33 ms·

Charlotte would probably be a lot better off if the growth wasn't sprawling so much with very low density single family houses. Instead it's illegal to build an

Charlotte would probably be a lot better off if the growth wasn't sprawling so much with very low density single family houses. Instead it's illegal to build anything but a SFH in most of the region. Imagine if half the single family homes spreading out for miles were instead townhouses, 4-6 floor apartments, duplexes, quadplexes with mixed use like groceries and schools placed within walking distance of most neighborhoods. I bet traffic and costs would be a fraction of what they are now, much easier to serve density with good infrastructure. With an added bonus, more farms and greenspace would be preserved.

e40 4y ago
There are a LOT of apartments in the area where my dad lives. All the new stuff is higher density housing. That's making the traffic even worse.
low_common 4y ago
yeah but most people don't want to live in a townhouse/apartment
- coryrc 4y ago
  They do if they were affordable and well-built, but we zone them to be expensive and undercut the labor market with illegal labor, so people don't have the motivation to upskill.
  - PaulHoule 4y ago
    Unless they are expected to be "affordable housing" in which case they are mandated to use unaffordable labor.
- amanaplanacanal 4y ago
  Most people would probably like to live in a giant mansion on a country estate, but they can’t afford to. If the price of a single family house in a sprawling suburb doesn’t include the actual cost of the infrastructure to serve that home, then really they can’t afford to live there, either. Cities all over the US are running into this problem.
  - bequanna 4y ago
    > If the price of a single family house in a sprawling suburb doesn’t include the actual cost of the infrastructure to serve that home, then really they can’t afford to live there, either. Sorry, but what is your point here? This is the same recycled “strongtowns” argument that they repeat endlessly. Worst case, property taxes increase to help with local infrastructure.
    - spaethnl 4y ago
      Who is "they"? You dismiss the "strongtowns" argument as if there is some consensus that it has been debunked, but I don't think there is such a consensus, so you'd need to support that claim. Further, the worst case is not that property taxes increase, it is that other people, usually less fortunate, end up subsidizing them further through federal, state, and county funds, rather than their own local taxes.
  - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
    What the lie-o-meter has to say about your assertion really depends a lot on the average income and level of density in the suburb in question. The rich inner suburbs full of busybody jerks are unfortunately rich enough to almost certainly be self sustaining if they want to be. No starving that beast.
cudgy 4y ago
Apartment living sucks. People love hearing their neighbors in the bedroom next door and their kids stomping on the floor upstairs while practicing their tumbling moves. Walking groceries up multiple floors of stairs is great too. And if you want to tinker on your car or some woodworking project … too bad. Do you want to add a new bedroom for a new family member? … too bad. Want to plant some plants or a garden? … too bad. Want a pool, workshop, or a garage? … too bad. Want to allow your young kids to go outside safely? … too bad. Want to get a dog of a certain breed like a German Shepherd or Bull dog? … too bad. The restrictions of apartment living are numerous in comparison to a single family property. Not everyone wants to live like that.
- carlmr 4y ago
  > People love hearing their neighbors in the bedroom next door and their kids stomping on the floor upstairs while practicing their tumbling moves. In densely populated areas of Europe we have apartments everywhere. It's not that bad, if the building was well-built you barely hear your neighbors. > Walking groceries up multiple floors of stairs is great too. With the average American BMI it's great indeed!
  - cudgy 4y ago
    Densely populated areas in the US are also loaded with apartments. However, there is a vast amount of land in the US, so 99% of it is sparsely populated. European homes are built to a higher standard than US homes and many are built from concrete and stone. US apartments are usually built using cheap particle board for floors that turn into bouncy, noisy trampolines over time and thin walls between units. None of that deals with the many other disadvantages of apartment living.
  - nradov 4y ago
    Nah, it's pretty bad. I've been to Europe and visited people who live in those flats. Even if the sound insulation is good, it's a bleak existence compared to a typical American suburban house (or townhouse). Very cramped, little ability to customize or remodel it to fit your needs, no space for any hobbies or activities that involve anything large or heavy or loud or dirty. Can't really invite a large group for a party, or have overnight guests. Dense urban apartments should be available for those who want that lifestyle (primarily childless young people) but it's not a model that we should be pushing as the default for the general population. That would be a real step backwards.
bequanna 4y ago
> Imagine if half the single family homes spreading out for miles were instead townhouses, 4-6 floor apartments, duplexes, quadplexes with mixed use like groceries and schools placed within walking distance of most neighborhoods. If that is all the zoning allowed then people just wouldn’t live there. Most people in the US simply don’t want to live like that. Consumer demand should dictate what kind of housing gets built, not naive central planners.
- pwinnski 4y ago
  > Consumer demand should dictate what kind of housing gets built, not naive central planners. And yet all across America, zoning restrictions laid down by "naive central planners" eliminate options, suppressing options for consumer demand.

