33 ms·

Where do you propose "more supply" be built? Pretty much every inch of SF is already occupied by something[0]. I suppose we could start landfilling part of the

Where do you propose "more supply" be built? Pretty much every inch of SF is already occupied by something[0]. I suppose we could start landfilling part of the bay a la Boston. [0] https://www.google.com/maps/place/San+Francisco,+CA/@37.7738299,-122.4049461,7687m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x80859a6d00690021:0x4a501367f076adff https://www.google.com/maps/place/San+Francisco,+CA/@37.7738...

Hobotron1 12y ago
There's a third, woefully underutilized dimension I can think of.
- swang 12y ago
  Yep. A lot of NIMBYism preventing that.
- jsprogrammer 12y ago
  Which would typically require demolition of existing structures. Most property owners don't have the capital to destroy their current structures just to replace them with taller buildings. It would also require displacing current residents, who won't have anywhere else to live while the new building is constructed.
  - Hobotron1 12y ago
    > Most property owners don't have the capital to destroy their current structures just to replace them with taller buildings. There are those that do who would gladly fork over a good chunk of change for their lots. > It would also require displacing current residents, who won't have anywhere else to live while the new building is constructed. Yeah, lets inconvenience 99% of people just so those few won't be.
    - jsprogrammer 12y ago
      Who exactly is being inconvenienced? Those who do not currently live in the city?
      - Hobotron1 12y ago
        Current tenants- paying insane prices for rent And yes, those that would like to live in the city but can't because of the ridiculous rent or simply lack of rent-able places.
        rdl 12y ago
        And the people who would like their pensions to be fully funded due to investment gains from new tech companies in SF, currently hindered by rent. And people who want to use exciting new products built by SF companies which are limited or don't happen due to lack of office space. It's a drag on not only the city but the state, nation, and world.
        ndnichols 12y ago
        Are you being sarcastic? Or do you genuinely think the lack of office space in SF is a drag on the world?
        tdaltonc 12y ago
        Not office space so much as housing. "But for the tight limits on construction in California’s Bay Area, they reckon, employment there would be about five times larger than it is. In work that has yet to be published they tot up similar distortions across the whole economy from 1964 on and find that American GDP in 2009 was as much as 13.5% lower than it otherwise could have been. At current levels of output that is a cost of more than $2 trillion a year, or nearly $10,000 per person." http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21647622-land-centre-pre-industrial-economy-has-returned-constraint-growth?zid=311&ah=308cac674cccf554ce65cf926868bbc2 http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21647622-land-centre-...
        rdl 11y ago
  - yunesj 12y ago
    > It would also require displacing current residents One of the drawbacks of renting is that you aren't guaranteed housing when your lease expires.
    - jsprogrammer 12y ago
      In SF, when a lease "expires" it converts to an indefinite lease with a 30-day notice from the tenant to terminate. The lessor may only terminate for just-cause with varying notice periods and possible compensation to the lessee for damages caused.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - encoderer 12y ago
        Landlords push people out of housing in SF every day. It's often under shameful circumstances. And its not just Ellis Act, though that's a big part of it. Suffice to say, the lease isn't the problem.
encoderer 12y ago
Manhattan population density is 4x San Francisco. I don't want to see the city turn into Manhattan but we have a lot of negotiating room.
- _delirium 12y ago
  Even Paris, a city that has banned high-rises, has a population density about 2.5x that of San Francisco. I realize SF doesn't want Miami-style condo towers everywhere, but there's a lot of room to densify just by putting in more mid-rise buildings in the 5-6 story range, rather than having so much of the city be low-rise.
slykat 12y ago
If you ask any architect or urban planner, you'd realize that San Francisco has plenty of room for further development. This isn't Manhattan island.
yunesj 12y ago
I would propose more supply be built on the land owned by developers who want to build more supply. For reference, the street view below is the heart of the Mission. Unfortunately, most people here would rather preserve the slums than build enough housing to support a diverse bunch of people. https://www.google.com/maps/@37.765862,-122.419784,3a,75y,267.78h,78.75t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1swKhRkx_occjOw3PD-Fw9aQ!2e0 https://www.google.com/maps/@37.765862,-122.419784,3a,75y,26...
- jsprogrammer 12y ago
  And what is preventing those developers from building more supply? I've seen plenty of construction going on in the city.
  - mahyarm 12y ago
    Permits, height laws, comment periods where some nimby will block the development. Otherwise they would of done it already because there is a lot of relative cash to be made to the cost of building. On a relative per capita basis, SF is building a lot less than lets say houston or similar. And the reason why it's a lot slower is because of all of the above.
    - pbreit 12y ago
      Uh, even if anyone aspired to be Houston, it's not surrounded on 3 sides by water. The developers are not entirely innocent since they always, without exception, ask for more than they are allowed, hence the endless reviews.
      - oxryly1 12y ago
        It's a chicken and egg situation. Developers propose larger than they want because inevitably the negotiations with city and neighbors reduce their plans.
  - kqr2 12y ago
    This is a good editorial on trying to develop housing in the Mission: How San Francisco creates its own housing crisis http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/How-San-Francisco-creates-its-own-housing-crisis-5139869.php http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/How-San-Fran... It took 6 long years with lots of fighting to try and develop a relatively modest 12 unit condo complex that met all zoning requirements.
pbreit 12y ago
Seems like SOMA could be much taller (and infinitely prettier) without creating congestion problems in the rest of the City.

