Comment by llsf | Hacker News Reader

Comment by llsf | Hacker News Reader

SF needs more multifamily homes (apartment buildings). Now, I can see how SB827 could have scared lots of people, like in SF.

If SB827 had passed, I am sure some SF neighborhoods and cities in the Bay, would have either defund existing or stop any new public transit projects, to avoid up zoning.

I think the City should just create a plan like Haussmann did in Paris. The City should start by preempting all the lots that are underused (parking lots, gas stations, car wash, single story commercial buildings, etc.) and build to the limit for the area. We could even keep the single story business at ground level (car wash, some parking, etc.). That should bring lots of units to the market.

Cities in the Bay should build more too. It is a bit crazy to have Apple or Google, creating those giant campuses for 10's of thousands employees, in cities that do not build anything close to accommodate the families of those employees. Cupertino and Mountain View welcome taxes from Apple or Google, but do not do much to house those employees and their families. Maybe every city should provide at least the same number of units as they have employees.

There are only about 20 gas stations in San Francisco. You can't have a city without gas stations; they're just as essential as housing.

> You can't have a city without gas stations

Manhattan has ~1 gas station per 42,000 residents, and it seems to be doing just fine. Back of the envelop calculation puts the San Francisco ratio to ~1 gas station per 43,000 residents, so it is about on par with other dense areas of the US.

I just searched a few times on Google Maps in different neighborhoods and I think I found about 50 gas stations, which didn't feel like a complete list to me. Especially along Van Ness and Lombard (signed as US-101), 19th Avenue (signed as CA-1), and exits from the 101 and 280, they are fairly numerous.

Google Maps found more than 20 in the southeastern neighborhoods alone!

I don't mean to argue from anecdotes, but I've never known anyone who lives in San Francisco and owns a car to complain that gas stations are particularly rare or hard to find or access here. (They may often complain about parking, but not as much about gas stations.)

Manhattan has a very robust public transportation system though. It's easier to get around the city and to friends, attractions and jobs without a car. San Francisco, definitely not the case. A lot of people live there but work in Palo Alto or Sunnyvale

Right, but the assertion was "You can't have a city without gas stations, they're just as essential as housing", which is a very, shall we say, suburban view of things.

  Manhattan has ~1 gas station per 42,000 residents

Don't city buses and the major cab fleets have their own private fuel distribution? They represent a huge percentage of passenger-miles.

I can tell you that NYC cabs do not seem to, as they're often lined up 5+ cabs deep at the pumps at the remaining stations in Manhattan.

The buses certainly do.

This number doesn't seem right, there are way more than 20

Yeah there's way more than 20. There are 10 just in the Mission.

You can keep gas stations and upzone. When I lived in Oslo our closest gas station was in the basement of a four story apartment building and commercial center.

(https://goo.gl/maps/vN2dH4zPd8U2 scroll till you see the Circle K)

not sure how happy I would be living above one

Not sure why the downvotes - living above a mass of highly flamable/explosive substance doesnt seem like the best choice to make if you can avoid it

  Cupertino and Mountain View welcome taxes from Apple or Google, but do not do much to house

Business/Industrial is where the tax base is. Apple/Google/Facebook themselves could have funded and developed lots of housing over the years but chose not to.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com