Slashdot Mirror
Facebook is Building a Real Community in California To Test Whether People Love Tech Companies Enough To Live in Them (nytimes.com)
In Menlo Park, Calif., Facebook is building a real community and testing the proposition: Do people love tech companies so much they will live inside them? From a report: Willow Village will be wedged between the Menlo Park neighborhood of Belle Haven and the city of East Palo Alto, both heavily Hispanic communities that are among Silicon Valley's poorest. Facebook is planning 1,500 apartments, and has agreed with Menlo Park to offer 225 of them at below-market rates. The most likely tenants of the full-price units are Facebook employees, who already receive a five-figure bonus if they live near the office.
The community will have eight acres of parks, plazas and bike-pedestrian paths open to the public. Facebook wants to revitalize the railway running alongside the property and will finish next year a pedestrian bridge over the expressway. The bridge will provide access to the trail that rings San Francisco Bay, a boon for birders and bikers. Mr. Tenanes, Facebook's vice president for real estate, contemplates the audacity of building a city.
The community will have eight acres of parks, plazas and bike-pedestrian paths open to the public. Facebook wants to revitalize the railway running alongside the property and will finish next year a pedestrian bridge over the expressway. The bridge will provide access to the trail that rings San Francisco Bay, a boon for birders and bikers. Mr. Tenanes, Facebook's vice president for real estate, contemplates the audacity of building a city.
Most homes will be built near the corner of Cambridge and Analytica. The Home Owners Association will demand that none of the houses shall have locks and no windows will have blinds/drapes .
Negative, Meatbag. ZUCKERBOT 9000 is consumed with planning its run for the president of... KILL ALL HUMANS. All who oppose ZUCKERBOT 9000 are russian bots. BEEP BOOP BOOP.
As someone who has cycled in Chicago in the middle of winter AND on a pristine cycle path in sunny California, I can say with confidence that you are bullshitting. After about ten minutes of getting hit in the face with sleet and your bike sliding on icy streets and the hairs freezing in your nose and cars splashing a colloidal mixture of slush, road salt and filth onto you, it gets kind of old.
Also, you're likely to find just as many overpaid yuppies in Chicago as you would in Menlo Park. If you've ever cycled down Halsted Street or Ashland near Division or Diversey & Sheffield, or Lincoln Ave toward downtown or Dearborn past Chicago Ave., the place is crawling with overpaid yuppies. The difference is that in California, you are more likely to see those yuppies wearing cropped t-shirts and short-shorts with their butt cheeks hanging out (even the women!) and that can make all the difference when it comes to quality of life.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I live in a nice neighborhood. They also included about 12 'low income' style houses in the mix. I believe it is a requirement where I live.
These are houses, which are purchased. Not rental units. I have no idea how they maintain the 'low income' ideal when houses are sold.
But here is what I have found:
The turnover rate of the low-income housing is probably triple of the 'regular' (somewhat high-end) houses.
MOST of the people are good/fine. No problems.
I would say that 75% of the 'problems' in the neighborhood stem from the low-income section. (My house is close by, I see what is happening) 75% of the problems yes, but this is in a neighborhood that has very, very few problems. So we're talking about maybe 3 police actions per year that I see.
75% of the traffic is also generated by that small collection of homes. Like these people drive a lot.
The biggest difference though is the age of the residents. In the 'regular' homes, the homeowner age is well above 50. I am on the young side, and I turn 50 in two weeks. I think two other guys are below 50, the rest are much older.
The low-income housing is made up of lots of younger people. 20 somethings, 30 somethings.
I don't think income has much to do with the 'problems', I think it has more to do with age. And honestly, the number of 'problems' is very low. It seems like a bunch of normal people, who couldn't afford $700,000 homes, but were able to live in a nice neighborhood for maybe a third of that price.
OH! The only issue I have is with parking overflow. Every once in a while a new group of people will move in with a plethora of cars which they start parking in front of other houses. The low income area is more like a condo complex (but they are detached) and they have their own parking areas, but they do get full. So people park on the normal street. All of the houses have at least 3 car garages, and giant driveways. We aren't even supposed to park on the street overnight...but the low-income residents didn't have to sign a CC&R stating they wouldn't park on the street...we did.
That's it. These are all really small issues. But I do believe that the people living in the low-income area benefit greatly from being in a nice neighborhood. I think it's fine.
No reason to lie.