5 ms·

You can substitute "Bay Area" with many of the major centers in the US at this point - Seattle, LA, Denver, Austin all have the same issues, they're just a few

You can substitute "Bay Area" with many of the major centers in the US at this point - Seattle, LA, Denver, Austin all have the same issues, they're just a few years behind the Bay. We need fixes to zoning and development rules and tax laws, they help cities be more liveable as it will help everyone. Cities overseas have figured this out, to some degree - rent as a % of income is lower in both Europe and Asia, generally, and it's a lot easier to build effective mass transit when housing densities are a bit higher. The single family home is one of the worst things to happen to the US, and it's slowly killing us with traffic and spiraling housing prices.

loeg 8y ago
> You can substitute "Bay Area" with many of the major centers in the US at this point - Seattle, LA, Denver, Austin all have the same issues, they're just a few years behind the Bay. Not the same issues. Seattle doesn't have anything like Prop 13, or nearly as bad height restrictions. City residents and council are much more supportive of upzoning than SFBA — as in, it actually happens.[0] Plenty of actual issues, and development still lags demand. But the situation is not nearly as dire as SFBA, and it's not getting worse quite as fast. [0]: https://seattle.curbed.com/2017/11/9/16629248/seattle-hala-mha-upzone-plan https://seattle.curbed.com/2017/11/9/16629248/seattle-hala-m...
- tomkarlo 8y ago
  Maybe to not the same degree, but the same issues - NIMBYism, a focus on SFH, a sense that established residents are pursuing housing policy that punishes younger / newer residents. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/upshot/zoning-housing-property-rights-nimby-us.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/upshot/zoning-housing-pro...
  - loeg 8y ago
    Yep, you are absolutely right that there is still (some) NIMBYism and an overemphasis on SFH in Seattle. The distinction I want to draw with SFBA is the degree. There's a tipping point where the NIMBYs have enough power to block all or most upzoning and development, and I think — fortunately for us — Seattle has not passed that threshold. SFBA has.

loeg 8y ago

> You can substitute "Bay Area" with many of the major centers in the US at this point - Seattle, LA, Denver, Austin all have the same issues, they're just a few years behind the Bay. Not the same issues. Seattle doesn't have anything like Prop 13, or nearly as bad height restrictions. City residents and council are much more supportive of upzoning than SFBA — as in, it actually happens.[0] Plenty of actual issues, and development still lags demand. But the situation is not nearly as dire as SFBA, and it's not getting worse quite as fast. [0]: https://seattle.curbed.com/2017/11/9/16629248/seattle-hala-mha-upzone-plan https://seattle.curbed.com/2017/11/9/16629248/seattle-hala-m...

tomkarlo 8y ago
Maybe to not the same degree, but the same issues - NIMBYism, a focus on SFH, a sense that established residents are pursuing housing policy that punishes younger / newer residents. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/upshot/zoning-housing-property-rights-nimby-us.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/upshot/zoning-housing-pro...
- loeg 8y ago
  Yep, you are absolutely right that there is still (some) NIMBYism and an overemphasis on SFH in Seattle. The distinction I want to draw with SFBA is the degree. There's a tipping point where the NIMBYs have enough power to block all or most upzoning and development, and I think — fortunately for us — Seattle has not passed that threshold. SFBA has.