That's true but this is one of many SF scandals (Nuru & Dept of Public Works, Recology rate-fixing, Dream Keeper Initiative & Sheryl Davis, Hunters Point Tetra Tech botched cleanup, DBI & SFPUC probes) in recent history
That was my biggest gripe growing up in SD - felt like Caltrans / SANDAG abdicated responsibility for developing good transit/bike/ped infra, doubling down on car dependency. It should be a mecca of active transportation given the weather!
I don't drive but aesthetically the cars of the '60s - '80s (e.g. a vintage Oldsmobile or Cadillac coupe) are so much better than boxy, oversized modern cars.
the main reasons for public housing failing (see Cabrini Greene, Pruitt Igoe) in the US are concentrated poverty, rents not covering maintenance/capital expenses, lack of good jobs (too far to access on transit, companies relocated to suburbs), high youth to adult ratios. it's too reductive to say lack of ownership when tenants formed unions to get thing fixed but management didn't have funds, threat to maintenance workers (needing police escort to do work), organizational issues with mgmt (patronage system for jobs in public housing, lack of accountability).
Yes. It is in mine too, I just mentioned the effect on teens since they would be oblivious to housing prices as a motivator for the fertility drop, which was OP's thesis.
The company where I last worked went public 10 years after founding. It would've been life-changing at peak, except the price slumped in Dec '21 before end of lockup. I should've sold it on the slide down as it never recovered, but was too bought into what could've been. Still grateful for how it turned out as the job paid pretty well and the equity helped with financial independence but given the vagaries of implementation, timing, and psychology it feels like less of a motivating factor now. To think that life would be completely different having started months earlier still stings.
It should be noted NYC nearly went bankrupt in the '70s, the Bronx was burning - I wonder if there's any studies that account for the share of the rent increase that's explained by the higher paid jobs, decrease in crime, etc. i.e. all the ways these places have changed materially since the reference point.
The GFC housing bust happened at the same time but note that the drop in fertility was most severe for teens so the phone effect predates the shortfall in units built
Luxury apartment is a term of marketing, all new builds use it. The main problem is the management tends to be lackadaisical. My current place is ~5yo, has great sound isolation, but responsiveness has varied over time and teams.
It depends on what that factor is - cities change and the density, views, etc are not frozen for you at the time of your purchase. It's hard to understand why someone would think otherwise. There are plenty of planned communities, HOAs, etc that are much more likely to go unchanged that would seem to be a better fit for people like this.
Unless you're arguing this is inherent to high density of any signifcant magnitude, I don't see how management or design of this one project is relevant. Buildings in Singapore like SkyVille @ Dawson are maybe 30% the DU/acre of Regent Intl but are green, open, humane in layout.
I read that as more broad - housing as investment; flippers buying properties to upgrade (materially or not) and sell at a premium, removing bottom rungs on housing ladder. i.e. the mindset is an accelerant or maybe even the cause (think back to the roots of restrictive zoning, fear of property devaluation)
Perhaps it's Sea Island which is a luxury enclave with homes in the millions. They seem to define cities as incorporated & unincorporated cities, towns, communities, etc.
I don't see how home values could hold up with white collar work threatened over the coming years. Anyone's guess as to the timing but tech is aiming at this full force - what else has equivalent TAM? It's too big a prize to discount in the longterm.
yes, this is true - getting discussed a bit in YIMBY circles but definitely not common knowledge. benefits to current owners should be a topic of research and outreach.
The thing is homeowners benefit from denser zoning because the potential of their land is increased even if the average unit price comes down - also the amenity value of more jobs, amusements, school funding/tax base, etc in the city should show up in the price too.
It all depends on the subject - I can talk about cooking, climate change, collapse, film for hours. As for sports, gossip, celebrities, I clam up. Ditto for any talk that's status seeking or not curious and bi-directional.
It's not just about sheer numbers but distribution - the areas where they're most needed are the ones that are building the fewest units, exceptions (Seattle, Austin) aside