3 ms·
A lot of people like San Francisco the way it is. Razing half the city and building skyscrapers is their worst nightmare. Especially if doing so would just be a
by wilfra 14y ago
A lot of people like San Francisco the way it is. Razing half the city and building skyscrapers is their worst nightmare. Especially if doing so would just be a way to temporarily house more tech workers in the middle of what may be another bubble.
After people flooded the city and drove up rents during the dot com boom and then fled the city when the bubble burst, real San Franciscans were still there. And if it happens again, they'll still be there afterward. And in 50 or 100 years, they and their families will still be there. How many coders working at startups in the city today can say the same? Who do you think should have more say in the future of the city? Those who care deeply about it's past, present and future - or those who are only looking out for their own short and medium term housing needs?
The old guard - who have the power - wont allow your suggestion to happen in our lifetime. The best you can hope for is slow, methodical babysteps in that direction.
- rayiner 14y agoCalifornia is an undivided sovereign entity--the City of San Francisco is merely an administrative subdivision. The relevant constituency is the population of California, and any Californian who wants to live in San Francisco should be able to do so without protectionist zoning regulations that put up artificial roadblocks to migration.
- wilfra 14y agoYou can try making that argument to the folks who handle zoning for the City of San Francisco. Seems unlikely that will persuade them to let you demolish half the city, but it's worth a shot I guess.