I didn't care about local politics when I was renting, because I was transient. I had no idea if I was gonna be in that spot in a year. Landlords were crappy, and I had no motivation to stay in...
I didn't care about local politics when I was renting, because I was transient. I had no idea if I was gonna be in that spot in a year. Landlords were crappy, and I had no motivation to stay in one spot. Given instability of the job market, it always made sense to move as close as reasonably affordable to a new job.
Now I have a home, and the hassle of moving from a home means I'll be looking local as possible when I change employers. Infinitely moreso now that I have kids and don't wanna uproot their lives merely for a job change.
I am torn on NIMBY, as public works are incredibly important. But also...a community should have some say in how infrastructure is being built, and certianly have some level of control over any displacement. The biggest problem being when wealth-makes-right and the poorer neighboorhods get bulldozed for a rail line that happens to just barely dodge the wealthy neighboorhood.
We have plenty of room for housing..just not within an hour of a major metro area...we just need to rethink how to handle this perpetual consolidation into the big cities and start building more of a connected-village model.
Idea: Start building small, dense, high-tech, eco-friendly cities in the middle of a flat rural area, like Kansas. Build everything pedestrian/bike first, with a high-speed and frieght rail connecting them every 50 miles
Edit: Another idea: When a home is purchased for the purpose of renting it must be bulldozed and replaced with something higher density. Or if someone's primary residence needs displaced find them comparable housing and give it to them for free as a thank you for uprooting their lives for the common good.
The idea solves a whole bunch of problems, especially the massive cost with retrofitting existing cities to be more bike and pedestrian friendly. Sometimes it just isn’t physically possible. But...
Idea: Start building small, dense, high-tech, eco-friendly cities in the middle of a flat rural area, like Kansas. Build everything pedestrian/bike first, with a high-speed and frieght rail connecting them every 50 miles
The idea solves a whole bunch of problems, especially the massive cost with retrofitting existing cities to be more bike and pedestrian friendly. Sometimes it just isn’t physically possible.
But it also creates a whole new set of problems. If no one lives there, then businesses won’t want to be there. And if there’s no businesses, no one will want to live there.
Yes it is, you just need to reduce the number of cars. Suddenly, you have more road to use and more parking spots to transform into bike and pedestrian friendly infrastructure. Of course, getting...
Sometimes it just isn’t physically possible.
Yes it is, you just need to reduce the number of cars. Suddenly, you have more road to use and more parking spots to transform into bike and pedestrian friendly infrastructure.
Of course, getting there is difficult but it is not really a physical issue.
I don't think @JXM meant physically in a literal sense and more of what is feasibly possible. An example, I live in Dallas, my wife and I are planning to move in the next few years and one of the...
I don't think @JXM meant physically in a literal sense and more of what is feasibly possible.
An example, I live in Dallas, my wife and I are planning to move in the next few years and one of the areas we were looking at is Baltimore. Looking at some commute times to various places and I was taken aback by how short they were. Did an overlay to find that I've become so accustomed to life in a place as huge as Texas that it didn't occur to me that other places are so small. All of Baltimore fits in an eastern quadrant of Dallas. The DFW metropolitan area is the size of Maryland, it's half the size of The Netherlands. I drive 25 miles to get to one of my favorite restaurants and I haven't even left the city.
Reducing the number of cars and making all the highways into bike lanes doesn't work in a lot of places without razing the entire city and rebuilding anew.
Sometimes the cross section of a road just isn’t wide enough for bikes, pedestrians and cars regardless of the concentration of each. Especially in more built up places. It would require removing...
Sometimes the cross section of a road just isn’t wide enough for bikes, pedestrians and cars regardless of the concentration of each. Especially in more built up places. It would require removing buildings to make room. So yes, I suppose it is physically possible but it is not feasible or sensible.
This has happened in a few UK places and the roads just get fully pedestrianised or the speed gets reduced enough to like 20mph and it's fine to share it all.
This has happened in a few UK places and the roads just get fully pedestrianised or the speed gets reduced enough to like 20mph and it's fine to share it all.
Initial populating might be a problem, yes. But small business will crop up wherever there is a demand, so really just need a big enough of an upstart population. Perhaps if we're not willing to...
Initial populating might be a problem, yes.
But small business will crop up wherever there is a demand, so really just need a big enough of an upstart population.
Perhaps if we're not willing to concede remote working so easily post-COVID, something like this would be more-viable.
