3 ms·

It is interesting to note that if the Bay area had a high speed rail system, it would alleviate both of Matt's issues (quality affordable housing and reasonable

by iqster 15y ago

It is interesting to note that if the Bay area had a high speed rail system, it would alleviate both of Matt's issues (quality affordable housing and reasonable commute times).

natrius 15y ago
High speed rail isn't necessary for that. Cities just need to relax their zoning restrictions to allow more housing to be built where people want to live. Low supply + high demand = high prices.
- iqster 15y ago
  Given the earthquake prone nature of that area, I am not to crazy about high density housing. For instance, the apartment buildings near the SF Caltain stop scare the heck out of me. Also, I've lived in apartments my whole life. I don't want that for my kids.
- jseliger 15y ago
  This is a perspicacious comment; if you're curious about more, see Edward Glaeser's book The Triumph of the City (http://www.amazon.com/Triumph-City-Greatest-Invention-Healthier/dp/159420277X?ie=UTF8&tag=thstsst-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957 http://www.amazon.com/Triumph-City-Greatest-Invention-Health...), which is quite good on 1) how density promotes idea transmission, 2) the environmental consequences of cities, and 3) transportation problems, which affect (2).
  - iqster 15y ago
    Dense cities work iff city services work.
  - natrius 15y ago
    Read it; loved it. I highly recommend it as well.
- potatolicious 15y ago
  Good luck with that. It seems any time anybody wants to redevelop land here in SF it's met with accusations of elitism, gentrification, and lamentations of losing SF's charming Victorian look. Yes, I get that the Victorian houses are nice, but come on, this city has the most ridiculous housing supply situation I've seen anywhere. It desperately needs a huge injection of housing supply. But of course, the city is loathe to allow any high density construction except for a few ultra-luxe towers by the waterfront, which solves none of our supply problems.

by iqster 15y ago

It is interesting to note that if the Bay area had a high speed rail system, it would alleviate both of Matt's issues (quality affordable housing and reasonable commute times).

natrius 15y ago

High speed rail isn't necessary for that. Cities just need to relax their zoning restrictions to allow more housing to be built where people want to live. Low supply + high demand = high prices.

iqster 15y ago
Given the earthquake prone nature of that area, I am not to crazy about high density housing. For instance, the apartment buildings near the SF Caltain stop scare the heck out of me. Also, I've lived in apartments my whole life. I don't want that for my kids.
jseliger 15y ago
This is a perspicacious comment; if you're curious about more, see Edward Glaeser's book The Triumph of the City (http://www.amazon.com/Triumph-City-Greatest-Invention-Healthier/dp/159420277X?ie=UTF8&tag=thstsst-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957 http://www.amazon.com/Triumph-City-Greatest-Invention-Health...), which is quite good on 1) how density promotes idea transmission, 2) the environmental consequences of cities, and 3) transportation problems, which affect (2).
- iqster 15y ago
  Dense cities work iff city services work.
- natrius 15y ago
  Read it; loved it. I highly recommend it as well.
potatolicious 15y ago
Good luck with that. It seems any time anybody wants to redevelop land here in SF it's met with accusations of elitism, gentrification, and lamentations of losing SF's charming Victorian look. Yes, I get that the Victorian houses are nice, but come on, this city has the most ridiculous housing supply situation I've seen anywhere. It desperately needs a huge injection of housing supply. But of course, the city is loathe to allow any high density construction except for a few ultra-luxe towers by the waterfront, which solves none of our supply problems.