4 ms·

We don't even need towers; six-story apartment buildings would do. See http://tinyurl.com/6storySF http://tinyurl.com/6storySF

• closeparen 9y ago
  The land near BART that’s available for development in the near and medium term is the parking. Six story apartments on all BART parking is what, a couple thousand units? That’s a drop in the bucket. To replace enough SFHs to make a difference with buildings of that height, we would need eminent domain seizures of entire tracts. Not gonna happen. It’s true that an entire city built out of six story apartments could work, but realistically development needs to squeeze in the gaps (infill). A mere six stories is a huge waste of a gap. Path dependence is weird like that.
  • raldi 9y ago
    We absolutely would not need eminent domain. The city is full of tenantless low-density buildings close to transit hubs where the owners would voluntarily build six-story apartment buildings if we allowed them to. (If they wouldn't, then why did it need to be forbidden?)
    • closeparen 9y ago
      Of course they would build six story buildings if we allowed them to. But why would we stop them at six stories?
      • raldi 9y ago
        I'm saying, whatever height you want, there's no need for eminent domain. Plenty of landowners want to build.
        • closeparen 9y ago
          Appeals to Paris and vast tracts of six-story apartments as an alternative to high-rise construction are dangerous because they create the illusion that a six-story height limit is okay. If we could build the whole city over again tomorrow, it might be. Today, recognizing the reality that most existing low-rise structures are in it for the long haul, when there is an opportunity to build, every floor counts.