We’re making a quick promotion this morning (from comment to post) as a reader recalls a decade old presentation sponsored by the American Institute of Architects (AIA):
[W]hat is interesting to me about all of these condominium conversion projects is that it makes one wonder, what kind of city will this become? About 10 years ago, the SF AIA had a talk presented by a USC arch. prof. predicting that San Francisco would become the Venice Italy of the U.S. No more jobs, offices, and industry. Instead we will have shops, restaurants, hotels and condominiums. The economic center of the region would shift south to the peninsula and San Jose. I think the prediction is coming true, though I am happy to see the added housing inventory.
For the record, the commercial real estate market in San Francisco is going gangbusters (and then some), but it’s an interesting question nonetheless (especially in light of San Franciso’s growing affordability crunch).
∙ 733 Front Street: A SocketSite Forum Inquiry (And Answer) [SocketSite]
I’ve only lived here a short time so I do not have nearly as deep of a perspective as others.
With three international airports relatively nearby (SFO, Oakland, and San Jose) and well-developed public transit system (and this new-fangled Internet thing), I believe San Francisco will attract more folks who embrace what author Dan Pink called a “Free Agent Nation.”
Right now, I make a supplemental income teaching online for the University of Phoenix. I started the job in 2002 while living in Michigan, and continue teaching for them just as easily from here in San Francisco or from anywhere I can find an Internet connection. I haven’t done the research, but I would guess telecommuting has only increased in frequency as employees ask for more of a work/life balance with families to mind (kids and senior parents).
I am worried about our City’s hurdles for businesses. We need to work on electing Supervisors who understand starting a business is a big risk unto itself without the City changing the rules of the game every whip stitch.
Certainly we have problems but calling us the “Venice of the USA” is silly hyperbole
SF’s daytime population is still high and growing. All cities including NYC are evolving with the rise of suburban job growth
In the future I think SF is moving toward a 24 hour downtown with housing, jobs and entertainment rather than focusing simply on builidng up white collar jobs in a finanacial district. This is happening already with all this development
Other than counter productive politics the transportation system is a cause for concern to me to ensure people have access
“For the record, the commercial real estate market in San Francisco is going gangbusters (and then some…”
I’m aware of the fact that commercial vacancies are dropping and rents are rising. That said, how much of the trend is due to the loss of millions of square feet of former office space to condo conversions? Or the fact there’s been essentially no major office development since the dot-com boom (which by the way, paled next to the development during the Feinstein years)? The point is I’m not sure how much the tightening office market reflects basic economic health as opposed to relatively restricted supply.
Calling San Francisco a “Venice Italy”, is not just a hyperbole in some respects. Venice is a very desirable, attractive and entertaining place, it has over time evolved so that it is still world famous, just not a financial power house they way it was hundreds of years ago. Watching all of these old banks and office towers turning into boutique condominiums reminded me of the lecture showing what happened to the banks and institutions of Venice Italy. (They became boutique condominiums) San Francisco will always be attractive and world famous, but which financial institutions have recently relocated to this city instead of moving out?
Morgan-you are missing the point that most job growth all over the US is in suburds even in the NYC metro
Cities have to adapt. Why would financial insitutions nessasarly flock to SF? Are you saying because of a lack of office space business that wants to relocate can’t?
Zig, cities do have to adapt, and the choices San Francisco is making are taking it down the road away from what it originally was. Chicago is taking the opposite course. Chicago not only is attracting companies to relocate to the city center without tax breaks, but is constantly keeping the city as the center or an urban region and forcing planning to let the suburbs be the suburbs and the city the focus. San Francisco goes out of its way to make it more and more difficult for people to get to the city. Your comment about concerns for the regional transportation system are correct and it will be interesting to watch and see what happens here. You just know that people today would fight the Golden Gate bridge if it were being built today. Can’t you hear the howls from nimbys regarding the increased traffic, noise, congestion and parking problems if the Golden Gate bridge were “allowed” to touch the sanctity of San Francisco.
it is truly astounding that in spite of the anti-business and vehement anti- development stances our board of stupidvisors takes, SF still manages to thrive. of course this is mostly due to the beauty and diversity inherent to our city, in confluence with the recent global wealth effect. there are many rich people/families that can basically choose to live whever they desire. and SF has become a very desireable playland for wealthy adults. hence, i think venice is a pretty good post-urban metaphor for SF’s long term future (sans the canals 🙂 and from my POV, bring it on.
For me, the incompetent city government, including the BoS and the mayor, are to blame if San Francisco becomes another Venice. San Francisco has basically been relying on its location and its beauty while the city government continues its anti-business and anti-development stance, which only seems to drive away businesses and drive up housing costs. San Francisco has so much untapped potential if only it had someone like a Mayor Daley or Giuliani running the show.
If I may mention two excellent books which really put in perspective the change in civic thinking regarding the role of San Francisco in the world, try “On the Edge of the World” by Longstreth and “Imperial San Francisco” by Brechin. It was no accident that San Francisco had become the western capitol of wealth, culture, commerce and trade at THAT time, for it was the planned desire of civic leaders and planners. Los Angeles was only able to inherit San Francisco’s former status by default.
Zig,
We moved from Chicago two years ago. I have to disagree with you about Chicago not offering incentives to business. Boeing got a great package, Ikea was sent packing because it wouldn’t agree to the City’s idea of a “proper” location, and Brach’s was subsidized until they moved production elsewhere. That said, the atmosphere is much more pro-business than the silliness that passes for reason in SF. I believe the cost of housing is the most serious problem facing business in SF. (Public transportation is a close second) Without an effective policy, SF business will become non-competitive with the result a huge hit to the middle class.
Get rid of rent control and liberalize local zoning to include more (sensitive) density and…poof… the problems will subside.
Cary