6 ms·

San Francisco is completely, utterly corrupt when it comes to housing. In 2011 there were a total of 418 new housing units built [1]. Really? One of the hottest

San Francisco is completely, utterly corrupt when it comes to housing. In 2011 there were a total of 418 new housing units built [1]. Really? One of the hottest areas with the highest demand in the entire country and only 418 new units were added in a full year? That's an absolute outrage. [1] http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/05/san_franciscos_total_housing_inventory_and_pipeline_rep.html http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/05/san_franciscos_to...

w1ntermute 14y ago
This is why I'm hoping that Bloomberg's efforts to create a Silicon Alley are a success. Maybe SF will realize that it needs to appreciate the tech industry more when people start leaving for NYC. It would be great for tech to be based in a city where (a) it's not the biggest industry (so you don't get mental inbreeding), (b) there's proper public transportation that doesn't require hazmat cleanup because of people shitting and pissing all over it[0], (c) you don't have homeless people and drug addicts everywhere on the streets, and (d) you don't have rampant NIMBYism blocking the development of more efficient housing because they're afraid of "Manhattanization" destroying their "Bay view". 0: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Human-waste-shuts-down-BART-escalators-3735981.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Human-waste-shuts-down...
- TruthElixirX 14y ago
  Oh yes, lets look to Bloomberg to show us how to run a city. Shitty rent controls, banning all sorts of things, cops stopping people in the streets for security checks. Brilliant.
  - zinssmeister 14y ago
    Seems to be working out for them... http://www.businessinsider.com/no-murders-in-new-york-2012-11 http://www.businessinsider.com/no-murders-in-new-york-2012-1...
  - rayiner 14y ago
    Bloomberg didn't implement rent control. Stop and frisk is a huge boon for making cities safer. Every major city does it.
    - epoxyhockey 14y ago
      Stop and frisk is a huge boon for making cities safer. Every major city does it. Can you to cite a source for both of those claims? AFAIK, NYC is the only city that does stop and frisk, and it has been proven to be a program to 1) be heavily skewed towards frisking minorities, and 2) resulting in a 1.9% "success rate" in finding a weapon after having frisked the entire African American population once over in NYC (source: http://occupydesign.org/uncategorized/stop-frisk-infographic/ http://occupydesign.org/uncategorized/stop-frisk-infographic... ) It's also unconstitutional, but as long as you aren't the one being frisked, it's no problem, right?
      - rayiner 14y ago
        Other cities don't call it stop and frisk, but they do it nonetheless. This editorial gives some numbers: http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-07-09/news/32606335_1_frisks-murder-rate-nypd http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-07-09/news/32606335_1_f.... This article also gives some numbers: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonoberholtzer/2012/07/17/stop-and-frisk-by-the-numbers http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonoberholtzer/2012/07/17/stop.... 5.4% of stops between 2004 and 2009 resulted in arrests. That's actually a really high number, contrary to the characterization of the article. That's tens of thousands of instances of actual wrongdoing being caught. Stop and frisk does skew towards stopping minorities. That is not in and of itself necessarily problematic. Race, socioeconomic status, and crime are deeply correlated in the big cities. The unfortunate fact is that most crime in New York, Chicago, and LA are committed by blacks and hispanics, and in fact usually both the victims and the perpetrators are minorities. See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/06/nypd-report-details-crime_n_1862771.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/06/nypd-report-details.... Stop and frisk is not unconstitutional. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio. Playing armchair Supreme Court Justice when it comes to the 4th amendment is fraught with peril, for the simple reason that the founders explicitly left it open to judicial interpretation by using the wiggle word "unreasonable."