I think we'd be better off redeveloping depopulated formerly urban areas like you get in the rust belt, as long as we approach it with the full conversion mindset, or filling out edge cities....
Idea: Start building small, dense, high-tech, eco-friendly cities in the middle of a flat rural area, like Kansas. Build everything pedestrian/bike first, with a high-speed and frieght rail connecting them every 50 miles
I think we'd be better off redeveloping depopulated formerly urban areas like you get in the rust belt, as long as we approach it with the full conversion mindset, or filling out edge cities. Cities typically are where they are for reasons, and I don't see just building new ones from scratch in essentially random areas (relative to existing population centers) working out too well in terms of attracting residents and businesses on anything like the desired time scales. Look at China's empty cities.
I agree but the problem is redevelopment is expensive. There's always surprises when you redo old work, especially when the work dates from times where documentation and standardization were...
I agree but the problem is redevelopment is expensive. There's always surprises when you redo old work, especially when the work dates from times where documentation and standardization were minimal. Depopulated urban areas, though, even if built up again suffer from the same lack of jobs that building up a new city would.
I know this is mild by comparison and totally anecdotal, but I recently saw this in action in my neighborhood. There is a Facebook group for my neighborhood (I honestly don't know why I bothered...
I know this is mild by comparison and totally anecdotal, but I recently saw this in action in my neighborhood. There is a Facebook group for my neighborhood (I honestly don't know why I bothered to join it). One of my neighbors one street over made a post asking for advice.
You see there is a halfway house on that street. This homeowner lives on the corner of the street and the women of that halfway house tend to cut diagonally across the homeowners lawn instead of taking the sidewalk. This homeowner was very upset about this. And it was very obvious to me that some of it had to do with the social status of the women of that halfway house. I don't live on the corner but I know that a few people cutting through my yard would really bother me. They're not up by the house and not disturbing anything.
And honestly it would bother me less so knowing that they are residents of a halfway house. They are on the road to recovery and honestly in a city like mine it really sucks not having a car. If they can save a few steps and some energy cutting through my yard then go right ahead.
I don't know your exact situation, but there are some legitimate concerns letting people regularly cut across your property. A few are: Over time, it will likely result in a bare-dirt desire path...
I don't know your exact situation, but there are some legitimate concerns letting people regularly cut across your property. A few are: Over time, it will likely result in a bare-dirt desire path cut into your lawn, which is both unsightly and encourages additional use. Once the habit is established, good luck planting any sort of shrubbery or garden in that area later without it getting trampled. Depending on jurisdiction, liability protections for the property owner with regards to trespassers and injury can be weakened if you know of and allow trespassing to continue.
God dammit, you get a couple mortgage quotes and suddenly EVERYBODY breaks your door down to force house-related talk down your throat. I can't even escape it here of all places... how'd you get...
God dammit, you get a couple mortgage quotes and suddenly EVERYBODY breaks your door down to force house-related talk down your throat. I can't even escape it here of all places... how'd you get my personal data @MetArtScroll?!? 🙃
All jokes aside, if I ever actually end up finding a house within my price range, I'd like to keep all of these points in mind during my time as a homeowner. While I have developed a pretty quick auto-sneer reaction whenever I hear the term NIMBY come up, I have a feeling it's quite easy to find yourself in said company if you're not developing a wider worldview.
I didn't care about local politics when I was renting, because I was transient. I had no idea if I was gonna be in that spot in a year. Landlords were crappy, and I had no motivation to stay in one spot. Given instability of the job market, it always made sense to move as close as reasonably affordable to a new job.
Now I have a home, and the hassle of moving from a home means I'll be looking local as possible when I change employers. Infinitely moreso now that I have kids and don't wanna uproot their lives merely for a job change.
I am torn on NIMBY, as public works are incredibly important. But also...a community should have some say in how infrastructure is being built, and certianly have some level of control over any displacement. The biggest problem being when wealth-makes-right and the poorer neighboorhods get bulldozed for a rail line that happens to just barely dodge the wealthy neighboorhood.
We have plenty of room for housing..just not within an hour of a major metro area...we just need to rethink how to handle this perpetual consolidation into the big cities and start building more of a connected-village model.
