4 ms·
They don't need to be high, but they do need to be higher than the 2-3 stories allowed in most of SF.
by TheCoelacanth 10y ago
They don't need to be high, but they do need to be higher than the 2-3 stories allowed in most of SF.
- graeme 10y agoWhat is your basis for that statement? SF is the second densest city in America. With low rise buildings. It's the bay area around SF that fails to be dense. The Bay Area as a whole is around 1000.
- TheCoelacanth 10y agoThe US as a whole fails to be dense except for NYC. Compare SF to Paris and it doesn't look dense at all.
- graeme 10y agoTrue, but Paris is one of the densest cities in the world, even compared to Europe. I agree the US should be denser. I'm just wondering why all the attention is focussed on a place that, relatively speaking, is already doing a rather good job on density as far as America goes. For that matter, Paris is largely low rise. I'm generally in favour of low rise density. I'm trying to figure out why everyone ignores that model, and argues for tall buildings instead.
- TheCoelacanth 10y agoBecause most of the cities in the US are hopeless. SF is one of the few that has anything going for it.