07-02-2014, 05:06 PM
(07-02-2014, 04:38 PM)ferrari link Wrote:As long as we remain a free market economy there is no way to reduce that differential and I am sure you know that. It is physically impossible to build enough affordable housing in Palo Alto, or Malibu, to reduce the differential without destroying the place, in which case no one would choose to live there. What is your proposed solution?
On the contrary -- I think if we became a free-market economy with respect to housing, we'd reduce the differential. If University Ave were leveled in an earthquake tomorrow, it'd probably be illegal to reconstruct it in the exact same form. Why? A number of things, including minimum parking requirements and other zoning laws.
And I think people underestimate the amount of density you can generate from simply building a little bit higher. Paris and Barcelona, for example, are very dense cities -- but are certainly aesthetically charming and don't exactly have a ton of skyscrapers.
If you built, say, the Sunset neighborhood at Mission district density, you'd have a ton more housing -- and no one would exactly cry about the fabric of San Francisco being ripped asunder.
