3 ms·

The best transport is no transport. The rules for residential zones need to change to require sidewalks, playgrounds, and parks, and to encourage low-traffic s

The best transport is no transport. The rules for residential zones need to change to require sidewalks, playgrounds, and parks, and to encourage low-traffic service businesses such as co-working spaces, professional services (e.g. accountants, lawyers, real estate offices, ...), convenience stores and small cafes (up to 10 seat). And then there are lot size, lot coverage, and off-street parking rules to be abolished... Hand in hand with that we'll need new bank regulations to force them to finance suburbs that work for people and communities.

agumonkey 5y ago
Beware, what you described sounds a lot like what France and other places did with projects in the 70s. Every thing was in reach, but for some obscure reason it collapsed in less than 20 years. Not saying it's a bad idea, but it's sociologically subtle.
- jltsiren 5y ago
  When you build a new residential area, people move in with kids. After 15-20 years, kids move out, population collapses, and local services die. The best way to avoid this is building within / next to existing areas instead of building completely new areas.
- mint2 5y ago
  Because then one is forced to go to what we dentist is there, whatever handful of restaurant are there, the grocery store that is there. No one wants zero or relative few choices like that, so trying to build mini self contained ecosystems isn’t going to work well
  - agumonkey 5y ago
    Nobody was forced but somehow something was missing, i tried to find reasons why these failed, it's a complex blend of mild poverty, mass social dynamics (same problems as in other neighborhood except it's not in higher concentrations and become unmanageable quick, broken window + reputation + tribalism). It devolved too fast to be handled. Even though on paper, they had best in class standards of living for average citizen (at that time my aunt lived in flat in Paris without toilets, it was the way for old building in her paris area; a year later she had electric kitchen appliance and her own toilet/bathroom).

agumonkey 5y ago

Beware, what you described sounds a lot like what France and other places did with projects in the 70s. Every thing was in reach, but for some obscure reason it collapsed in less than 20 years. Not saying it's a bad idea, but it's sociologically subtle.

jltsiren 5y ago
When you build a new residential area, people move in with kids. After 15-20 years, kids move out, population collapses, and local services die. The best way to avoid this is building within / next to existing areas instead of building completely new areas.
mint2 5y ago
Because then one is forced to go to what we dentist is there, whatever handful of restaurant are there, the grocery store that is there. No one wants zero or relative few choices like that, so trying to build mini self contained ecosystems isn’t going to work well
- agumonkey 5y ago
  Nobody was forced but somehow something was missing, i tried to find reasons why these failed, it's a complex blend of mild poverty, mass social dynamics (same problems as in other neighborhood except it's not in higher concentrations and become unmanageable quick, broken window + reputation + tribalism). It devolved too fast to be handled. Even though on paper, they had best in class standards of living for average citizen (at that time my aunt lived in flat in Paris without toilets, it was the way for old building in her paris area; a year later she had electric kitchen appliance and her own toilet/bathroom).