4 ms·

A symptom of the sickness, IMO, and another example of the tech boom failing to hit anyone except techies. Our success and our wealth is failing to float all b

A symptom of the sickness, IMO, and another example of the tech boom failing to hit anyone except techies. Our success and our wealth is failing to float all boats, or even any boats that aren't our own. Instead of tech worker demand driving infrastructure, it has simply created a separate (but equal?), exclusive, mirror transit system. Also an example of complete and utter urban planning failing on the part of the city of San Francisco. A large part of why companies don't set up shop in SF proper (despite the bulk of their work force wanting to live there), is due to the complete lack of development. Rents, both commercial and residential, are completely out of control and it actively drives away business. Meanwhile SF has completely crossed off new development in large swathes of the city - including pretty much the entire downtown commercial core. SF is a vibrant, innovative, creative population subsisting on the surface of a government that is firmly hanging onto antiquated notions of the 19th century, not even the 20th, and this conflict has reached epic proportions of ridiculousness. Everywhere you go find vibrant pockets of activity, but you can't shake the feeling that you're walking in a museum, instead of a evolving, changing, adapting city.

mc32 14y ago
Exactly right. SF is surprisingly conservative despite its social liberalism. It wants to remain a Victorian oasis in the 21st century. Development seems to have to meet extraordinary reqs compared to say SJ. SJ on the other hand is built out like a huge suburb with no downtown core.
capkutay 14y ago
"SF is a vibrant, innovative, creative population subsisting on the surface of a government that is firmly hanging onto antiquated notions of the 19th century, not even the 20th, and this conflict has reached epic proportions of ridiculousness." Extremely unfortunate but true. SF is one of the few cities that has the unique opportunity of creating a super-city, the technological world capital. How do they respond? By doing nothing. They could expand the reach of public transportation and develop on the outter rims of the city. They could AT LEAST make it easier to go downtown from less-expensive SF districts like the sunset and richmond. They would rather basque in their position as a second-rate metropolitan area, one step below the likes of NY and Boston.
vidarh 14y ago
> Rents, both commercial and residential, are completely out of control and it actively drives away business. I find this constant complaining about rents and zoning whenever the Bay Area comes up amusing. Why should SF or the Bay Area strive for growth at all costs? The rents are presumably as they are because the demand for the space that is available is sky high? It would seem they don't particularly need to change. The Bay Area also already has a population density that is high. If the people who live there want to keep voting for local governments that wants to restrict increases in density, and it stops you from living or setting up show there, then don't. Personally to me, the current character of the place is a huge part of what would make the Bay Area attractive if I was to consider relocating anywhere.
- rayiner 14y ago
  Rent is a factor of both supply and demand. High rents don't necessarily mean that demand is sky high in absolute terms, just that it's high relative to supply, which isn't a very meaningful statement if supply is artificially restricted. The point isn't to grow at all costs. The point is to not let the people who already live in an area restrict growth so much that people who want to move in cannot reasonably do so.
prostoalex 14y ago
> Instead of tech worker demand driving infrastructure, it has simply created a separate (but equal?), exclusive, mirror transit system. On the list of pros and cons of living in a large state this is listed under "cons". The roads are maintained by the state, not by the municipalities, and however important, tech industry is just one of many voices in the state of California. Paired with the squeaky wheels of agricultural lobby, state employer union, teacher union, prison worker union and film industry, tech lobby basically gets no grease. Northern California becoming its own state would probably solve a lot of these issues, as tech companies and their employees tend to be pretty significant revenue generators for the state.
chipsy 14y ago
The majority of the city tax dollars still come from tourism, not tech. That business is so lucrative that the government can remain extremely inefficient for an indefinite period without facing a major crisis. As well, it's playing a huge role in the low-growth policies, by raising various fears about keeping the views intact and the money flowing. Oakland is actually in a better position to do the right thing w/r to growth, even with all its other problems.
- dredmorbius 14y ago
  Numbers on that -- citation anywhere?

mc32 14y ago

Exactly right. SF is surprisingly conservative despite its social liberalism. It wants to remain a Victorian oasis in the 21st century. Development seems to have to meet extraordinary reqs compared to say SJ. SJ on the other hand is built out like a huge suburb with no downtown core.

capkutay 14y ago

"SF is a vibrant, innovative, creative population subsisting on the surface of a government that is firmly hanging onto antiquated notions of the 19th century, not even the 20th, and this conflict has reached epic proportions of ridiculousness." Extremely unfortunate but true. SF is one of the few cities that has the unique opportunity of creating a super-city, the technological world capital. How do they respond? By doing nothing. They could expand the reach of public transportation and develop on the outter rims of the city. They could AT LEAST make it easier to go downtown from less-expensive SF districts like the sunset and richmond. They would rather basque in their position as a second-rate metropolitan area, one step below the likes of NY and Boston.

vidarh 14y ago

> Rents, both commercial and residential, are completely out of control and it actively drives away business. I find this constant complaining about rents and zoning whenever the Bay Area comes up amusing. Why should SF or the Bay Area strive for growth at all costs? The rents are presumably as they are because the demand for the space that is available is sky high? It would seem they don't particularly need to change. The Bay Area also already has a population density that is high. If the people who live there want to keep voting for local governments that wants to restrict increases in density, and it stops you from living or setting up show there, then don't. Personally to me, the current character of the place is a huge part of what would make the Bay Area attractive if I was to consider relocating anywhere.

rayiner 14y ago
Rent is a factor of both supply and demand. High rents don't necessarily mean that demand is sky high in absolute terms, just that it's high relative to supply, which isn't a very meaningful statement if supply is artificially restricted. The point isn't to grow at all costs. The point is to not let the people who already live in an area restrict growth so much that people who want to move in cannot reasonably do so.

prostoalex 14y ago

> Instead of tech worker demand driving infrastructure, it has simply created a separate (but equal?), exclusive, mirror transit system. On the list of pros and cons of living in a large state this is listed under "cons". The roads are maintained by the state, not by the municipalities, and however important, tech industry is just one of many voices in the state of California. Paired with the squeaky wheels of agricultural lobby, state employer union, teacher union, prison worker union and film industry, tech lobby basically gets no grease. Northern California becoming its own state would probably solve a lot of these issues, as tech companies and their employees tend to be pretty significant revenue generators for the state.

chipsy 14y ago

The majority of the city tax dollars still come from tourism, not tech. That business is so lucrative that the government can remain extremely inefficient for an indefinite period without facing a major crisis. As well, it's playing a huge role in the low-growth policies, by raising various fears about keeping the views intact and the money flowing. Oakland is actually in a better position to do the right thing w/r to growth, even with all its other problems.

dredmorbius 14y ago
Numbers on that -- citation anywhere?