOMA get replaced.