Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-05-2013, 12:11 PM
 
2,747 posts, read 3,304,444 times
Reputation: 3012

Advertisements

Hard choices ahead for growing S.F. - SFGate

Looks like SF is going to get a lot more crowded in the future
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-05-2013, 12:15 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, CA
2,518 posts, read 3,996,470 times
Reputation: 624
About time. The Bay Area has around 7 million people but only because of people being priced out, or moving away. It really should be around 11 million people by now if we track population change since 1990. That being said, S.F is going to have a lot of growing pains with the amount of anti-development NIMBYism around here, and an aging infrastructure (BART is literally falling apart / MUNI is ineffective).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 12:31 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,062 posts, read 106,950,530 times
Reputation: 115838
Wherever they build, they'd better keep rising water levels in mind, and not build to close to Bay or ocean. Not on at ground level, anyway. It would be nice if they stuck to the general mediterranean theme, in architecture, at least part of the time. Try to keep in character with existing architecture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 01:53 PM
 
343 posts, read 443,001 times
Reputation: 150
Easy enough to tax new development and new residents, along with current residents, to pay for infrastructure upgrades. Doesn't seem terribly complicated to me, beyond the usual NIMBY/I got mine now I'm going to pull up the ladder behind me voices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 01:54 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, CA
2,518 posts, read 3,996,470 times
Reputation: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obamadon1 View Post
Doesn't seem terribly complicated to me, beyond the usual NIMBY/I got mine now I'm going to pull up the ladder behind me voices.
That's not complicated? It's basically stagnated Bay Area population growth for nearly 15 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 01:55 PM
 
343 posts, read 443,001 times
Reputation: 150
That said, if SF shoots itself in the foot with some development moratorium, I hope Oakland welcomes those new residents with open arms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 01:56 PM
 
6,802 posts, read 6,677,962 times
Reputation: 1911
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
That's not complicated? It's basically stagnated Bay Area population growth for nearly 15 years.
And SF voted down finding a replacement for Hetch Hetchy water to top things off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 01:58 PM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,572 posts, read 27,264,824 times
Reputation: 9002
Quote:
That's not complicated? It's basically stagnated Bay Area growth for nearly 15 years
11 million people here would be horrible.

Quote:
Wherever they build, they'd better keep rising water levels in mind, and not build to close to Bay or ocean.
Well due to the California Coastal Commission, no new structures can be built within 75 feet of the water.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 01:58 PM
 
343 posts, read 443,001 times
Reputation: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
That's not complicated? It's basically stagnated Bay Area population growth for nearly 15 years.
It may be difficult, but it's not complicated. I basically explained it right there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2013, 02:03 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, CA
2,518 posts, read 3,996,470 times
Reputation: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentoo View Post
11 million people here would be horrible.
Yes, NOW it would since the Bay Area infrastructure from BART to MUNI to the lack of advanced things like "roundabouts" in San Francisco have all basically stopped evolving sans 1990.

But places like Paris, or even New York, with much higher population densities than anywhere in the Bay Area have managed to create wonderful cities with better public transportation, better walkability, and just overall better infrastructure.

The NIMBYism has made this area unbearable for anyone making under $100,000 to live, let alone own a decent home in a place without gun shots ringing out every few minutes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:48 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top