this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
103 points (94.0% liked)
Technology
66503 readers
5025 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If SF did not have strict zoning and NIMBY’s it would look like Hong Kong. The demand for more housing on limited land is strong.
As long as it is a decently dense development that is walkable and has public transportation (subways are far cheaper if open cut) then I say build away.
This isn't all that close to SF. It's about 45 min- 1 hour away. I doubt they are going to alter existing highways that have the comforting title of Blood Alley because of all the fatal crashes.
Public transportation out in this area is basically non-existent. We got some buses, and that's it. The closest BART(Bay Area Rapid Transit aka subway) station to where they are building this is concord about 30 min away, with the ride into the city taking another 45. It's on the cusp of being too far away to commute to the city.
It's being built in a drought area, and the neighboring town has already said we can't help with water.
I’m assuming that if it is driven by tech, there will be offices for the major companies there. The developers will make it appealing for major tech firms to invest somehow.
Yeah, let's spend money to move offices to a worse location. More dangerous commute, more traffic, worse weather, worse neighboring cities and more air traffic,.
The developers don't need to make it that appealing. It's close enough to San Francisco and Sacramento while also being next to an airbase. The housing demand in the area is already high. They will be filled quickly no matter what. My bigger concern is what happens to Fairfield, I'm not sure if this will have a positive impact and I fear to see what a worse Fairfield would look like.