Comment by bartwr | Hacker News Reader

Comment by bartwr | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I know this is an unpopular opinion in the US, but the tenements can be pretty great.

I grew up in Eastern Europe (Warsaw) in "commie" blocks and there was a lot of valid criticisms and problems (like poor quality of buildings, small apartments, or thin walls - but consider that they rebuilt whole Warsaw after it was completely grounded in WW2 in a decade or two!), but also a lot to love. Extremely walkable, safe, all amenities (cinemas, stores, cultural centers, playgrounds) in the walking distance, lots of trees and green, easy access to public transit. As a kid or teenager they were great. I preferred it 100x over suburbs where my parents moved later, and to typical American cityscapes. (And this is why I moved to NYC and love it)

Here is a fun and a bit provocative/exaggerated video https://youtu.be/1eIxUuuJX7Y

Everyone is different so I'm not forcing my perspective onto anyone, just worth considering - especially if you have not had such first hand experience (and the main objection to tenements comes from how depressing they look or American association of "projects = crime", which misses a lot of "why"). Feel free to disagree!

And apart from that, I don't think "more of small houses" solves anything. It has to create more car dependence and social isolation. And it does not really scale, where would you fit more of smaller homes in SF?

"Everyone is different"

I think this is the root of it. You prefer higher density -- and that's great. I'm sure not everyone agrees, but I don't see any reason to take that away. In fact, I think it should be encouraged for those that like it.

The issue, IMHO, is that some folks don't like that and prefer lower density. And a lot of these changes focus on taking that away from them (i.e. changing their current neighborhood).

Also, just a comment on: "It has to create more car dependence and social isolation"

I don't think that's true. I live in a pretty traditional SFH neighborhood. Within a 12 minute bike ride, I have:

* Four grocery stores (Major chains)

* 2 gyms

* Dozens of restaurants

* Several large parks

* 2 home improvement stores

* Several large employers

* Several (non-Starbucks) coffee shops

And lots more. It's certainly possible, with bikes, to have SFH neighborhoods where cars aren't required.

There are lots of less dense places in the US that are not major metros.

Many of the people who are pissed about more density coming to cities only moved to them in the last decade or two, especially on the east coast where white flight only recently reversed.

I lived in SF for ~1.5y, and it's not NYC, and I did not like it too much, but it certainly has some of the city conveniences and is not a car-hell suburb. (I lived in a building with ~10 units in Castro, which was cool)

But my question remains - how do you scale up your approach to the already-full SF? How do you make it more affordable, as prices are insane due to demand >> supply? Or do you just envision a more sprawled, but similarly dense SF as the solution?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com