article saying that SF Bay Area needs DENSE HOUSING (San Diego: real estate, apartments)

[neutrino78x]

This is what I've been saying for a while and this article supports me. It is saying that we need more housing built in the Bay Area. DENSE HOUSING, not Single Family Homes.

Sorry, It's Not Tech Money Ruining San Francisco

I would support a ban on new single family homes in SF and SJ. As the existing SFHs slowly fall apart and are ready to be replaced with new buildings, the law should say that the new building has to house at least three families; three units arranged vertically in the same condo.

[neutrino78x]

Check out the images of theoretical Google employee housing. That would help. Although, the real problem with the campuses is that they are not built near existing public transit. If Google wanted to put their campus in Mountain View, it should have been less than a mile from the light rail.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by neutrino78x

This is what I've been saying for a while and this article supports me. It is saying that we need more housing built in the Bay Area. DENSE HOUSING, not Single Family Homes.

Sorry, It's Not Tech Money Ruining San Francisco

I would support a ban on new single family homes in SF and SJ. As the existing SFHs slowly fall apart and are ready to be replaced with new buildings, the law should say that the new building has to house at least three families; three units arranged vertically in the same condo.

I know I'll never sell my undense duplex with a real front and back yard when I inherit it. I don't want tacky condos ruining my neighborhood.

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

I know I'll never sell my undense duplex with a real front and back yard when I inherit it. I don't want tacky condos ruining my neighborhood.

lol then don't complain about the cost of housing, dude. This is how you solve it. DENSITY.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by neutrino78x

lol then don't complain about the cost of housing, dude. This is how you solve it. DENSITY.

Places like RWC and San Carlos don't need skyscrapers sticking up like a stick in mud. It's an eyesore. Build that high density housing in Oakland and the East Bay where there is no history.

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Places like RWC and San Carlos don't need skyscrapers sticking up like a stick in mud. It's an eyesore.

Again, don't complain about the cost of housing, then.

I guess the Golden Gate is an eyesore. It's far larger.

Build that high density housing in Oakland and the East Bay where there is no history.

Oakland has no history? Have you never heard of Jack London?

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by neutrino78x

Again, don't complain about the cost of housing, then.

I guess the Golden Gate is an eyesore. It's far larger.



Oakland has no history? Have you never heard of Jack London?

The golden gate is a monument with history and doesn't take away from potential real estate that's actually pleasant to live in.

That's not very impressive. Sure there's a few victorians but Oakland has suffered from urban decay so long that it's reboot wouldn't hurt too much.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Places like RWC and San Carlos don't need skyscrapers sticking up like a stick in mud. It's an eyesore. Build that high density housing in Oakland and the East Bay where there is no history.

There is a wide spectrum of "dense." We should say denser. RWC doesn't need 20 story buildings. But 3-6 story multifamily buildings are not out of scale for the areas around transit stations. We can't only build single family homes and wonder why we have no space.

This is a great explanation.
Home Page - Missing Middle Housing

We need the "missing middle" and the mid-rise in all of our bigger towns and suburbs. I.e. like the Peninsula downtowns.

[pacific2]

We have mid-rise housing here in South Orange County, and I much prefer it to the monstrous high-rises of my former town, NYC.

Here, in Aliso Viejo (midway between LA and San Diego, and just next to Laguna Beach),you don't feel like you are in the middle of a concrete jungle, even though most residences are of the attached type, with primarily condos/townhouses/apartments and relatively few SFR's.

AV feels like a "mini-city," if that makes sense. It's only 7.47 sq mi with about 50,000 people. Traffic is heavy, but flowing, on the main arteries, and sparse in residential areas.

It helps, too, that we have a lot of parks; and the ocean is just minutes away. So, while we see our neighbors all the time, we also have a lot of opportunities to "commune with nature."

https://www.google.com/search?q=alis...JXB2UQ_AUICSgE

That being said, we are not an isolated community, and have plenty of tech, pharmaceutical and biomed firms here. There's a lot of creative energy in AV, and much of it is directed at business endeavors ("SoCal's Most Entrepreneurial City," per a MIT report). So, we are very far from being "Mayberry RFD," but we are an entrepreneurial hotspot.

This city used to be a bargain, but prices are now rising as they are in much of CA.

Since we have mid-rises, we are still able to enjoy things like a view of the mountains from our homes, or while walking or driving about the city. This opportunity is lost in many cities to the north of us since they have high rises.

This type of master plan doesn't work for everyone, since there are still many who want to live in large SFR's with a big yard. Obviously, that type tends to avoid mid-rise cities like AV.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Build that high density housing in Oakland and the East Bay where there is no history.

You haven't spent much time in Oakland at all. Downtown has a bunch of awesome historical buildings. Many neighborhoods (like my own) have a mix of housing types landing from Victorians, to craftsman to mediterraneans to mid century mid-rises.

There are plenty of underutilized parking lots downtown that should get high rises. And blocks on Broadway north of downtown that are getting mid-rises, and other potential spaces that should get a similar treatment.

We should be filling in housing on empty lots, surface parking lots and other underutilized spaces.