greeneggs 14y ago
Are cities obligated to grow forever? I don't want SF to turn into Tokyo or Manhattan or Hong Kong. Why not draw a line?
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  Why? Why should you get to say that the city can't grow when others want it to? I don't understand where this sense of entitlement comes from.
  - epoxyhockey 14y ago
    I think that every SF resident is entitled to their opinion on the topic. Do we know how many residents are for housing growth and how many are against it?
    - rayiner 14y ago
      SF residents are entitled to their opinion on the topic, but their opinions must also be balanced against the rights of the landowners to develop their private property as they see fit. The point of zoning regulation is to allow a measure of urban planning to safeguard the health and safety of the city, not to allow existing landowners to freeze the city in its current state by restricting development on land they don't own.
      - deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
    - bitcartel 14y ago
      It's funny given the economic argument, how we don't often hear about plans to start building in Pacific Heights, where many VCs and business leaders reside, given that it's a neighborhood with probably one of the lowest population densities in the city.
hnriot 14y ago
In case you haven't noticed sf is bounded by the Pacific Ocean. It can't just grow and it already has a very high housing density. The only area that can absorb new housing is china basin (3rd st) and that is being developed. The rest is already full. Do we really want or feel that more people in sf is a good thing? Why not live down the peninsula or the east bay where there's an unlimited amount of space.
- saosebastiao 14y ago
  Even as early as the turn of the 20th century, there was private development on every single acre that was privately owned in Manhattan. It still grew and continued to be developed. You don't have to worry...if people stop liking cities, they will move to the peninsula or the east bay.
- greggman 14y ago
  It's certainly possible to grow SF up like NYC or HK. Both are bounded by water and yet manage to make more living quarters. As for whether building up and having more people is a good thing that really depends on the people, the culture and the management of the city. Personally Tokyo an awesome place to live with all kinds of activity, culture, etc and it has a population density much higher than SF so it's certainly true that an SF that grows up could be a great place.
  - WildUtah 14y ago
    okyo an awesome place to live with all kinds of activity, culture, etc and it has a population density much higher than SF so it's certainly true that an SF that grows up could be a great place. But Tokyo's average building height is lower than San Francisco's already. Tokyo did not grow "up." Tokyo has double the density of SF by having much, much less parking and much narrower streets. Eighty-five percent of street miles -- or kilometers -- in Tokyo are single lane streets, not single lane each way or single with a parking lane but true single lane. Tokyo also has no truck with SF's absurd excess of easy, cheap, and free parking. Building up harms quality of life. If you want more density, and you do, then you need to eliminate parking and turn it into housing.

