[HN Gopher] SF's Historic Preservation Rules Are in Limbo, All P...
___________________________________________________________________
SF's Historic Preservation Rules Are in Limbo, All Part of CA's
Push for Housing
Author : jseliger
Score : 8 points
Date : 2024-08-01 17:28 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (thefrisc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (thefrisc.com)
| blackeyeblitzar wrote:
| Sad. Communities should be allowed to preserve their character
| and charm and preserve quality of life for their existing
| residents. This forced top down push for density doesn't make
| sense - there is a whole country of places to live in, and yet
| everyone feels entitled to crowd into expensive and desirable
| places at the price point that fits them. It's basically taking
| away from the people that have put down roots for newcomers.
| Personally it feels unfair and unnecessary because the same
| people have other places in the country to choose from where they
| could live and work - they just don't want to accept the trade
| offs and live within their means.
| ramesh31 wrote:
| Cities are living, evolving, organisms that should function to
| serve the reason for their existence: the amazing efficiency of
| colocating so many people and resources. San Francisco is, by a
| large margin, the least dynamic city I have ever encountered in
| the US. For a place that prides itself on progressivism, it's
| mindblowing how obsessed they are with preserving things
| exactly the way they are.
| zjp wrote:
| If I didn't want to live around other people I would simply
| move out of America's second densest city and not live in one
| of its most economically productive megaregions.
| pieix wrote:
| > This forced top down push for density
|
| You have it backwards -- the push for density is bottom-up,
| coming from the people who want to live in SF. The top-down
| elements are the regulations imposed to keep the city from
| changing.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-08-01 23:01 UTC)