9 ms·

> assumption that _everyone wants to be stacked on top of each other_ It's also an assumption that everyone wants to begin and end every trip, no matter how t

> assumption that _everyone wants to be stacked on top of each other_ It's also an assumption that everyone wants to begin and end every trip, no matter how trivial, with a parking spot. It's an assumption that people will want to drive in traffic for 20 minutes minimum to get to a supermarket, do anything with their kids, or anything outside their property line. The notion of "stacked on top of each other" has unpleasant connotations, but there are many different ways to live in a dense city. Would you feel "stacked on top of each other" in a Parisian townhouse with a magnificent shared courtyard, 12 foot ceilings, and everything you could possibly want a short walk or subway ride away?

ebg13 6y ago
> in a Parisian... Having occupied a 120 square foot chambre de bonne, I agree with your sentiment but I'd say it depends on a few qualifications. Like for instance not having basically plumbed closets as a large percentage of available living spaces. Building height restrictions in the city lead to a large number of tiny (aforementioned) inaccessible (few and tiny elevators) apartments.
maxsilver 6y ago
> Would you feel "stacked on top of each other" in a Parisian townhouse with a magnificent shared courtyard, 12 foot ceilings, and everything you could possibly want a short walk or subway ride away? No, I wouldn't feel "stacked on top of each other" if I were a multi-millionaire in Paris. But, in the real world, your talking about putting families into 600sqft (at very best) boxes, with audible neighbors on every side of the unit, and no way to go anywhere (no parking, no meaningful transport, because 'everything we'd let you have is a short walk away') If you actually do what you've described, and give everyone their own townhouse, you've just reinvented the modern suburb. Because that's what modern suburbs look like, everyone in a townhouse, or a townhouse with some small strips of yard around it. > but there are many different ways to live in a dense city Sure, but only if you are fantastically wealthy.
- ebg13 6y ago
  > no way to go anywhere (no parking, no meaningful transport, because 'everything we'd let you have is a short walk away') It's news to me that the Paris Bus, Tram, Metro, RER, SNCF, Velib, and the venerable scooter have all suddenly vanished.
  - maxsilver 6y ago
    Obviously they haven't, and they remain great options for people wealthy enough to afford Parisian Townhouses. But unless you somehow gift me one million dollars USD or more (and the same to every single person I know), none of us are going to be able to afford to live anywhere in Paris that actually has close access to all of those things you've described, with the living situation described above. If we're magically exceptionally lucky, at best we might get like one or two.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - ebg13 6y ago
      I lived in the center of Paris for years on a few Altairian dollars per day, and you're being ridiculous. Rental prices in Paris proper, not even the banlieue, are about the same per foot as Cambridge/Somerville/Boston while being an overall nicer place to live.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      Scooters, the RER, the SNCF, the bus, the Vélib and the metro, are very cheap and service even poor parts of Paris and the Banlieue pretty well.
      - wozniacki 6y ago
        There's also this assumption that people in relatively segregated rich areas want to be connected to poorer areas via public transit - the opposite is more often true. People who wish to live in neighborhoods with low crime often NIMBY off any attempts to add public transit options specifically to keep out the riffraff. Marin County is home to over 252,000 residents, yet it is without a BART station. If you search web content to find out why that is the case, you will not find a lot. There is minimal information explaining why the BART doesn't connect from Marin to San Francisco and even less explaining why it doesn't connect from the East Bay to Marin. Marin funded a large portion of the project when BART was being planned in the 1950s. But "concerns" over whether or not the Golden Gate Bridge could support BART suddenly arose. After San Mateo pulled out of the plan, Marin's participation fell through as well. It is not unfair to speculate that socio-economic discrepancies might have something to do with this lack of transit connection. After all, Marin is the county where wealthy residents stopped George Lucas from building affordable housing on his land. The median household income there is almost $84,000, more than $15,000 more than San Francisco and more than twice as much as Oakland. A similar situation in Dayton, Ohio arose where wealthy suburbanites tried to stop the local transit authority from building three new bus stops near major employment centers.[1] [1] https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/ex/sustainablecitiescollective/it-s-bay-area-rapid-transit-except-marin-they-re-exclusive/176216/ https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/ex/sustainablecitiescollecti...
bcrosby95 6y ago
> It's also an assumption that everyone wants to begin and end every trip, no matter how trivial, with a parking spot. It's an assumption that people will want to drive in traffic for 20 minutes minimum to get to a supermarket, do anything with their kids, or anything outside their property line. I wouldn't be surprised to find some suburbs with some of the traits you mention, but it hasn't been my experience with them. I've lived in about 5 different suburbs in my life and a supermarket has never been more than 2 miles away - certainly not a 20 minute drive and it's even within biking distance. Parks are by schools and there's usually an elementary school fairly close if you're looking to do something with your kid. Depending upon the suburb you can also play in the street, which I regularly did growing up. The traits you are talking about sounds more like a rural area than a suburban one.
