2 ms·
None of SF's dense apartment buildings are on hills, there is a good reason for that. You could terrace them like they do in Chongqing, but even in HK they tend
by seanmcdirmid 2y ago
None of SF's dense apartment buildings are on hills, there is a good reason for that. You could terrace them like they do in Chongqing, but even in HK they tend to build in valleys between mountains except for luxury condo housing (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-Levels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-Levels). Italy follows the same pattern as SF.
- scoofy 2y agoThat's just not true. Russian Hill has plenty of highrises that were built in the 1970s: https://maps.app.goo.gl/LukSfpMG5DnumTL79 https://maps.app.goo.gl/LukSfpMG5DnumTL79 The point isn't that LA should force the area to be highrises. The point is that it should be legal, in a housing crisis, to increase the density of one of the lowest density neighborhoods in LA, which is already an incredibly low density city. Literally just building row houses instead of SFH's would easily double the density. Three-unit row houses like in much of hilly SF would increase the density by 6x. The idea that we either need skyscrapers or SFH's is exactly the problem with our zoning laws. People should be able to build multi-unit when the demand is there.