5 ms·

So much of this would go away if the city would just loosen its building and zoning regulations.

• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
  • malandrew 13y ago
    Not necessarily. A lot of people live here for a lot of different reasons. I live in SF for the people despite the way the city is organized and run. The types of people from the techies to the hippies are what make San Francisco desirable. The "quaintness" people admires? Who cares? What matters if that changes with growth so long as it changes for the better? Instead of being against all growth, why not just support growth that improves your quality of life? For example, instead of only being okay with rent control, permit a mechanism where you can trade your rent control on your current place for rent control in a better newly constructed building. Further still, you could create a market for people to exchange rent control in one unit for rent control in another unit. This would permit builders to voluntarily submit to rent control as a way to get access to land. i.e. I want to develop a piece of land into 20 units, where there are now two units. I could offer the tenants of those two units at the same rent price in nicer and larger units in a building I recently built.
• steven2012 13y ago
  Yes, all that wasted space in useless Golden Gate Park that could be used for housing!
• wpietri 13y ago
  Why pick on the city? So much of it would go away if the cities in which these companies exist would loosen their zoning regulations. Then we could get rid of the buses.
  • muzz 13y ago
    Which cities would that be? Mountain View? Palo Alto? Menlo Park? Cupertino? South San Francisco? The 100+ other cities in the Bay Area? If zoning were truly the major obstacle, we would see more building where there is the least amount of zoning.