3 ms·

SF (only acceptable abbreviation) is 7x7 miles square surrounded by water on three sides—the only way to grow is up, right after you knock down the 100 yro Vict

SF (only acceptable abbreviation) is 7x7 miles square surrounded by water on three sides—the only way to grow is up, right after you knock down the 100 yro Victorian homes and historic buildings, and gut the neighborhood charms. This from someone who once paid rent 1300/mo for a two bedroom in Potrero Hill.

littlexsparkee 6mo ago
Nah, Frisco has a long history of use https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/rappers-poets-activists-say-frisco-17441731.php https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/rappers-poets-activists... as does 'the City'.
- xtiansimon 6mo ago
  hehe. Frisco seems derisive to me. And The City? All major cities can be called that when in their vicinity (NYC?). But SF? It's right there on the Giant's caps!
  - bombcar 6mo ago
    What are you talking about? It's clearly Cisco - the bridge is right there in the logo! SF was founded by a joint effort between Cisco and Salesforce, that's why it's called Cisco and SF, right?
klooney 6mo ago
Just turn SOMA into Hong Kong
- bombcar 6mo ago
  At the density of Kowloon Walled City SOMA could house 2.2 million! And we could probably do it comfortably with what we've spent on AI datacenters.
ProfessorLayton 6mo ago
>right after you knock down the 100 yro Victorian homes and historic buildings BS, there's ~400K housing units in SF, and only ~10k of those would be considered victorian. These units couldn't (And shouldn't!) be destroyed for new housing because they're protected, and that's not what NIMBY's or YIMBY's are arguing about anyway since almost everyone loves victorian homes. More than half of the city's housing was built after 1940, mostly on the west side, and it's where NIMBYism is at its worst. There's little reason someone or even a developer shouldn't be able to build up there.
- xtiansimon 6mo ago
  > “west side” Build around Golden Gate Park just like NYC’s Central Park! Great idea.
  - ProfessorLayton 6mo ago
    Ah yes, Golden Gate Park, famously the only option for building new housing on the west side of SF!

littlexsparkee 6mo ago

Nah, Frisco has a long history of use https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/rappers-poets-activists-say-frisco-17441731.php https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/rappers-poets-activists... as does 'the City'.

xtiansimon 6mo ago
hehe. Frisco seems derisive to me. And The City? All major cities can be called that when in their vicinity (NYC?). But SF? It's right there on the Giant's caps!
- bombcar 6mo ago
  What are you talking about? It's clearly Cisco - the bridge is right there in the logo! SF was founded by a joint effort between Cisco and Salesforce, that's why it's called Cisco and SF, right?

klooney 6mo ago

Just turn SOMA into Hong Kong

bombcar 6mo ago
At the density of Kowloon Walled City SOMA could house 2.2 million! And we could probably do it comfortably with what we've spent on AI datacenters.

ProfessorLayton 6mo ago

>right after you knock down the 100 yro Victorian homes and historic buildings BS, there's ~400K housing units in SF, and only ~10k of those would be considered victorian. These units couldn't (And shouldn't!) be destroyed for new housing because they're protected, and that's not what NIMBY's or YIMBY's are arguing about anyway since almost everyone loves victorian homes. More than half of the city's housing was built after 1940, mostly on the west side, and it's where NIMBYism is at its worst. There's little reason someone or even a developer shouldn't be able to build up there.

xtiansimon 6mo ago
> “west side” Build around Golden Gate Park just like NYC’s Central Park! Great idea.
- ProfessorLayton 6mo ago
  Ah yes, Golden Gate Park, famously the only option for building new housing on the west side of SF!