- yason 6y ago
  supermarket has never been more than 2 miles away - certainly not a 20 minute drive and it's even within biking distance I'd consider that far, far away. My walk to the nearest train station is about one mile, takes about 15 minutes to get there on foot, and that's irritatingly far, too, considering the trip is two way and repeats every day. Something like a grocery shop should be accessible within decent walking distance, a five-minute walk or so. A rule of thumb is that if something is far enough that I have to take the car in the first place I'll be incentivised to drive further away to a big supermarket/other big stores while I'm at it.
  - philwelch 6y ago
    > A rule of thumb is that if something is far enough that I have to take the car in the first place I'll be incentivised to drive further away to a big supermarket/other big stores while I'm at it. The grocery store that’s 2 miles away is a big supermarket. The US doesn’t really do small groceries in most places.
    - hannasanarion 6y ago
      The US used to have tons of small groceries everywhere. The legislative mandate for free parking everywhere has put them out of business, and many were demolished to build freeways.
s1artibartfast 6y ago
Assumptions aside, I think this raises a valid question of how we balance high density urban housing and suburban housing in american cities. Can a city have both options as workable solutions? Is there more demand for high density urban housing that cities are not meeting? If so, why? Is there a demand for more access from suburban commuters? If so, why isn't the access available? Are these solutions mutually exclusive?
asciimov 6y ago
I assume you have never lived in Houston. Right now at 5:30pm (17:30) it's 95F (35C). I don't wanna walk 20 mins anywhere in this heat, I don't wanna stand and wait on the bus in the heat, I can't go pick up ice cream from the store and walk it home in this heat. Surely you think, summer isn't that long, just tough it out a few months. Well I regularly run the A/C in the "winter months". Several years ago during the week of chistmas, I went to a late night movie, as I was walking back to my car to go home I noticed the following: at 11:30pm it was 80F (26C), the humidity was around 80-90%, and I was wearing shorts.
- mmm_grayons 6y ago
  I am also Houstonian and can second this. The heat sucks and the humidity makes it even worse. And it goes on for much longer than most realize. They'll mention that other places also have a few hot days while ignoring that for the better part of the year (roughly April through October) it's not fun to be outside. I don't care if the grocery store is only a mile away, I'm still driving.
ctdonath 6y ago
There's the catch: is everything you could possibly want really a short walk/transit away? or is the proliferation of top-end (for you) options in a sprawling city way beyond what can be crammed within walking distance of _your_ home? Are you satisfied with a few arbitrary restaurants within walking distance? or, car enabled, would you rather go 30 miles for that REALLY good place that would never be so close in a compact city?
- souprock 6y ago
  Around here, the fancy restaurant has a boat dock. The people with money have boat docks. You don't walk to the restaurant! The dress code probably doesn't include SCUBA, especially if dripping wet.
- stbtrax 6y ago
  I dunno about other places but I can get to everything within ~10 min bike ride in SF. I have a car too for longer trips but I really don't like driving and enjoy the side effect of free exercise. It's not for everyone, I'm sure people with kids and people in non mediterranean climates might find a more car-centric lifestyle more comfortable
- ffdjjjffjj 6y ago
  I think you’re underestimating the number and quality of restaurants that are easily accessible in say a mixed used NYC neighborhood vs what’s within a 30 minute drive of a Houston suburb. Especially if you aren’t a fan of the midrange chains that seem to proliferate in sprawling areas for whatever reason.
souprock 6y ago
To safely "do anything with their kids" a car is very useful. Depending on the ages of the kids... Kids need to bring stuff. That could be hockey equipment, a drum set, or a clean playpen. Kids wander off if not contained. A kid may get off a subway at the wrong stop, lost in the crowd, along as the rest of the family continues on down the line. A kid may fall onto the tracks. Kids should be kept from licking public spaces. Kids should be kept from eating food found on the ground. Kids should not be able to play with hypodermic needles.
- stbtrax 6y ago
  Sounds like some paranoid parenting that seems to be in style right now. In Tokyo kids take the subway by themselves as young as age 9. In denser cities the density helps in that other people help socialize/watch your kids and they can bike around to their friends place when they are older. As someone who grew up in a denser area, then moved to a sprawly suburb where you were dependent on your parents for getting you around, and lack of public space made activities revolve around consumerism, I greatly preferred the dense area.
  - souprock 6y ago
    Kids aren't born at that age. It takes 9 years. How are the little ones supposed to travel? At one time, mine were these ages: 8, 6, 4, 2, 2, 0 Doing that on the subway would be nuts. I actually know somebody who, as a kid, got off the subway at the wrong stop. That really happens. The crowd seems to be leaving, the kid goes, and before the parents can react the subway is moving again. Activities need not revolve around consumerism. Find a less-densely populated area, and there will be wild space like forests and streams. Backyards can be pretty big too. Consumerism is more of a city thing, since there is no backyard and no forest.
    - ric2b 6y ago
      If you have time to drive them somewhere you also have time to take them via public transit in a well connected city.
    - 6y ago

