9 ms·
Not to disagree with your second point, but that 200ft^2 of land can house a lot of people if you're building 20 stories onto it. It seems to me housing crisis
by ekimekim 9y ago
Not to disagree with your second point, but that 200ft^2 of land can house a lot of people if you're building 20 stories onto it. It seems to me housing crisis is affected massively by the anti-high-density sentiment in SF preventing efficient use of land.
- kurthr 9y agoYes, but look at building costs for those 20 stories. They won't be like a tiny house. SJ has an airport, and SF has a lot of marsh fill. Both are in earthquake country. I don't think it's ok to violate earthquake standards so we can build tall buildings for the homeless (and to cost less than $5-600/mo they would need to be purpose built). We also don't want ghettos like Cabrini Green, but try putting them next to someone paying 10x ($5k/mo) in the same building. Your best bet is just straight up subsidy to get prices down and high value low cost build. That will be expensive to house even a few % of the population... a 1-2% sales tax increase (since that's one of the few the city could keep).