Bay Area Regional Planner: The Board Game
kickstarter.com
kickstarter.com
Also well-done is the rule that the state of the economy determines the highest zone that can be built, since a zone does no good if not actually populated, and ghost towns benefit nobody.
The rules about how commute times change if you build adjacent to C/D zones or out in the middle of R zones seem quite well thought-out as well. Though that does raise the question of why they can't be brought down again by building a D zone (so more people can live closer to work).
This does rather subtly demonstrate the primary problem: players in this game have to care about goals like "keep small towns small" or "at least 5 R-1 zones in ...", and treat those as having parity with rent and commute times. (Obviously, without conflicting constraints there'd be no tension and no game; that this is a game nicely demonstrates the problem.) Not to mention rules like "Upzoning brings a zone up one level", since within the rules of the game, C and D zones are strictly preferable to R zones, and having more housing is strictly better than having less housing. (And, obviously, repeatedly re-zoning the same area in reality would be more disruptive than changing it once.)
As another commenter said, "the only winning move is not to play". A game like this makes a clearer and cleverer political statement than a pile of ads and protests.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1700980409/california-w...
> The game was created to be a "practical demonstration of the present system of land grabbing with all its usual outcomes and consequences". She based the game on the economic principles of Georgism, a system proposed by Henry George, with the object of demonstrating how rents enrich property owners and impoverish tenants.
http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2015/12/no-progress-for-a...
Basically, they built the SF Central Subway all the way up to the Pagoda site in North Beach. Due to bureaucratic BS, the city can't buy the site and therefore they can't turn it into a subway station. As a result, the city's only subway line (other than BART) will stop at Chinatown.
It's stuff like this that just proves the impotence of the SF government.
The environmental review process really wrecks projects like this. It's also a favorite tool of NIMBYs, especially in California. City getting too dense for your taste? Let's argue it's bad for the environment, even though urban living is better for the environment than sprawl and the housing will be built there instead.
The rule that Marin can't be upzoned is hilarious.
This is why there's the double decker tunnels downtown - one was intended to branch off towards Marin.
After the loans on the construction of the Golden Gate Bridge were paid off (some time in the 1960s or 1970s) instead of eliminating the tolls, it was decided to use the revenue from the tolls to subsidize public transportation between SF and the counties to the north of it. The buses and ferries between Marin and SF remain very good IMHO.
Also, how does that really work out in practice - can I buy a house in a residential neighborhood and open a noisy biker bar in it?
http://urbankchoze.blogspot.com/2014/04/japanese-zoning.html
versus US style "euclidian" zoining:
http://urbankchoze.blogspot.ca/2014/04/euclidian-zoning.html
I mean, I suppose that even someone making a 100K salary can't buy a house easily by themselves, but at least they can live here in a decent apartment. The real losers are people who can't even afford an apartment to rent in the Bay Area. By and large those people aren't software engineers.
That's right: the people moving in are not the winners. Their salaries are high, but they're spending a large percentage of it in rent. Granted, overall, they're pretty well off, but they're not really "the winners" compared to people who actually own the land.
Tech workers make up ~8% of SF's population.
Programmers are low-paid highly-paid workers. (Especially when you factor in rents in SF.)
If tech workers didn't move in, it would be folks in biotech, or finance, or high-end sales, or...
There are many factors that drive up rents in SF. The primary -and by far largest- factor is the fact that it's nearly impossible to build new housing. Get the City Supervisors to hang obstructionist landlords, NIMBYs, and Real Estate Investment Firms who are currently making mad bank [0] out to dry and you'll -relatively- quickly see rents drop back to vaguely sane levels.
The enemy isn't tech workers. The enemy is those who choose to make obscene profits, rather than permitting others to build housing to meet current and near-future demand.
[0] And have been for at least ten years.
The reason SF landlords are getting away with the absurd rent they're charging is because there is a very low vacancy rate AND there are enough people willing to pay 50% or more of their $6-$7k take-home pay just to live in a cool neighborhood.
I don't know how much the average plumber makes, but I don't think it would skew the market in the same way.
(http://www.simplyhired.com/salaries-k-plumber-l-san-francisc...)
0 : https://ksr-ugc.imgix.net/assets/005/082/476/9ce6e22f89f241f...
Developed as an educational tool for the
San Francisco Bay Area Renters' Federation
The SF BARF? Seriously?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_Bus_and_Rail_Company_...
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.631347,12.2397643,3a,20.9y,1...
A bunch of party-poopers didn't like that idea. :-)
Anyone who has been in 101 traffic knows what I mean. There were times I slept in my truck while in San Francisco, instead of dealing with that traffic. I was in construction at the time, so my appearance the next day didn't matter.
I would like to see the county/towns approve a few variances. I honestly don't think they ever pass them, but they happily take in the fees. Years ago I had a chance to buy a cabin in Laginitas, but the zoning was agricultural and the lady at the planning department, said she would take my money, but my chances were zilch. She was just being honest. I still wish I bought that cabin though.
I don't have an answer to the housing crisis. I would like to see more harbors built. Harbors where you can live on your boat.
I want to clear up a few misconceptions. In San Francisco, most Union Plumbers, and Electricians are making $100/hr. Housing has been a problem in Marin and San Francisco forever. I don't like it. Most Marinites wanted Bart, but at the time the state didn't have the money. I know because my father worked on that project for over a year.
Part of the problem is the head honcho wants to live/work in a very desirable city/location. If they want employees to show up for work--pay them more, or set up shop in a less desirable place to live. Or, let them telecommute?
Again--I've though about this for years, and I don't see a solution. My solution has been living on a boat, but it's not for everyone. I truly think if their were more harbors that allowed live-aboards it might help? And approve a few trailer parks?
This describes a large portion of Europe, where people manage to live and work just fine.
Here's street view of what looks like a fairly central place in Mill Valley: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9066516,-122.5461843,3a,75y,...
And here's one of downtown Monselice, a smallish town in Italy: https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2419025,11.7514149,3a,75y,30...
They're both fairly pleasant places in my experience.
By European standards, Monselice doesn't have small roads.
How about a nice game of chess?