3 ms·
There is nothing really lending SF towards big-mega-dense city status. Manhattan has bedrock and flat terrain, which is great for building underground subways a
by joonix 13y ago
There is nothing really lending SF towards big-mega-dense city status. Manhattan has bedrock and flat terrain, which is great for building underground subways and tall buildings and letting people walk around. SF has hilly terrain and earthquakes.
I hate to say it, but maybe we should just leave SF to be sort of a "jewel." Let the tech companies and employees who can afford to live there remain.
Then, why not pick a place like Oakland or Alameda or perhaps somewhere more south of San Francisco, and build the mega dense business center of our dreams?
Maybe it makes more sense to recognize that SF is beautiful, rare, and limited in space, and leave it be. After all, it's basically the size of some "elite" neighborhoods in other big cities. Do the poor have a right to be accommodated in SF? There is a ton of space around it that can be developed more affordably and let's not forget about the rest of the country.
No, I don't live in SF. I just don't see why it should be turned into a New York clone.
- samstave 13y agoKeep your grubby hands off Alameda!!! Which really is the jewel in the bay area. SHhhh.... Actually - what I would prefer is to create a massive floating platform and build a large number of micro-apartments on this platform - with workspace, conference rooms, cafes and grocery. Put this floating place just off shore and let singles and couples rent the places.
- nostrademons 13y agoThat's Marin, where all the rich professionals who work in SF live, and where they intentionally prevent development because they like their bucolic atmosphere.
- sanoli 13y agoSo that's what that Dead Kennedys song was about..!
- michaelochurch 13y agoNo, I don't live in SF. I just don't see why it should be turned into a New York clone. I've lived in New York for 7 years and I'll be leaving (at least for a while) soon and there is exactly one major negative of New York: the cost of real estate. Of course, there are cultural problems-- douchebags, shitty cutthroat people, unimaginative technology scene-- but all of that garbage flows directly from the extreme cost of living. Given that San Francisco has now been fully infected by the one major negative of Manhattan, and is already experiencing the attendant cultural complications, it really has nothing to lose by fully Manhattanizing.
- Apocryphon 13y agoThat's a grand idea: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5032555 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5032555 the author has said that there's a far more modest development plan somewhat mirroring his proposal: http://www.grandboulevard.net http://www.grandboulevard.net