4 ms·

As the article mentions, SF needs to do some large-scale rezoning to avoid a gutted downtown. The city's approach to drug use probably doesn't help, but the pa

by muglug 4y ago

As the article mentions, SF needs to do some large-scale rezoning to avoid a gutted downtown. The city's approach to drug use probably doesn't help, but the pandemic-motivated downturn in foot traffic is the most obvious culprit.

option 4y ago
SF should start by closing open air drug scenes, arresting dealers and not subsidizing drug addiction.
- jmatthews 4y ago
  out of curiosity, why is this comment being voted down? It seems reasonable, is there more to it?
  - apsurd 4y ago
    my assumption is that "war on drugs" is naive. gotta treat it like an illness
    - foobiekr 4y ago
      Including forcibly treating people who refuse treatment?
  - gotoeleven 4y ago
    as an amateur hacker news logician and avid rachel maddow watcher I believe it is because the comment is an example of the slippery slope fallacy, fails to note that correlation does not equal causation and also doesnt mention how 40 years ago ronald reagan closed the mental hospitals which meant CA could not enforce laws against pooping in the streets ever again.
  - rtpg 4y ago
    Because arresting drug dealers is not actually a thing that means that retail will have more customers in downtown SF. There's a legitimate discussion about having downtown areas be economically viable and pretending that if we "just" arrested all the criminals or whatever then things would get fixed is very dismissive of real, actual things that could be improved. You need customers for retail to exist. People working for SF-based companies don't want to go to the office (you might make an argument it's for crime reasons, but it feels obvious the overriding reason is just wanting to work from home). So retail is suffering. Notice how crime plays at best a second order effect there. Yet every story on HN about this topic is filled with people saying it's crime.
    - mansion7 4y ago
      No drug dealers = druggies go elsewhere No druggies/dealers = people move back to the area People move back to the area + no druggies/dealers = businesses move back to the area
      - rtpg 4y ago
        I mean the place is already next to a bunch of houses. I'm imagining that all of those places aren't exactly empty. But of course this thing is built across the street from a Safeway (which feels pretty relevant to the lack of the success to be honest). It feels just like there are so many more simple narratives here. Like seriously, there's a supermarket that looks larger and has a parking lot just there! Why would people bother crossing a 4-lane highway to go to whole foods? And so you're left with a huge supermarket that is trying to cater purely to foot traffic, outside of a place with that much of it to begin with. It sure feels like hubris meant this site simply did not work. It just feels like such a stretch to claim that crime is the thing here.
        twelve40 4y ago
        are you sure you are looking at the right place? i don't see any Safeway close to 8th and Market and there are plenty of boarded-up abandoned houses on Market and the streets next to it. Also, have you just seen it? It's the stinkiest most repulsive part of town with a bunch of deranged people hanging out nonstop day and night on that corner there.
        pandaman 4y ago
        There is neither a highway nor a Safeway nearby. Also, the apartment complex where the WFM is located (the Trinity Place) seems to have ample parking for retail.
    - jsnell 4y ago
      According to the article, the store was closed due to security concerns. There was no suggestion in the article that it was due to insufficient sales. Are you suggesting the company is lying for some reason?
nzoschke 4y ago
Agreed about pandemic affecting downtown being the man culprit. I wager SF was affected harder more than most downtowns due to high commercial rents, tons of startups that were nimble and moved, and lots of progressive big companies that are actually adapting to WFH reasonably well. I wish commercial rents would drop significantly and more mixed use was permitted for new galleries, bars, clubs and residential. I personally have hope SF will figure it out. It’s a town of constant change.
- muglug 4y ago
  > I wager SF was affected harder more than most downtowns due to high commercial rents, tons of startups that were nimble and moved, and lots of progressive big companies that are actually adapting to WFH reasonably well. Yeah, though I think it doesn't help that downtown SF has relatively low population density compared to downtown Manhattan. When the return-to-office plans started to kick in there weren't a ton of workers with very short commutes who were eager to be back in-office.

by muglug 4y ago

option 4y ago

SF should start by closing open air drug scenes, arresting dealers and not subsidizing drug addiction.

jmatthews 4y ago
out of curiosity, why is this comment being voted down? It seems reasonable, is there more to it?
- apsurd 4y ago
  my assumption is that "war on drugs" is naive. gotta treat it like an illness
  - foobiekr 4y ago
    Including forcibly treating people who refuse treatment?
- gotoeleven 4y ago
  as an amateur hacker news logician and avid rachel maddow watcher I believe it is because the comment is an example of the slippery slope fallacy, fails to note that correlation does not equal causation and also doesnt mention how 40 years ago ronald reagan closed the mental hospitals which meant CA could not enforce laws against pooping in the streets ever again.
- rtpg 4y ago
  Because arresting drug dealers is not actually a thing that means that retail will have more customers in downtown SF. There's a legitimate discussion about having downtown areas be economically viable and pretending that if we "just" arrested all the criminals or whatever then things would get fixed is very dismissive of real, actual things that could be improved. You need customers for retail to exist. People working for SF-based companies don't want to go to the office (you might make an argument it's for crime reasons, but it feels obvious the overriding reason is just wanting to work from home). So retail is suffering. Notice how crime plays at best a second order effect there. Yet every story on HN about this topic is filled with people saying it's crime.
  - mansion7 4y ago
    No drug dealers = druggies go elsewhere No druggies/dealers = people move back to the area People move back to the area + no druggies/dealers = businesses move back to the area
    - rtpg 4y ago
      I mean the place is already next to a bunch of houses. I'm imagining that all of those places aren't exactly empty. But of course this thing is built across the street from a Safeway (which feels pretty relevant to the lack of the success to be honest). It feels just like there are so many more simple narratives here. Like seriously, there's a supermarket that looks larger and has a parking lot just there! Why would people bother crossing a 4-lane highway to go to whole foods? And so you're left with a huge supermarket that is trying to cater purely to foot traffic, outside of a place with that much of it to begin with. It sure feels like hubris meant this site simply did not work. It just feels like such a stretch to claim that crime is the thing here.
      - twelve40 4y ago
        are you sure you are looking at the right place? i don't see any Safeway close to 8th and Market and there are plenty of boarded-up abandoned houses on Market and the streets next to it. Also, have you just seen it? It's the stinkiest most repulsive part of town with a bunch of deranged people hanging out nonstop day and night on that corner there.
      - pandaman 4y ago
        There is neither a highway nor a Safeway nearby. Also, the apartment complex where the WFM is located (the Trinity Place) seems to have ample parking for retail.
  - jsnell 4y ago
    According to the article, the store was closed due to security concerns. There was no suggestion in the article that it was due to insufficient sales. Are you suggesting the company is lying for some reason?

nzoschke 4y ago

Agreed about pandemic affecting downtown being the man culprit. I wager SF was affected harder more than most downtowns due to high commercial rents, tons of startups that were nimble and moved, and lots of progressive big companies that are actually adapting to WFH reasonably well. I wish commercial rents would drop significantly and more mixed use was permitted for new galleries, bars, clubs and residential. I personally have hope SF will figure it out. It’s a town of constant change.

muglug 4y ago
> I wager SF was affected harder more than most downtowns due to high commercial rents, tons of startups that were nimble and moved, and lots of progressive big companies that are actually adapting to WFH reasonably well. Yeah, though I think it doesn't help that downtown SF has relatively low population density compared to downtown Manhattan. When the return-to-office plans started to kick in there weren't a ton of workers with very short commutes who were eager to be back in-office.