w1ntermute 14y ago

This is why I'm hoping that Bloomberg's efforts to create a Silicon Alley are a success. Maybe SF will realize that it needs to appreciate the tech industry more when people start leaving for NYC. It would be great for tech to be based in a city where (a) it's not the biggest industry (so you don't get mental inbreeding), (b) there's proper public transportation that doesn't require hazmat cleanup because of people shitting and pissing all over it[0], (c) you don't have homeless people and drug addicts everywhere on the streets, and (d) you don't have rampant NIMBYism blocking the development of more efficient housing because they're afraid of "Manhattanization" destroying their "Bay view". 0: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Human-waste-shuts-down-BART-escalators-3735981.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Human-waste-shuts-down...

TruthElixirX 14y ago
Oh yes, lets look to Bloomberg to show us how to run a city. Shitty rent controls, banning all sorts of things, cops stopping people in the streets for security checks. Brilliant.
- zinssmeister 14y ago
  Seems to be working out for them... http://www.businessinsider.com/no-murders-in-new-york-2012-11 http://www.businessinsider.com/no-murders-in-new-york-2012-1...
- rayiner 14y ago
  Bloomberg didn't implement rent control. Stop and frisk is a huge boon for making cities safer. Every major city does it.
  - epoxyhockey 14y ago
    Stop and frisk is a huge boon for making cities safer. Every major city does it. Can you to cite a source for both of those claims? AFAIK, NYC is the only city that does stop and frisk, and it has been proven to be a program to 1) be heavily skewed towards frisking minorities, and 2) resulting in a 1.9% "success rate" in finding a weapon after having frisked the entire African American population once over in NYC (source: http://occupydesign.org/uncategorized/stop-frisk-infographic/ http://occupydesign.org/uncategorized/stop-frisk-infographic... ) It's also unconstitutional, but as long as you aren't the one being frisked, it's no problem, right?
    - rayiner 14y ago
      Other cities don't call it stop and frisk, but they do it nonetheless. This editorial gives some numbers: http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-07-09/news/32606335_1_frisks-murder-rate-nypd http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-07-09/news/32606335_1_f.... This article also gives some numbers: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonoberholtzer/2012/07/17/stop-and-frisk-by-the-numbers http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonoberholtzer/2012/07/17/stop.... 5.4% of stops between 2004 and 2009 resulted in arrests. That's actually a really high number, contrary to the characterization of the article. That's tens of thousands of instances of actual wrongdoing being caught. Stop and frisk does skew towards stopping minorities. That is not in and of itself necessarily problematic. Race, socioeconomic status, and crime are deeply correlated in the big cities. The unfortunate fact is that most crime in New York, Chicago, and LA are committed by blacks and hispanics, and in fact usually both the victims and the perpetrators are minorities. See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/06/nypd-report-details-crime_n_1862771.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/06/nypd-report-details.... Stop and frisk is not unconstitutional. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio. Playing armchair Supreme Court Justice when it comes to the 4th amendment is fraught with peril, for the simple reason that the founders explicitly left it open to judicial interpretation by using the wiggle word "unreasonable."

greeneggs 14y ago

Are cities obligated to grow forever? I don't want SF to turn into Tokyo or Manhattan or Hong Kong. Why not draw a line?

w1ntermute 14y ago
Why? Why should you get to say that the city can't grow when others want it to? I don't understand where this sense of entitlement comes from.
- epoxyhockey 14y ago
  I think that every SF resident is entitled to their opinion on the topic. Do we know how many residents are for housing growth and how many are against it?
  - rayiner 14y ago
    SF residents are entitled to their opinion on the topic, but their opinions must also be balanced against the rights of the landowners to develop their private property as they see fit. The point of zoning regulation is to allow a measure of urban planning to safeguard the health and safety of the city, not to allow existing landowners to freeze the city in its current state by restricting development on land they don't own.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
  - bitcartel 14y ago
    It's funny given the economic argument, how we don't often hear about plans to start building in Pacific Heights, where many VCs and business leaders reside, given that it's a neighborhood with probably one of the lowest population densities in the city.

hnriot 14y ago

In case you haven't noticed sf is bounded by the Pacific Ocean. It can't just grow and it already has a very high housing density. The only area that can absorb new housing is china basin (3rd st) and that is being developed. The rest is already full. Do we really want or feel that more people in sf is a good thing? Why not live down the peninsula or the east bay where there's an unlimited amount of space.

saosebastiao 14y ago
Even as early as the turn of the 20th century, there was private development on every single acre that was privately owned in Manhattan. It still grew and continued to be developed. You don't have to worry...if people stop liking cities, they will move to the peninsula or the east bay.
greggman 14y ago
It's certainly possible to grow SF up like NYC or HK. Both are bounded by water and yet manage to make more living quarters. As for whether building up and having more people is a good thing that really depends on the people, the culture and the management of the city. Personally Tokyo an awesome place to live with all kinds of activity, culture, etc and it has a population density much higher than SF so it's certainly true that an SF that grows up could be a great place.
- WildUtah 14y ago
  okyo an awesome place to live with all kinds of activity, culture, etc and it has a population density much higher than SF so it's certainly true that an SF that grows up could be a great place. But Tokyo's average building height is lower than San Francisco's already. Tokyo did not grow "up." Tokyo has double the density of SF by having much, much less parking and much narrower streets. Eighty-five percent of street miles -- or kilometers -- in Tokyo are single lane streets, not single lane each way or single with a parking lane but true single lane. Tokyo also has no truck with SF's absurd excess of easy, cheap, and free parking. Building up harms quality of life. If you want more density, and you do, then you need to eliminate parking and turn it into housing.