Hacker News Reader

Comment by tqi | Hacker News Reader

I'm very pro development in general, but I'm not sure if the market for a building of that type makes sense for that location? Over 40 minutes to FiDi on public transit and not especially close to 280, so not super convenient for commuters. That far out there also isn't a ton of bars/restaurants, so no especially attractive to younger people. And for families lack of dedicated outdoor space + downstairs neighbors to worry about makes it less than ideal.

I hate that SF has painted itself into a corner, where development has to occur in whatever random locations that happen to open up. I think for higher density housing, locations off of muni closer to the core of the city would obviously make more sense / have a clear market, but we just can't get there.

View on HN

That's fine though right?

Clearly, the developer thinks it will make financial sense to build it that way. If it turns out nobody wants it, then all the better, the market forces will drive down the price and make it affordable housing. The only one that loses in this case is the developer. Succeed or fail, it will be a plus for people who want to buy in a housing starved area.

From what I've seen this kind of building grows it's own ecosystem of supporting shops, restaurants, and services. Ideally in the building itself but it usually spills over into the area as well.

A lot of attitudes like this become a catch 22 where we can't build dense in an area because it's not ready, but it's not ready because the density is low. Even pro housing folks fall into this trap pretty regularly.

Won't happen. There is brand new unused retail space across the street. Its been vacant for years.

Would it still be vacant if there were 1500 people right out the door?

Assuming the demo that moves in - probably. It could be a GoPuff/Amazon warehouse though.

Brand new ocean-view apartments 2 blocks from the beach? They're definitely marketable. People don't travel to work as much these days anyway. While it's true that closer to town will be more attractive, but that's not this project.

Sounds like you are not very familiar with SF.

It's an easy drive south on the 101 to get to the rest of silicon valley, without the horrible traffic/congestion of downtown SF.

Also, unlike many neighborhoods in SF, there is superb muni access and also great proximity to golden gate park AND ocean beach. What better outdoors space could you want?

I lived in the outer sunset for a few years and it was among the most livable of the neighborhoods in SF that I frequented.

"the 101" outs you as someone who's only briefly been here, and also you have to take 280 to even get to 101 so it doesn't seem like you drove much either.

MUNI in the sunset is pretty awful as well

>Sounds like you are not very familiar with SF.

>It's an easy drive south on the 101 to get to the rest of silicon valley, without the horrible traffic/congestion of downtown SF.

That sound is everyone who actually lived in SF laughing at you.

Anyone who claims that going by car from the Outer Sunset to 101 is an "easy drive ... without the horrible traffic/congestion of downtown SF" is a liar or a fool.

Not to mention that this building won’t have that much parking availability. Only a small portion of residents will be able to own a car, the rest will be dependent on the Muni.

You go south, not through the city!

I am aware. Nonetheless, calling taking 19th an "easy drive south" is ridiculous.

There are a lot of legal and illegal immigrants living in that area who work in the hospitality industry. They live in overcrowded apartments.

The immigrants also use underground cheaper taxi services that ferry workers to and from these locations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com