3 ms·

>The expense of Silicon Valley is largely down to growth policy, which is to say, they can’t build housing concomitant with demand. I can't tell you how much t

>The expense of Silicon Valley is largely down to growth policy, which is to say, they can’t build housing concomitant with demand. I can't tell you how much this infuriates me. I actually heard a Mountain View city council member say, "Maybe we should tell Google that they can't hire any more people." Meanwhile, the city is full of termite-ridden rotting apartment buildings just waiting for the next earthquake to pulverize them. Here's the zoning map for mountain view: http://www.mountainview.gov/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=2459 http://www.mountainview.gov/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?Bl... There's only a single block of high density residential on the entire map.

brudgers 15y ago
The R3 zoning district (all that orange on the map) allows fairly high density - FAR 1.05 maximum and upto >40 DU's per acre. [Mountainview, Ca, Code of Ordinances, Chapter 36 Article XII available at www.municode.com] However, the primary land subdivision pattern of many small lots (and consequently many owners) makes assembling parcels suitable for redevelopment at higher densities not just expensive, but difficult. Furthermore, existing high rents mean that the value of the land based on existing cashflows may make redevelopment infeasible once the cost of new construction and land acquisition is amortized and the higher returns associated with the risk of development must be paid. Obsolescent housing (and other structures) remain because they are profitable and can be valued on an existing income basis and thus traded with known risk. Higher density projects may be possible, but the market may not be able to absorb the units if the rents are significantly higher - and of course, higher rents are also likely to be untenable for voters as well.
- moultano 15y ago
  I don't think that's the issue. Look through the R4 zones on the sunnyvale zoning map. http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/Departments/CommunityDevelopment/MapsandData.aspx http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/Departments/CommunityDevelopment/Map... Almost every one of those is a beautiful new (tall) building that efficiently uses the space, and the plots aren't huge.

brudgers 15y ago

The R3 zoning district (all that orange on the map) allows fairly high density - FAR 1.05 maximum and upto >40 DU's per acre. [Mountainview, Ca, Code of Ordinances, Chapter 36 Article XII available at www.municode.com] However, the primary land subdivision pattern of many small lots (and consequently many owners) makes assembling parcels suitable for redevelopment at higher densities not just expensive, but difficult. Furthermore, existing high rents mean that the value of the land based on existing cashflows may make redevelopment infeasible once the cost of new construction and land acquisition is amortized and the higher returns associated with the risk of development must be paid. Obsolescent housing (and other structures) remain because they are profitable and can be valued on an existing income basis and thus traded with known risk. Higher density projects may be possible, but the market may not be able to absorb the units if the rents are significantly higher - and of course, higher rents are also likely to be untenable for voters as well.

moultano 15y ago
I don't think that's the issue. Look through the R4 zones on the sunnyvale zoning map. http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/Departments/CommunityDevelopment/MapsandData.aspx http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/Departments/CommunityDevelopment/Map... Almost every one of those is a beautiful new (tall) building that efficiently uses the space, and the plots aren't huge.