4 ms·

Those are very expensive to build, approaching $1000/sqft. Also require utilities, transit, and other city services (schools, police, fire, etc).

by muzz 10y ago

davidw 10y ago
Prices are high enough in San Francisco to pay for them. 2/3/4/5/6 stories are significantly cheaper to build.
Touche 10y ago
There isn't a cheap way out of SF's situation. > Also require utilities, transit, and other city services (schools, police, fire, etc). High rises don't require those things. People require those things.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  For some of them, the requirements (for the same number of people and the same overall outcomes) increase with density, so, in a sense, high-rises (or other arrangements which increase density) do require them.
  - Touche 10y ago
    I didn't state my point well enough; people are the driving factor here. The density is caused by people wanting to move to SF. High rises are a way to deal with the reality, not providing housing isn't going to solve the problem in any way people are going to be happy with.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > The density is caused by people wanting to move to SF. High rises are a way to deal with the reality, not providing housing isn't going to solve the problem in any way people are going to be happy with. Quite likely, just as many (if not more, in both absolute and proportional terms) people in SF will be unhappy with adoption of high-rises as the solution; the lack of availability under the current regime constrains some of the problems because it limits the ability of people to move in regardless of their desire to do so; relieving that constraint -- especially if the problems besides finding places to store the bodies aren't addressed -- just makes all the other problems of density worse.
ericd 10y ago
It's about as expensive to live here as it is in many skyscrapers in Manhattan. NYC seems to have those other problems pretty well figured out. I've never heard a very convincing reason that SF can't be more like Manhattan in terms of density, except that the existing residents who've "got theirs" don't like the idea.

Those are very expensive to build, approaching $1000/sqft. Also require utilities, transit, and other city services (schools, police, fire, etc).

by muzz 10y ago

Those are very expensive to build, approaching $1000/sqft. Also require utilities, transit, and other city services (schools, police, fire, etc).

davidw 10y ago

Prices are high enough in San Francisco to pay for them. 2/3/4/5/6 stories are significantly cheaper to build.

Touche 10y ago

There isn't a cheap way out of SF's situation. > Also require utilities, transit, and other city services (schools, police, fire, etc). High rises don't require those things. People require those things.

dragonwriter 10y ago
For some of them, the requirements (for the same number of people and the same overall outcomes) increase with density, so, in a sense, high-rises (or other arrangements which increase density) do require them.
- Touche 10y ago
  I didn't state my point well enough; people are the driving factor here. The density is caused by people wanting to move to SF. High rises are a way to deal with the reality, not providing housing isn't going to solve the problem in any way people are going to be happy with.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > The density is caused by people wanting to move to SF. High rises are a way to deal with the reality, not providing housing isn't going to solve the problem in any way people are going to be happy with. Quite likely, just as many (if not more, in both absolute and proportional terms) people in SF will be unhappy with adoption of high-rises as the solution; the lack of availability under the current regime constrains some of the problems because it limits the ability of people to move in regardless of their desire to do so; relieving that constraint -- especially if the problems besides finding places to store the bodies aren't addressed -- just makes all the other problems of density worse.

ericd 10y ago

It's about as expensive to live here as it is in many skyscrapers in Manhattan. NYC seems to have those other problems pretty well figured out. I've never heard a very convincing reason that SF can't be more like Manhattan in terms of density, except that the existing residents who've "got theirs" don't like the idea.