4 ms·

I don't read Strong Towns much, but I don't think you've read much of the stuff they put out. The blog definitely isn't in favor of mass privatization — that wo

I don't read Strong Towns much, but I don't think you've read much of the stuff they put out. The blog definitely isn't in favor of mass privatization — that wouldn't help much, since the infrastructure is still crazy expensive and not worth paying for. The model of development that gets us out of this mess probably is one of much greater density + changes in accounting practices.

avn2109 10y ago
The model that gets us out of this predicament is trivially simple and literally fits on one line: Really Narrow Streets Unfortunately most North American local government has a savagely visceral hatred of that idea. Full disclosure I stole this idea from [0]. [0] http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2006/032606.htm http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2006/032606.htm
- sdenton4 10y ago
  Pretty good article; the metric that more fully captures the idea is the ratio of land used for cars instead of people. Narrow streets takes care of the on street parking idiocy, which is the worst of it, but the number of parking structure where there could be residential buildings is also helpful to track. And the six lane highways cutting through the middle of town takes a huge amount of space...
- krakensden 10y ago
  I feel like urbanists should talk about Mexico more. They have really narrow streets, as-of-right construction, and they are much closer than Vienna or Hong Kong.
  - ceras 10y ago
    As someone with a city planning hobbyist interest, I've visited Mexico City and greatly disliked it. It's a miserable city to get around in, though I can see its potential if it ever decides to move away from heavy car infrastructure (some core neighborhoods are pretty nice so long as you don't want to leave them). Were you thinking of somewhere else in Mexico, or specific parts of Mexico City?
    - krakensden 10y ago
      I was further north- Guanajuato, San Luis Potosi, Zacatecas.
zigzigzag 10y ago
that wouldn't help much, since the infrastructure is still crazy expensive and not worth paying for. Surely it would help, then? The entire point of the article is that local governments built infrastructure that isn't worth paying for, and paid too much for it, because of bad planning/misaligned incentives. If towns were fully privatised then there'd be no assumption of government bailouts, and towns that overbuilt would go bankrupt and be abandoned/eventually bulldozed. In practice governments are rarely willing to let that happen. Even in the case of Detroit it was bailed out.

avn2109 10y ago

The model that gets us out of this predicament is trivially simple and literally fits on one line: Really Narrow Streets Unfortunately most North American local government has a savagely visceral hatred of that idea. Full disclosure I stole this idea from [0]. [0] http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2006/032606.htm http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2006/032606.htm

sdenton4 10y ago
Pretty good article; the metric that more fully captures the idea is the ratio of land used for cars instead of people. Narrow streets takes care of the on street parking idiocy, which is the worst of it, but the number of parking structure where there could be residential buildings is also helpful to track. And the six lane highways cutting through the middle of town takes a huge amount of space...
krakensden 10y ago
I feel like urbanists should talk about Mexico more. They have really narrow streets, as-of-right construction, and they are much closer than Vienna or Hong Kong.
- ceras 10y ago
  As someone with a city planning hobbyist interest, I've visited Mexico City and greatly disliked it. It's a miserable city to get around in, though I can see its potential if it ever decides to move away from heavy car infrastructure (some core neighborhoods are pretty nice so long as you don't want to leave them). Were you thinking of somewhere else in Mexico, or specific parts of Mexico City?
  - krakensden 10y ago
    I was further north- Guanajuato, San Luis Potosi, Zacatecas.

zigzigzag 10y ago

that wouldn't help much, since the infrastructure is still crazy expensive and not worth paying for. Surely it would help, then? The entire point of the article is that local governments built infrastructure that isn't worth paying for, and paid too much for it, because of bad planning/misaligned incentives. If towns were fully privatised then there'd be no assumption of government bailouts, and towns that overbuilt would go bankrupt and be abandoned/eventually bulldozed. In practice governments are rarely willing to let that happen. Even in the case of Detroit it was bailed out.