ebg13 6y ago

> in a Parisian... Having occupied a 120 square foot chambre de bonne, I agree with your sentiment but I'd say it depends on a few qualifications. Like for instance not having basically plumbed closets as a large percentage of available living spaces. Building height restrictions in the city lead to a large number of tiny (aforementioned) inaccessible (few and tiny elevators) apartments.

maxsilver 6y ago

> Would you feel "stacked on top of each other" in a Parisian townhouse with a magnificent shared courtyard, 12 foot ceilings, and everything you could possibly want a short walk or subway ride away? No, I wouldn't feel "stacked on top of each other" if I were a multi-millionaire in Paris. But, in the real world, your talking about putting families into 600sqft (at very best) boxes, with audible neighbors on every side of the unit, and no way to go anywhere (no parking, no meaningful transport, because 'everything we'd let you have is a short walk away') If you actually do what you've described, and give everyone their own townhouse, you've just reinvented the modern suburb. Because that's what modern suburbs look like, everyone in a townhouse, or a townhouse with some small strips of yard around it. > but there are many different ways to live in a dense city Sure, but only if you are fantastically wealthy.

ebg13 6y ago
> no way to go anywhere (no parking, no meaningful transport, because 'everything we'd let you have is a short walk away') It's news to me that the Paris Bus, Tram, Metro, RER, SNCF, Velib, and the venerable scooter have all suddenly vanished.
- maxsilver 6y ago
  Obviously they haven't, and they remain great options for people wealthy enough to afford Parisian Townhouses. But unless you somehow gift me one million dollars USD or more (and the same to every single person I know), none of us are going to be able to afford to live anywhere in Paris that actually has close access to all of those things you've described, with the living situation described above. If we're magically exceptionally lucky, at best we might get like one or two.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - ebg13 6y ago
    I lived in the center of Paris for years on a few Altairian dollars per day, and you're being ridiculous. Rental prices in Paris proper, not even the banlieue, are about the same per foot as Cambridge/Somerville/Boston while being an overall nicer place to live.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Scooters, the RER, the SNCF, the bus, the Vélib and the metro, are very cheap and service even poor parts of Paris and the Banlieue pretty well.
    - wozniacki 6y ago
      There's also this assumption that people in relatively segregated rich areas want to be connected to poorer areas via public transit - the opposite is more often true. People who wish to live in neighborhoods with low crime often NIMBY off any attempts to add public transit options specifically to keep out the riffraff. Marin County is home to over 252,000 residents, yet it is without a BART station. If you search web content to find out why that is the case, you will not find a lot. There is minimal information explaining why the BART doesn't connect from Marin to San Francisco and even less explaining why it doesn't connect from the East Bay to Marin. Marin funded a large portion of the project when BART was being planned in the 1950s. But "concerns" over whether or not the Golden Gate Bridge could support BART suddenly arose. After San Mateo pulled out of the plan, Marin's participation fell through as well. It is not unfair to speculate that socio-economic discrepancies might have something to do with this lack of transit connection. After all, Marin is the county where wealthy residents stopped George Lucas from building affordable housing on his land. The median household income there is almost $84,000, more than $15,000 more than San Francisco and more than twice as much as Oakland. A similar situation in Dayton, Ohio arose where wealthy suburbanites tried to stop the local transit authority from building three new bus stops near major employment centers.[1] [1] https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/ex/sustainablecitiescollective/it-s-bay-area-rapid-transit-except-marin-they-re-exclusive/176216/ https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/ex/sustainablecitiescollecti...

bcrosby95 6y ago

> It's also an assumption that everyone wants to begin and end every trip, no matter how trivial, with a parking spot. It's an assumption that people will want to drive in traffic for 20 minutes minimum to get to a supermarket, do anything with their kids, or anything outside their property line. I wouldn't be surprised to find some suburbs with some of the traits you mention, but it hasn't been my experience with them. I've lived in about 5 different suburbs in my life and a supermarket has never been more than 2 miles away - certainly not a 20 minute drive and it's even within biking distance. Parks are by schools and there's usually an elementary school fairly close if you're looking to do something with your kid. Depending upon the suburb you can also play in the street, which I regularly did growing up. The traits you are talking about sounds more like a rural area than a suburban one.

