why not build up in the bay area (San Francisco, Corona: apartment complexes, new construction)

[roadwarrior101]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

What the Bay Area needs is fewer people, not more crowding. Development invites population increase. Which causes every kind of problem all of you complain about ceaselessly on the forum.

Like gawddam cancer.

Other way around. Its not building more that invites more people. Its that more people are already here and still coming due to jobs, attraction to the Bay Area, etc. They're going to be here regardless. Either we build the needed housing and beef up the infrastructure and public transportation or we don't. If we don't, we'll see prices go even more out of whack and more suburban sprawl. I don't think that is the solution.

[Maceart]

Driverless cars isn't happening for a long time. They're on the same level as robot maids. Nope, not happening in my generation.

What the Bay Area needs is more investment in density and public transportation. Megacities around the world such as Tokyo, London, and Paris support much higher density; look at places such as Amsterdam and Taipei. Not saying the Bay Area should get to that type of density, but people who say "the Bay Area should stop growing" are just being selfish; of course people want to live here. Best weather, job opportunities, high salaries (high cost of living). Why reject newcomers?

More density + Better BART + High speed rail would do wonders to the Bay Area.

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by Maceart

Driverless cars isn't happening for a long time. They're on the same level as robot maids. Nope, not happening in my generation.

What the Bay Area needs is more investment in density and public transportation. Megacities around the world such as Tokyo, London, and Paris support much higher density; look at places such as Amsterdam and Taipei. Not saying the Bay Area should get to that type of density, but people who say "the Bay Area should stop growing" are just being selfish; of course people want to live here. Best weather, job opportunities, high salaries (high cost of living). Why reject newcomers?

More density + Better BART + High speed rail would do wonders to the Bay Area.

I agree with you, besides the high speed rail part.

The biggest issue is not having any public transportation that connects the east bay with the SV.

[gizmo980]

Originally Posted by Maceart

Driverless cars isn't happening for a long time. They're on the same level as robot maids. Nope, not happening in my generation.

I agree, as IMO there are too many logistical and safety concerns to get them rolling by 2017! I doubt we'll see them within the next 20 years, outside of maybe some Google folks "driving" them between downtown MV/PA & their campus. Quite frankly, the whole idea terrifies me - plus I actually LIKE to drive, and am too much of a control freak to consider such a thing.

More density + Better BART + High speed rail would do wonders to the Bay Area.

Originally Posted by shooting4life

I agree with you, besides the high speed rail part.

The biggest issue is not having any public transportation that connects the east bay with the SV.

Excellent news on that front, and about g'dam time: 10-mile BART extension to San Jose clears hurdle - San Jose Mercury News

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by gizmo980

I agree, as IMO there are too many logistical and safety concerns to get them rolling by 2017! I doubt we'll see them within the next 20 years, outside of maybe some Google folks "driving" them between downtown MV/PA & their campus. Quite frankly, the whole idea terrifies me - plus I actually LIKE to drive, and am too much of a control freak to consider such a thing.





Excellent news on that front, and about g'dam time: 10-mile BART extension to San Jose clears hurdle - San Jose Mercury News

That will help, but I'm speaking more towards the San Mateo to Cupertino corridor which is completely void of public transit besides Caltrain, which only connects the peninsula.

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

What the Bay Area needs is fewer people, not more crowding. Development invites population increase. Which causes every kind of problem all of you complain about ceaselessly on the forum.

Like gawddam cancer.

News flash: the population increase came anyway. So rather than house them closer in, you pushed them out--toward Stockton and Sacramento.

[Oakformonday]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Seeing as I have lived here longer than you, and most other posters on this forum, have been alive, um no, I'm calling seniority.

But wisecracks aside between us, the issue really isn't that people have to leave - nice as that would be. The sane policy is to stop encouraging further growth. Even you could stay.

There is a time for growing and expanding. Building a population of diversity and commerce that offers great variety in all things to thrive on and enjoy.

And then there is a point at which growth needs to stop - and focus turn to sustainability of quality. The whole planet is long past that point. Growth unchecked eventually becomes disease. We are there.

I do think we need to plan for a future that is going to happen as opposed to sticking our heads in the sand and doing nothing. You may want to go down to the boarder with your gun and protect the our area from too many people, yes? Most growth is going to be from immigration. Do you have a plan to close off our borders?

Listen, I just think we should build and prepare for the future. You don't have to agree with me. It's okay. BTW, there are many parts of California (the majority actually) that are rural. You may want to check them out, Lot of choices!!!

[NOLA101]

Originally Posted by roadwarrior101

Other way around. Its not building more that invites more people. Its that more people are already here and still coming due to jobs, attraction to the Bay Area, etc. They're going to be here regardless.

You have it completely reversed. People come to an area because of available housing and amenities. Building more housing will just encourage more people to come.

Why do you think the Inland Empire has boomed so much while coastal Southern CA has barely grown? Because people prefer living in Palmdale over Corona del Mar? LOL.

Why do you think dumps like Tracy have boomed while Marin, SF and the Peninsula have grown very slowly? Same reason.

California needs no more people. The beauty and attractiveness of the state is just being destroyed by too many people. The SF mayor is whoring the city to developers, and will probably destroy what makes the city attractive in the first place (it sure as hell isn't condo boxes).

[marcopolo666]

I'm shocked that nobody has mentioned the 500-pound gorilla in the room : earthquakes.

[felinius]

Originally Posted by NOLA101

You have it completely reversed. People come to an area because of available housing and amenities. Building more housing will just encourage more people to come.

Have you job searched recently? All the jobs are out here in the Bay. Every time I try looking inland there is too much competition for a job by more experienced folk, and less positions, period. So it's not housing, which there is PLENTY of.