I believe low-income/homeless were pushed-out of housing market long time ago... and it will take a long time to get them back (it will be very costly and see little benefit/upside) The immediate crisis facing the Bay Area is lack of overall housing for current workers (techies)
-
-
It makes the city like Palo Alto, extremely exclusive and increasingly irrelevant to new company formation. Just all big tech executives and middle management.
-
Singularly focusing on limiting new housing development to low-income/homeless -who left the housing market decades ago -would exacerbate that problem (big tech and ultra rich exclusivity) because the current crisis would continue: people fleeing now would have no relief in sight
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I disagree. Limiting office development is a negative incentive on city taxes. Which also negatively affects existing housing value (existing owners/constituents) because it negatively affects job growth (which also negatively affects rental market)
-
Would it be best if new housing development wasn’t tied to office development? Yes We need new/more housing independent of office development This prop isn’t perfect. But I think it’s next best available alternative
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
why is there little upside for low income housing and why are techies a crisis? If anything, techies are more resilient due to their earning power.
)