Meh, it was mostly just sand dunes, at least for San Francisco. There’s probably more trees there now then before it was developed. Also San Francisco probably has the most natural area surrounding it then any other major city in the US, since most of the area around it is either mountains or water which you can’t build on, that’s also why it’s so dense.
Unironnically yes, conservation wise skyscrapers are the best way for people to live. Squeezing people onto the smallest footprint possible per person is the best way to keep spaces natural, besides killing large chunks of the human population…
Meh, it was mostly just sand dunes, at least for San Francisco. There’s probably more trees there now then before it was developed. Also San Francisco probably has the most natural area surrounding it then any other major city in the US, since most of the area around it is either mountains or water which you can’t build on, that’s also why it’s so dense.
Oh thank god they build some skyscrapers then.
Unironnically yes, conservation wise skyscrapers are the best way for people to live. Squeezing people onto the smallest footprint possible per person is the best way to keep spaces natural, besides killing large chunks of the human population…
Plus doing away with cattle. (Yeah, c’mon.)