3 ms·

As opposed to building more and denser housing.

by Camas 7y ago

toomuchtodo 7y ago
Sometimes, you cannot build more housing, or denser housing, so you use rent control so tenants who do live there don't spend all of their income on housing, and some people don't get to live there (because of housing limits). If you turned San Francisco into Manhattan, and still had unquenched demand for housing while still maximizing every square meter of three dimensional space within desired geo bounds, what then? "Build baby build" is not a silver bullet.
- Camas 7y ago
  >Sometimes, you cannot build more housing, or denser housing A hypothetical possibility that doesn't hold true for any city that has enacted rent controls. "Build baby build" is a silver bullet.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - HarryHirsch 7y ago
    In New York City the subway is running at capacity. Building housing isn't enough, you also need infrastructure.
    - pzone 7y ago
      Brooklyn resident here. Plenty of room on the subway during my morning commute. Wish they would build more condos here so I could enter the market.
- randall 7y ago
  Manhattan uws has lower rents than comparable places in SF in my experience.
- munk-a 7y ago
  "Build baby build" is a pretty good silver bullet - assuming the city is willing to keep up with infrastructure spending to support the denser housing (absolutely possible economically, but politically difficult) _and_ assuming the local populace doesn't throw whoever advocates for it out of office. Too often new construction is killed by NIMBYism (though, it seems just as often new construction blames NIMBYism for legitimate complaints about land compensation)... if you live in a city and treasure your quiet off the beaten path neighborhood... too bad.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- nordsieck 7y ago
  > Sometimes, you cannot build more housing, or denser housing ... If you turned San Francisco into Manhattan, and still had unquenched demand for housing while still maximizing every square meter of three dimensional space within desired geo bounds, what then? Using Manhattan as your example of maximum possible density is... odd. Kowloon City [1] had much higher density and had the disadvantage of poverty. I'm not saying that we should turn all residential areas into facsimiles of Kowloon City, but there is a ton of space between what currently exists - even in Manhattan - and that. I'm deeply skeptical that any place in the US or Europe has reached the limits of building more housing and is forced to look at other options. ___ 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City

As opposed to building more and denser housing.

by Camas 7y ago

As opposed to building more and denser housing.

Sometimes, you cannot build more housing, or denser housing, so you use rent control so tenants who do live there don't spend all of their income on housing, and some people don't get to live there (because of housing limits). If you turned San Francisco into Manhattan, and still had unquenched demand for housing while still maximizing every square meter of three dimensional space within desired geo bounds, what then? "Build baby build" is not a silver bullet.

Camas 7y ago
>Sometimes, you cannot build more housing, or denser housing A hypothetical possibility that doesn't hold true for any city that has enacted rent controls. "Build baby build" is a silver bullet.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- HarryHirsch 7y ago
  In New York City the subway is running at capacity. Building housing isn't enough, you also need infrastructure.
  - pzone 7y ago
    Brooklyn resident here. Plenty of room on the subway during my morning commute. Wish they would build more condos here so I could enter the market.
randall 7y ago
Manhattan uws has lower rents than comparable places in SF in my experience.
munk-a 7y ago
"Build baby build" is a pretty good silver bullet - assuming the city is willing to keep up with infrastructure spending to support the denser housing (absolutely possible economically, but politically difficult) _and_ assuming the local populace doesn't throw whoever advocates for it out of office. Too often new construction is killed by NIMBYism (though, it seems just as often new construction blames NIMBYism for legitimate complaints about land compensation)... if you live in a city and treasure your quiet off the beaten path neighborhood... too bad.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
nordsieck 7y ago
> Sometimes, you cannot build more housing, or denser housing ... If you turned San Francisco into Manhattan, and still had unquenched demand for housing while still maximizing every square meter of three dimensional space within desired geo bounds, what then? Using Manhattan as your example of maximum possible density is... odd. Kowloon City [1] had much higher density and had the disadvantage of poverty. I'm not saying that we should turn all residential areas into facsimiles of Kowloon City, but there is a ton of space between what currently exists - even in Manhattan - and that. I'm deeply skeptical that any place in the US or Europe has reached the limits of building more housing and is forced to look at other options. ___ 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City