e40 4y ago

There are a LOT of apartments in the area where my dad lives. All the new stuff is higher density housing. That's making the traffic even worse.

low_common 4y ago

yeah but most people don't want to live in a townhouse/apartment

coryrc 4y ago
They do if they were affordable and well-built, but we zone them to be expensive and undercut the labor market with illegal labor, so people don't have the motivation to upskill.
- PaulHoule 4y ago
  Unless they are expected to be "affordable housing" in which case they are mandated to use unaffordable labor.
amanaplanacanal 4y ago
Most people would probably like to live in a giant mansion on a country estate, but they can’t afford to. If the price of a single family house in a sprawling suburb doesn’t include the actual cost of the infrastructure to serve that home, then really they can’t afford to live there, either. Cities all over the US are running into this problem.
- bequanna 4y ago
  > If the price of a single family house in a sprawling suburb doesn’t include the actual cost of the infrastructure to serve that home, then really they can’t afford to live there, either. Sorry, but what is your point here? This is the same recycled “strongtowns” argument that they repeat endlessly. Worst case, property taxes increase to help with local infrastructure.
  - spaethnl 4y ago
    Who is "they"? You dismiss the "strongtowns" argument as if there is some consensus that it has been debunked, but I don't think there is such a consensus, so you'd need to support that claim. Further, the worst case is not that property taxes increase, it is that other people, usually less fortunate, end up subsidizing them further through federal, state, and county funds, rather than their own local taxes.
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  What the lie-o-meter has to say about your assertion really depends a lot on the average income and level of density in the suburb in question. The rich inner suburbs full of busybody jerks are unfortunately rich enough to almost certainly be self sustaining if they want to be. No starving that beast.

cudgy 4y ago

Apartment living sucks. People love hearing their neighbors in the bedroom next door and their kids stomping on the floor upstairs while practicing their tumbling moves. Walking groceries up multiple floors of stairs is great too. And if you want to tinker on your car or some woodworking project … too bad. Do you want to add a new bedroom for a new family member? … too bad. Want to plant some plants or a garden? … too bad. Want a pool, workshop, or a garage? … too bad. Want to allow your young kids to go outside safely? … too bad. Want to get a dog of a certain breed like a German Shepherd or Bull dog? … too bad. The restrictions of apartment living are numerous in comparison to a single family property. Not everyone wants to live like that.

carlmr 4y ago
> People love hearing their neighbors in the bedroom next door and their kids stomping on the floor upstairs while practicing their tumbling moves. In densely populated areas of Europe we have apartments everywhere. It's not that bad, if the building was well-built you barely hear your neighbors. > Walking groceries up multiple floors of stairs is great too. With the average American BMI it's great indeed!
- cudgy 4y ago
  Densely populated areas in the US are also loaded with apartments. However, there is a vast amount of land in the US, so 99% of it is sparsely populated. European homes are built to a higher standard than US homes and many are built from concrete and stone. US apartments are usually built using cheap particle board for floors that turn into bouncy, noisy trampolines over time and thin walls between units. None of that deals with the many other disadvantages of apartment living.
- nradov 4y ago
  Nah, it's pretty bad. I've been to Europe and visited people who live in those flats. Even if the sound insulation is good, it's a bleak existence compared to a typical American suburban house (or townhouse). Very cramped, little ability to customize or remodel it to fit your needs, no space for any hobbies or activities that involve anything large or heavy or loud or dirty. Can't really invite a large group for a party, or have overnight guests. Dense urban apartments should be available for those who want that lifestyle (primarily childless young people) but it's not a model that we should be pushing as the default for the general population. That would be a real step backwards.

bequanna 4y ago

> Imagine if half the single family homes spreading out for miles were instead townhouses, 4-6 floor apartments, duplexes, quadplexes with mixed use like groceries and schools placed within walking distance of most neighborhoods. If that is all the zoning allowed then people just wouldn’t live there. Most people in the US simply don’t want to live like that. Consumer demand should dictate what kind of housing gets built, not naive central planners.

pwinnski 4y ago
> Consumer demand should dictate what kind of housing gets built, not naive central planners. And yet all across America, zoning restrictions laid down by "naive central planners" eliminate options, suppressing options for consumer demand.