5 ms·

> I hate apartments, they are cramped, noisy, I don't have a private yard Is this something that can't be solved by building codes?

by jhgb 5y ago

namibj 5y ago
Yes it can. Well, the private yard is harder, but also the least required.
- jhgb 5y ago
  When I visited my step-grandmother in (then) West Germany in the 1980s, she had a private yard, despite living in an apartment tower...in the middle of Frankfurt. Apparently such allotments are common in Germany, even in cities.
  - collegeburner 5y ago
    I'm curious how this would work? I imagine it would have to be smalla and fenced in, and still everybody could see in from above.
    - jhgb 5y ago
      It's not a CIA black site. It's a garden. It works just fine even if people can see you from above.
dionidium 5y ago
This is basically what single-family zoning is. People noticed that most people express a preference for detached housing with extra space, so they made the alternatives illegal. The problem is that this ignores a pretty fundamental fact about economics (and the universe itself) -- people have to be free to make tradeoffs. In some sense I prefer a Lamborghini to the Hyundai I own. I guess everybody would. So why don't we make the Hyundai illegal? Because all things are not equal and when I'm free to weigh my options I make tradeoffs. In my case, I have decided I would rather own the worse car, so that I have the flexibility to use my money for other things. Some people would prefer to do this with apartments, too -- maybe to save money or maybe to be close to the urban center or for some other reason -- except that most cities have made them illegal in most districts. It's no good to say in the abstract, "most people prefer houses to apartments, so developers should only be allowed to build houses." People don't make decisions in the abstract. They have constraints. They weigh tradeoffs. Single-family zoning is a bunch of rich people making Hyundais illegal, because they're rich enough to ignore the tradeoffs and they think it's pretty obvious that everybody prefers a Lamborghini, anyway. Meanwhile, the rest of us would really like the option to buy a Hyundai -- the option to make tradeoffs.
- unethical_ban 5y ago
  I get the analogy, but real estate is a different beast than any other kind of ownership or asset. My neighbor owning a different style car than me is one thing. My neighbor choosing to tear down the rest of the block's houses and build a five-story apartment complex is a different thing.
  - dionidium 5y ago
    Yes, it is different. It barely matters what kind of car your neighbor has. But letting them build more housing has enormous positive benefits for the city and the country as a whole. More people get to live where they want. There's more trade. Housing prices are kept in check, leading to huge productivity gains. More businesses form. And so on and so on. And we have to weigh all those benefits against...the fact that you personally don't like it? I don't think it's a tough call.
    - unethical_ban 5y ago
      My biggest gripe with apartments is that it strips ownership away from residents and into the pockets of very few people with a lot of money. Equity doesn't get built. It's a hip fiefdom. I'll be 100% onboard when all these apartments kicking people out of homes are equity-based for residents. I know I moved the goalposts a bit, but equity is a huge issue for me with dense living. To your original point, I get it, but I've been in the world so long that the idea my neighbor can build a skyscraper against my property line feels... unfree, ironically perhaps. Your assertion is that dense housing is for the greater good, an opinion I share. So I guess I'm just human in my contradiction.
      - jaas 5y ago
        You know that people can and do buy/own apartments in apartment buildings, right? And that on the flip side of the coin, many people rent single family homes?
        5y ago
scythe 5y ago
Better than codes are metrics: if you come up with a way to measure the sound conductance between units, it could be advertised (or maybe require labeling) with the unit, and I believe consumer behavior will strongly encourage the construction of quieter housing. As for cramped/yard, the square footage and presence of a balcony are easily determined by the buyers. But building codes should accommodate balconies by exempting them from limits on floor-area ratio and building footprint.

> I hate apartments, they are cramped, noisy, I don't have a private yard Is this something that can't be solved by building codes?

by jhgb 5y ago

> I hate apartments, they are cramped, noisy, I don't have a private yard Is this something that can't be solved by building codes?

namibj 5y ago

Yes it can. Well, the private yard is harder, but also the least required.

jhgb 5y ago
When I visited my step-grandmother in (then) West Germany in the 1980s, she had a private yard, despite living in an apartment tower...in the middle of Frankfurt. Apparently such allotments are common in Germany, even in cities.
- collegeburner 5y ago
  I'm curious how this would work? I imagine it would have to be smalla and fenced in, and still everybody could see in from above.
  - jhgb 5y ago
    It's not a CIA black site. It's a garden. It works just fine even if people can see you from above.

dionidium 5y ago

This is basically what single-family zoning is. People noticed that most people express a preference for detached housing with extra space, so they made the alternatives illegal. The problem is that this ignores a pretty fundamental fact about economics (and the universe itself) -- people have to be free to make tradeoffs. In some sense I prefer a Lamborghini to the Hyundai I own. I guess everybody would. So why don't we make the Hyundai illegal? Because all things are not equal and when I'm free to weigh my options I make tradeoffs. In my case, I have decided I would rather own the worse car, so that I have the flexibility to use my money for other things. Some people would prefer to do this with apartments, too -- maybe to save money or maybe to be close to the urban center or for some other reason -- except that most cities have made them illegal in most districts. It's no good to say in the abstract, "most people prefer houses to apartments, so developers should only be allowed to build houses." People don't make decisions in the abstract. They have constraints. They weigh tradeoffs. Single-family zoning is a bunch of rich people making Hyundais illegal, because they're rich enough to ignore the tradeoffs and they think it's pretty obvious that everybody prefers a Lamborghini, anyway. Meanwhile, the rest of us would really like the option to buy a Hyundai -- the option to make tradeoffs.

unethical_ban 5y ago
I get the analogy, but real estate is a different beast than any other kind of ownership or asset. My neighbor owning a different style car than me is one thing. My neighbor choosing to tear down the rest of the block's houses and build a five-story apartment complex is a different thing.
- dionidium 5y ago
  Yes, it is different. It barely matters what kind of car your neighbor has. But letting them build more housing has enormous positive benefits for the city and the country as a whole. More people get to live where they want. There's more trade. Housing prices are kept in check, leading to huge productivity gains. More businesses form. And so on and so on. And we have to weigh all those benefits against...the fact that you personally don't like it? I don't think it's a tough call.
  - unethical_ban 5y ago
    My biggest gripe with apartments is that it strips ownership away from residents and into the pockets of very few people with a lot of money. Equity doesn't get built. It's a hip fiefdom. I'll be 100% onboard when all these apartments kicking people out of homes are equity-based for residents. I know I moved the goalposts a bit, but equity is a huge issue for me with dense living. To your original point, I get it, but I've been in the world so long that the idea my neighbor can build a skyscraper against my property line feels... unfree, ironically perhaps. Your assertion is that dense housing is for the greater good, an opinion I share. So I guess I'm just human in my contradiction.
    - jaas 5y ago
      You know that people can and do buy/own apartments in apartment buildings, right? And that on the flip side of the coin, many people rent single family homes?
      - 5y ago

scythe 5y ago

Better than codes are metrics: if you come up with a way to measure the sound conductance between units, it could be advertised (or maybe require labeling) with the unit, and I believe consumer behavior will strongly encourage the construction of quieter housing. As for cramped/yard, the square footage and presence of a balcony are easily determined by the buyers. But building codes should accommodate balconies by exempting them from limits on floor-area ratio and building footprint.