17 ms·

In SF you will find entire floors vacant while the homeless camp outside.

by juunpp 3y ago

rs999gti 3y ago
This is a feel good comment, but the reality is these building are not designed for residential use and would require substantial build out to be habitable for multiple residents. Now if the thought is just to move the homeless eyesore out of site, then open office space might work.
- j7ake 3y ago
  I think parent is suggesting that it’s absurd that a building not designed for residential use is an excuse to not let people inside who are camping at their doorsteps.
- klyrs 3y ago
  I read it as an observation about misallocation. SF has had no real trouble building, but what got built isn't helping the town.
- fragmede 3y ago
  To bring it up to code, is a very different situation than make it livable, especially when compared to living in a tent on the street. If you gave me a floor of a commerical building that was mine, that I was allowed to build in and improve how I saw fit, I'd take that in a heartbeat. If there's an Kafkaesque set of red tape, then forget it.
  - CapstanRoller 3y ago
    What happens when someone in the building decides who DOESN'T know what they're doing turns you into the next Ghost Ship[0] type fire? No, we need massive zoning & code reform but not a total free-for-all. You may be resourceful enough to build a safe habitat but there's a good chance all your work will be destroyed because someone decided to build an indoor slum out of pallets and space heaters. All safety regulations are written in blood. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Ship_warehouse_fire https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Ship_warehouse_fire
    - fragmede 3y ago
      Safety regulations won't keep you warm at night. Ghost Ship was an absolute tragedy, and a close dear friend was on her way there that night. It made national news. But it's funny, the homeless encampment fires that keep happening in West Oakland just five miles away, that keep killing people don't get the same kind of national coverage. There was one just this past April. To be able to be used for commercial occupancy, the buildings have an up-to-code sprinkler system. Keeping those systems up to code requires yearly inspections and walkthroughs and testing. So just keep doing those while we let people live in them? Ghost Ship is good to bring up. In the wake of it neighboring San Francisco shut down several warehomes, forcing people out onto the streets in one of the most expensive housing markets in the world. There was no real help from the city or fire marshals to bring things up to code, just a bunch of red tape. Critically, no money was made available from the government to do any renovations to bring things up to code and stop people from dying in fires. Just evictions. > In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.
      - CapstanRoller 3y ago
        I completely understand your point, and I agree with it. I just don't trust laissez-faire economics. We've got entrepreneurs trying to put SF techies into communal bunks. If that's how they're willing to treat engineers, how will they treat the poor and disabled? Then again, I also understand the historically bad examples of crime-filled government housing projects. I don't know how to convince Americans to do things the more European way. As someone born in the USSR and raised in a "commieblock" I see how housing like this is far better than living on the street. Many of the big block style apartments all over western Europe are quite decent. How much more pain before we have massive housing reform? Will we ever? I don't know. Neoliberalism is eating the country and we're in a deadlock. The pressure is continuing to build and build. I am very concerned about a collapse scenario, because the USA is awash with guns and the far right keeps gaining ground.
- francisofascii 3y ago
  I would wager these buildings are more appropriate for residential use than the sidewalk.

In SF you will find entire floors vacant while the homeless camp outside.

by juunpp 3y ago

In SF you will find entire floors vacant while the homeless camp outside.

This is a feel good comment, but the reality is these building are not designed for residential use and would require substantial build out to be habitable for multiple residents. Now if the thought is just to move the homeless eyesore out of site, then open office space might work.

j7ake 3y ago
I think parent is suggesting that it’s absurd that a building not designed for residential use is an excuse to not let people inside who are camping at their doorsteps.
klyrs 3y ago
I read it as an observation about misallocation. SF has had no real trouble building, but what got built isn't helping the town.
fragmede 3y ago
To bring it up to code, is a very different situation than make it livable, especially when compared to living in a tent on the street. If you gave me a floor of a commerical building that was mine, that I was allowed to build in and improve how I saw fit, I'd take that in a heartbeat. If there's an Kafkaesque set of red tape, then forget it.
- CapstanRoller 3y ago
  What happens when someone in the building decides who DOESN'T know what they're doing turns you into the next Ghost Ship[0] type fire? No, we need massive zoning & code reform but not a total free-for-all. You may be resourceful enough to build a safe habitat but there's a good chance all your work will be destroyed because someone decided to build an indoor slum out of pallets and space heaters. All safety regulations are written in blood. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Ship_warehouse_fire https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Ship_warehouse_fire
  - fragmede 3y ago
    Safety regulations won't keep you warm at night. Ghost Ship was an absolute tragedy, and a close dear friend was on her way there that night. It made national news. But it's funny, the homeless encampment fires that keep happening in West Oakland just five miles away, that keep killing people don't get the same kind of national coverage. There was one just this past April. To be able to be used for commercial occupancy, the buildings have an up-to-code sprinkler system. Keeping those systems up to code requires yearly inspections and walkthroughs and testing. So just keep doing those while we let people live in them? Ghost Ship is good to bring up. In the wake of it neighboring San Francisco shut down several warehomes, forcing people out onto the streets in one of the most expensive housing markets in the world. There was no real help from the city or fire marshals to bring things up to code, just a bunch of red tape. Critically, no money was made available from the government to do any renovations to bring things up to code and stop people from dying in fires. Just evictions. > In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.
    - CapstanRoller 3y ago
      I completely understand your point, and I agree with it. I just don't trust laissez-faire economics. We've got entrepreneurs trying to put SF techies into communal bunks. If that's how they're willing to treat engineers, how will they treat the poor and disabled? Then again, I also understand the historically bad examples of crime-filled government housing projects. I don't know how to convince Americans to do things the more European way. As someone born in the USSR and raised in a "commieblock" I see how housing like this is far better than living on the street. Many of the big block style apartments all over western Europe are quite decent. How much more pain before we have massive housing reform? Will we ever? I don't know. Neoliberalism is eating the country and we're in a deadlock. The pressure is continuing to build and build. I am very concerned about a collapse scenario, because the USA is awash with guns and the far right keeps gaining ground.
francisofascii 3y ago
I would wager these buildings are more appropriate for residential use than the sidewalk.