5 ms·

Neither of you are incorrect as it's about preferences, but the real problem is one of balance. A city needs all kinds of people. Affordability and density nee

Neither of you are incorrect as it's about preferences, but the real problem is one of balance. A city needs all kinds of people. Affordability and density needs to be moderated so that there's enough diversity in families and employment to function well. Also some of the most affordable areas in the USA are also the most sparse.

arcticbull 7y ago
> A city needs all kinds of people to function and affordability and density needs to be moderated so that there's enough diversity in families and employment to function well. I don't necessarily see how one follows the other. So long as there's diversity in, for instance, bedroom count on units, what difference does it make if the units are stacked horizontally as they are today or vertically? To be clear, I'd love your thoughts, I'm not sure myself. > Also some of the most affordable areas in the USA are also the most sparse. Indeed because building up is expensive, so it requires demand. There's no demand in the middle of Idaho even comparable to what SF has. Further, I'm proposing scrapping constraints on new development, not taking peoples 2 story Sunset units via eminent domain and throwing up SoMa style 50 story skyscrapers. I think it's not an unreasonable place to start by doubling all height restrictions across all of SF. No more of this prime real estate on 17th and Brannan (the SFMTA bus lot redevelopment) getting wanged by a 4 story cap. That should be 20+ no question.
- watwut 7y ago
  > What difference does it make if the units are stacked horizontally as they are today or vertically? One difference is how far things end up to be after. If they are spaced vertically, everything ends up far from everything. Not enough people living in the geographic area means that stores wont be there, playgrounds will be empty, school will be far away. Visiting friends means longer drives, commute to work means longer drive.
- joking 7y ago
  4 - 5 floor is the sweet spot for balancing cost and price, if you go up from there the cost per sq meter increases. The places where economically is worth to go higher than that, is where the land is very expensive and you have to recover that cost having more units.
  - ch4s3 7y ago
    From what I have read, it's probably more like 4-8 floors. With 8 still being totally possible with with a podium floor or two and wood framing above that. (DC does this now)
- bluGill 7y ago
  Stacked vs horizontal makes differences for some uses and not others. If we are vertical I care is you start a kitchen fire as I have to evacuate just in case, Horizontal makes that need much less likely. There are a lot of hobbies that include large objects that are easier to have in horizontal development (any collector of large objects, a grand piano). Though the number of people who do that is small in the scheme of things. Grand pianos are often moved via crane - if you only do it once in a lifetime the cost isn't much but if you move regularly it is expensive.

arcticbull 7y ago

> A city needs all kinds of people to function and affordability and density needs to be moderated so that there's enough diversity in families and employment to function well. I don't necessarily see how one follows the other. So long as there's diversity in, for instance, bedroom count on units, what difference does it make if the units are stacked horizontally as they are today or vertically? To be clear, I'd love your thoughts, I'm not sure myself. > Also some of the most affordable areas in the USA are also the most sparse. Indeed because building up is expensive, so it requires demand. There's no demand in the middle of Idaho even comparable to what SF has. Further, I'm proposing scrapping constraints on new development, not taking peoples 2 story Sunset units via eminent domain and throwing up SoMa style 50 story skyscrapers. I think it's not an unreasonable place to start by doubling all height restrictions across all of SF. No more of this prime real estate on 17th and Brannan (the SFMTA bus lot redevelopment) getting wanged by a 4 story cap. That should be 20+ no question.

watwut 7y ago
> What difference does it make if the units are stacked horizontally as they are today or vertically? One difference is how far things end up to be after. If they are spaced vertically, everything ends up far from everything. Not enough people living in the geographic area means that stores wont be there, playgrounds will be empty, school will be far away. Visiting friends means longer drives, commute to work means longer drive.
joking 7y ago
4 - 5 floor is the sweet spot for balancing cost and price, if you go up from there the cost per sq meter increases. The places where economically is worth to go higher than that, is where the land is very expensive and you have to recover that cost having more units.
- ch4s3 7y ago
  From what I have read, it's probably more like 4-8 floors. With 8 still being totally possible with with a podium floor or two and wood framing above that. (DC does this now)
bluGill 7y ago
Stacked vs horizontal makes differences for some uses and not others. If we are vertical I care is you start a kitchen fire as I have to evacuate just in case, Horizontal makes that need much less likely. There are a lot of hobbies that include large objects that are easier to have in horizontal development (any collector of large objects, a grand piano). Though the number of people who do that is small in the scheme of things. Grand pianos are often moved via crane - if you only do it once in a lifetime the cost isn't much but if you move regularly it is expensive.