Hobotron1 12y ago

There's a third, woefully underutilized dimension I can think of.

swang 12y ago
Yep. A lot of NIMBYism preventing that.
jsprogrammer 12y ago
Which would typically require demolition of existing structures. Most property owners don't have the capital to destroy their current structures just to replace them with taller buildings. It would also require displacing current residents, who won't have anywhere else to live while the new building is constructed.
- Hobotron1 12y ago
  > Most property owners don't have the capital to destroy their current structures just to replace them with taller buildings. There are those that do who would gladly fork over a good chunk of change for their lots. > It would also require displacing current residents, who won't have anywhere else to live while the new building is constructed. Yeah, lets inconvenience 99% of people just so those few won't be.
  - jsprogrammer 12y ago
    Who exactly is being inconvenienced? Those who do not currently live in the city?
    - Hobotron1 12y ago
      Current tenants- paying insane prices for rent And yes, those that would like to live in the city but can't because of the ridiculous rent or simply lack of rent-able places.
      - rdl 12y ago
        And the people who would like their pensions to be fully funded due to investment gains from new tech companies in SF, currently hindered by rent. And people who want to use exciting new products built by SF companies which are limited or don't happen due to lack of office space. It's a drag on not only the city but the state, nation, and world.
        ndnichols 12y ago
        Are you being sarcastic? Or do you genuinely think the lack of office space in SF is a drag on the world?
        tdaltonc 12y ago
        Not office space so much as housing. "But for the tight limits on construction in California’s Bay Area, they reckon, employment there would be about five times larger than it is. In work that has yet to be published they tot up similar distortions across the whole economy from 1964 on and find that American GDP in 2009 was as much as 13.5% lower than it otherwise could have been. At current levels of output that is a cost of more than $2 trillion a year, or nearly $10,000 per person." http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21647622-land-centre-pre-industrial-economy-has-returned-constraint-growth?zid=311&ah=308cac674cccf554ce65cf926868bbc2 http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21647622-land-centre-...
        rdl 11y ago
- yunesj 12y ago
  > It would also require displacing current residents One of the drawbacks of renting is that you aren't guaranteed housing when your lease expires.
  - jsprogrammer 12y ago
    In SF, when a lease "expires" it converts to an indefinite lease with a 30-day notice from the tenant to terminate. The lessor may only terminate for just-cause with varying notice periods and possible compensation to the lessee for damages caused.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - encoderer 12y ago
      Landlords push people out of housing in SF every day. It's often under shameful circumstances. And its not just Ellis Act, though that's a big part of it. Suffice to say, the lease isn't the problem.

encoderer 12y ago

Manhattan population density is 4x San Francisco. I don't want to see the city turn into Manhattan but we have a lot of negotiating room.

_delirium 12y ago
Even Paris, a city that has banned high-rises, has a population density about 2.5x that of San Francisco. I realize SF doesn't want Miami-style condo towers everywhere, but there's a lot of room to densify just by putting in more mid-rise buildings in the 5-6 story range, rather than having so much of the city be low-rise.

slykat 12y ago

If you ask any architect or urban planner, you'd realize that San Francisco has plenty of room for further development. This isn't Manhattan island.

yunesj 12y ago

I would propose more supply be built on the land owned by developers who want to build more supply. For reference, the street view below is the heart of the Mission. Unfortunately, most people here would rather preserve the slums than build enough housing to support a diverse bunch of people. https://www.google.com/maps/@37.765862,-122.419784,3a,75y,267.78h,78.75t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1swKhRkx_occjOw3PD-Fw9aQ!2e0 https://www.google.com/maps/@37.765862,-122.419784,3a,75y,26...

jsprogrammer 12y ago
And what is preventing those developers from building more supply? I've seen plenty of construction going on in the city.
- mahyarm 12y ago
  Permits, height laws, comment periods where some nimby will block the development. Otherwise they would of done it already because there is a lot of relative cash to be made to the cost of building. On a relative per capita basis, SF is building a lot less than lets say houston or similar. And the reason why it's a lot slower is because of all of the above.
  - pbreit 12y ago
    Uh, even if anyone aspired to be Houston, it's not surrounded on 3 sides by water. The developers are not entirely innocent since they always, without exception, ask for more than they are allowed, hence the endless reviews.
    - oxryly1 12y ago
      It's a chicken and egg situation. Developers propose larger than they want because inevitably the negotiations with city and neighbors reduce their plans.
- kqr2 12y ago
  This is a good editorial on trying to develop housing in the Mission: How San Francisco creates its own housing crisis http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/How-San-Francisco-creates-its-own-housing-crisis-5139869.php http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/How-San-Fran... It took 6 long years with lots of fighting to try and develop a relatively modest 12 unit condo complex that met all zoning requirements.

pbreit 12y ago

Seems like SOMA could be much taller (and infinitely prettier) without creating congestion problems in the rest of the City.