Idea: Start building small, dense, high-tech, eco-friendly cities in the middle of a flat rural area, like Kansas. Build everything pedestrian/bike first, with a high-speed and frieght rail connecting them every 50 miles
Edit: Another idea: When a home is purchased for the purpose of renting it must be bulldozed and replaced with something higher density. Or if someone's primary residence needs displaced find them comparable housing and give it to them for free as a thank you for uprooting their lives for the common good.
The idea solves a whole bunch of problems, especially the massive cost with retrofitting existing cities to be more bike and pedestrian friendly. Sometimes it just isn’t physically possible.
But it also creates a whole new set of problems. If no one lives there, then businesses won’t want to be there. And if there’s no businesses, no one will want to live there.
Yes it is, you just need to reduce the number of cars. Suddenly, you have more road to use and more parking spots to transform into bike and pedestrian friendly infrastructure.
Of course, getting there is difficult but it is not really a physical issue.
I don't think @JXM meant physically in a literal sense and more of what is feasibly possible.
An example, I live in Dallas, my wife and I are planning to move in the next few years and one of the areas we were looking at is Baltimore. Looking at some commute times to various places and I was taken aback by how short they were. Did an overlay to find that I've become so accustomed to life in a place as huge as Texas that it didn't occur to me that other places are so small. All of Baltimore fits in an eastern quadrant of Dallas. The DFW metropolitan area is the size of Maryland, it's half the size of The Netherlands. I drive 25 miles to get to one of my favorite restaurants and I haven't even left the city.
Reducing the number of cars and making all the highways into bike lanes doesn't work in a lot of places without razing the entire city and rebuilding anew.
Sometimes the cross section of a road just isn’t wide enough for bikes, pedestrians and cars regardless of the concentration of each. Especially in more built up places. It would require removing buildings to make room. So yes, I suppose it is physically possible but it is not feasible or sensible.
This has happened in a few UK places and the roads just get fully pedestrianised or the speed gets reduced enough to like 20mph and it's fine to share it all.
Initial populating might be a problem, yes.
But small business will crop up wherever there is a demand, so really just need a big enough of an upstart population.
Perhaps if we're not willing to concede remote working so easily post-COVID, something like this would be more-viable.
I think we'd be better off redeveloping depopulated formerly urban areas like you get in the rust belt, as long as we approach it with the full conversion mindset, or filling out edge cities. Cities typically are where they are for reasons, and I don't see just building new ones from scratch in essentially random areas (relative to existing population centers) working out too well in terms of attracting residents and businesses on anything like the desired time scales. Look at China's empty cities.
I agree but the problem is redevelopment is expensive. There's always surprises when you redo old work, especially when the work dates from times where documentation and standardization were minimal. Depopulated urban areas, though, even if built up again suffer from the same lack of jobs that building up a new city would.
I know this is mild by comparison and totally anecdotal, but I recently saw this in action in my neighborhood. There is a Facebook group for my neighborhood (I honestly don't know why I bothered to join it). One of my neighbors one street over made a post asking for advice.
You see there is a halfway house on that street. This homeowner lives on the corner of the street and the women of that halfway house tend to cut diagonally across the homeowners lawn instead of taking the sidewalk. This homeowner was very upset about this. And it was very obvious to me that some of it had to do with the social status of the women of that halfway house. I don't live on the corner but I know that a few people cutting through my yard would really bother me. They're not up by the house and not disturbing anything.
And honestly it would bother me less so knowing that they are residents of a halfway house. They are on the road to recovery and honestly in a city like mine it really sucks not having a car. If they can save a few steps and some energy cutting through my yard then go right ahead.
I don't know your exact situation, but there are some legitimate concerns letting people regularly cut across your property. A few are: Over time, it will likely result in a bare-dirt desire path cut into your lawn, which is both unsightly and encourages additional use. Once the habit is established, good luck planting any sort of shrubbery or garden in that area later without it getting trampled. Depending on jurisdiction, liability protections for the property owner with regards to trespassers and injury can be weakened if you know of and allow trespassing to continue.
God dammit, you get a couple mortgage quotes and suddenly EVERYBODY breaks your door down to force house-related talk down your throat. I can't even escape it here of all places... how'd you get my personal data @MetArtScroll?!? 🙃
All jokes aside, if I ever actually end up finding a house within my price range, I'd like to keep all of these points in mind during my time as a homeowner. While I have developed a pretty quick auto-sneer reaction whenever I hear the term NIMBY come up, I have a feeling it's quite easy to find yourself in said company if you're not developing a wider worldview.