yason 6y ago
supermarket has never been more than 2 miles away - certainly not a 20 minute drive and it's even within biking distance I'd consider that far, far away. My walk to the nearest train station is about one mile, takes about 15 minutes to get there on foot, and that's irritatingly far, too, considering the trip is two way and repeats every day. Something like a grocery shop should be accessible within decent walking distance, a five-minute walk or so. A rule of thumb is that if something is far enough that I have to take the car in the first place I'll be incentivised to drive further away to a big supermarket/other big stores while I'm at it.
- philwelch 6y ago
  > A rule of thumb is that if something is far enough that I have to take the car in the first place I'll be incentivised to drive further away to a big supermarket/other big stores while I'm at it. The grocery store that’s 2 miles away is a big supermarket. The US doesn’t really do small groceries in most places.
  - hannasanarion 6y ago
    The US used to have tons of small groceries everywhere. The legislative mandate for free parking everywhere has put them out of business, and many were demolished to build freeways.

s1artibartfast 6y ago

Assumptions aside, I think this raises a valid question of how we balance high density urban housing and suburban housing in american cities. Can a city have both options as workable solutions? Is there more demand for high density urban housing that cities are not meeting? If so, why? Is there a demand for more access from suburban commuters? If so, why isn't the access available? Are these solutions mutually exclusive?

asciimov 6y ago

I assume you have never lived in Houston. Right now at 5:30pm (17:30) it's 95F (35C). I don't wanna walk 20 mins anywhere in this heat, I don't wanna stand and wait on the bus in the heat, I can't go pick up ice cream from the store and walk it home in this heat. Surely you think, summer isn't that long, just tough it out a few months. Well I regularly run the A/C in the "winter months". Several years ago during the week of chistmas, I went to a late night movie, as I was walking back to my car to go home I noticed the following: at 11:30pm it was 80F (26C), the humidity was around 80-90%, and I was wearing shorts.

mmm_grayons 6y ago
I am also Houstonian and can second this. The heat sucks and the humidity makes it even worse. And it goes on for much longer than most realize. They'll mention that other places also have a few hot days while ignoring that for the better part of the year (roughly April through October) it's not fun to be outside. I don't care if the grocery store is only a mile away, I'm still driving.

ctdonath 6y ago

There's the catch: is everything you could possibly want really a short walk/transit away? or is the proliferation of top-end (for you) options in a sprawling city way beyond what can be crammed within walking distance of _your_ home? Are you satisfied with a few arbitrary restaurants within walking distance? or, car enabled, would you rather go 30 miles for that REALLY good place that would never be so close in a compact city?

souprock 6y ago
Around here, the fancy restaurant has a boat dock. The people with money have boat docks. You don't walk to the restaurant! The dress code probably doesn't include SCUBA, especially if dripping wet.
stbtrax 6y ago
I dunno about other places but I can get to everything within ~10 min bike ride in SF. I have a car too for longer trips but I really don't like driving and enjoy the side effect of free exercise. It's not for everyone, I'm sure people with kids and people in non mediterranean climates might find a more car-centric lifestyle more comfortable
ffdjjjffjj 6y ago
I think you’re underestimating the number and quality of restaurants that are easily accessible in say a mixed used NYC neighborhood vs what’s within a 30 minute drive of a Houston suburb. Especially if you aren’t a fan of the midrange chains that seem to proliferate in sprawling areas for whatever reason.

souprock 6y ago

To safely "do anything with their kids" a car is very useful. Depending on the ages of the kids... Kids need to bring stuff. That could be hockey equipment, a drum set, or a clean playpen. Kids wander off if not contained. A kid may get off a subway at the wrong stop, lost in the crowd, along as the rest of the family continues on down the line. A kid may fall onto the tracks. Kids should be kept from licking public spaces. Kids should be kept from eating food found on the ground. Kids should not be able to play with hypodermic needles.

stbtrax 6y ago
Sounds like some paranoid parenting that seems to be in style right now. In Tokyo kids take the subway by themselves as young as age 9. In denser cities the density helps in that other people help socialize/watch your kids and they can bike around to their friends place when they are older. As someone who grew up in a denser area, then moved to a sprawly suburb where you were dependent on your parents for getting you around, and lack of public space made activities revolve around consumerism, I greatly preferred the dense area.
- souprock 6y ago
  Kids aren't born at that age. It takes 9 years. How are the little ones supposed to travel? At one time, mine were these ages: 8, 6, 4, 2, 2, 0 Doing that on the subway would be nuts. I actually know somebody who, as a kid, got off the subway at the wrong stop. That really happens. The crowd seems to be leaving, the kid goes, and before the parents can react the subway is moving again. Activities need not revolve around consumerism. Find a less-densely populated area, and there will be wild space like forests and streams. Backyards can be pretty big too. Consumerism is more of a city thing, since there is no backyard and no forest.
  - ric2b 6y ago
    If you have time to drive them somewhere you also have time to take them via public transit in a well connected city.
  - 6y ago