4 ms·

Sounds to me like they want to max out tax revenue and that's their right. Were you jumping up and down and holding your breath when San Jose built office spac

Sounds to me like they want to max out tax revenue and that's their right. Were you jumping up and down and holding your breath when San Jose built office space and very little housing for exactly the same reason during the first dotcom boom? All this developer has to do is make building that housing a no-brainer for Brisbane, but I suspect in doing so the profitability plummets or somebody would have already done this, no?

erentz 9y ago
> Were you jumping up and down and holding your breath when San Jose built office space and very little housing for exactly the same reason during the first dotcom boom? Yes. The sprawling office parks and snakey 8 lane roads of northern San Jose are a fucking miserable mess. But the concentration of offices and condos in downtown San Jose is probably the only thing resembling sensible urban planning in the whole South Bay.
- oneshot908 9y ago
  OK, but for me, Brisbane is the Brigadoon of the Bay Area. I don't see why we should have any say whatsoever in how they decide to develop what is theirs. Make it a win/win for them or GTFO IMO.
- DrScump 9y ago
  sensible urban planning Downtown San Jose? Are you serious? Try walking downtown on a typical evening. Say, Market to 6th, Santa Clara St. to, say, Reed. Feel the vibe. Research how many businesses (restaurants, bars, clubs, shops) have failed there even during the "recovery". Then do the same in downtown Santa Clara. Then Willow Glen (Lincoln Ave). Then Mountain View (Castro St.). Then Palo Alto (University Ave). And Menlo Park. Even Redwood City. Even ignoring that modern downtown San Jose is "planned" and the others "unplanned": if San Jose is "sensible" urban planning, then give me unplanned any day. I spent 50+ evenings a year downtown for over a 20-year span. Now, I avoid it except for SOMA First Fridays.
  - oneshot908 9y ago
    It's funny, because you're dead-on about this IMO. Individual cities responding individually to the commuter calamity of the South Bay have done a better job than any high-fallutin' 20-year plan could have. As for downtown San Jose, it looks like it's about to get a lot better if Google follows through on building a campus there. Meanwhile in my hometown of Santa Cruz, it's bums, needles, and out of business signs thanks to our local rabidly anti-growth government. I'm pinning my hopes on Amazon eventually expanding its downtown footprint as the only way possible way out of the trap the place constructed for itself.
    - DrScump 9y ago
      if Google follows through on building a campus there I wouldn't count on that. They just bought (final) some $600 million worth of real estate in North Sunnyvale. Those parcels in San Jose were originally acquired for the ballpark that never happened, either. I suspect they offered them to Google at far below their value, as with the A's.
      - oneshot908 9y ago
        Well, as someone who was once caught in the net of Google's "Let's hire every smart person in the valley and give them menial jobs to keep them off the market" plan of 2011, I wouldn't rule out the "Let's develop the last pieces of available land in Silicon Valley so no one else can" plan of 2018 because WTF else do you do with billions of dollars in profit?
  - erentz 9y ago
    > San Jose is "planned" and the others "unplanned" I didn't say the others are unplanned. They are entirely planned to stay exactly as they are and constrain growth so that their super wealthy residents can live exactly as they have been for the past twenty years without any change. > then give me unplanned any day. Well as said. They are planned to be that way. But sure, I guess if you can afford the $6,000 rents to live there you can have them. But that's not a good vision for the Bay Area, nor a place I particularly want to live even if I could afford it. > downtown San Jose I don't disagree with what you say about San Jose. I used to live downtown. Still compared to those other places you mention San Jose actually allows development. And there's a lot more starting to go on there now. Palo Alto is great if you're rich. All the boutiques. And $6000 per month apartments. It has a blue bottle. (But other than that pretty shit options.) Mountain View is an ugly dump of stores that only seem to still exist because they're owned by someone who isn't paying current market rate taxes. And a bunch of ugly out of place buildings at the other edge. But it does have good sushi. Redwood City you mentioned is the place I think is doing a good job from the little I've seen these days, could become a model for the rest of the South Bay. I hope they keep it up.

erentz 9y ago

> Were you jumping up and down and holding your breath when San Jose built office space and very little housing for exactly the same reason during the first dotcom boom? Yes. The sprawling office parks and snakey 8 lane roads of northern San Jose are a fucking miserable mess. But the concentration of offices and condos in downtown San Jose is probably the only thing resembling sensible urban planning in the whole South Bay.

oneshot908 9y ago
OK, but for me, Brisbane is the Brigadoon of the Bay Area. I don't see why we should have any say whatsoever in how they decide to develop what is theirs. Make it a win/win for them or GTFO IMO.
DrScump 9y ago
sensible urban planning Downtown San Jose? Are you serious? Try walking downtown on a typical evening. Say, Market to 6th, Santa Clara St. to, say, Reed. Feel the vibe. Research how many businesses (restaurants, bars, clubs, shops) have failed there even during the "recovery". Then do the same in downtown Santa Clara. Then Willow Glen (Lincoln Ave). Then Mountain View (Castro St.). Then Palo Alto (University Ave). And Menlo Park. Even Redwood City. Even ignoring that modern downtown San Jose is "planned" and the others "unplanned": if San Jose is "sensible" urban planning, then give me unplanned any day. I spent 50+ evenings a year downtown for over a 20-year span. Now, I avoid it except for SOMA First Fridays.
- oneshot908 9y ago
  It's funny, because you're dead-on about this IMO. Individual cities responding individually to the commuter calamity of the South Bay have done a better job than any high-fallutin' 20-year plan could have. As for downtown San Jose, it looks like it's about to get a lot better if Google follows through on building a campus there. Meanwhile in my hometown of Santa Cruz, it's bums, needles, and out of business signs thanks to our local rabidly anti-growth government. I'm pinning my hopes on Amazon eventually expanding its downtown footprint as the only way possible way out of the trap the place constructed for itself.
  - DrScump 9y ago
    if Google follows through on building a campus there I wouldn't count on that. They just bought (final) some $600 million worth of real estate in North Sunnyvale. Those parcels in San Jose were originally acquired for the ballpark that never happened, either. I suspect they offered them to Google at far below their value, as with the A's.
    - oneshot908 9y ago
      Well, as someone who was once caught in the net of Google's "Let's hire every smart person in the valley and give them menial jobs to keep them off the market" plan of 2011, I wouldn't rule out the "Let's develop the last pieces of available land in Silicon Valley so no one else can" plan of 2018 because WTF else do you do with billions of dollars in profit?
- erentz 9y ago
  > San Jose is "planned" and the others "unplanned" I didn't say the others are unplanned. They are entirely planned to stay exactly as they are and constrain growth so that their super wealthy residents can live exactly as they have been for the past twenty years without any change. > then give me unplanned any day. Well as said. They are planned to be that way. But sure, I guess if you can afford the $6,000 rents to live there you can have them. But that's not a good vision for the Bay Area, nor a place I particularly want to live even if I could afford it. > downtown San Jose I don't disagree with what you say about San Jose. I used to live downtown. Still compared to those other places you mention San Jose actually allows development. And there's a lot more starting to go on there now. Palo Alto is great if you're rich. All the boutiques. And $6000 per month apartments. It has a blue bottle. (But other than that pretty shit options.) Mountain View is an ugly dump of stores that only seem to still exist because they're owned by someone who isn't paying current market rate taxes. And a bunch of ugly out of place buildings at the other edge. But it does have good sushi. Redwood City you mentioned is the place I think is doing a good job from the little I've seen these days, could become a model for the rest of the South Bay. I hope they keep it up.