4 ms·

That is not the alternative being discussed here. 80% of the US population is urban. We could not undo that without a huge degradation is quality of life. Citie

That is not the alternative being discussed here. 80% of the US population is urban. We could not undo that without a huge degradation is quality of life. Cities are incredible engines for wealth creation. The alternative more or less imposed by law is suburbs that don't have access to communal space or nature.

xyzelement 3y ago
// The alternative more or less imposed by law What do you mean imposed by law?
- conjecTech 3y ago
  I'm referring to things like single-family zoning, minimum parking requirements, and the subsidization & forced construction of highways through city centers. The situation we have today isn't some spontaneous expression of consumer preference. Federal, state and local governments have made building walkable alternatives nearly impossible and prohibitively expensive.
  - xyzelement 3y ago
    This is an interesting set of points, thank you. But they seem a bit orthogonal to the conclusion. For example - the town I live in is fairly compact (.15 acre lots, people can easily walk to main st.) but does not have a lot of multi-family. When the state attempted to push through multi-family zoning, the town and every other town like it pushed back. Because it is our preference to live in this style, and we're not eager to lift zoning even if it can eventually mean I have to walk 5 mins to a Starbucks rather than ten. One town over has many more 6+ story buildings and townhouses. So folks over there have made a different choice about what kind of situation they want to live in. Is their town more walkable than mine? Not really but it does have even more variety on Main St due to increased density - great. They were clearly able to do the thing you're talking about because they wanted to.
    - conjecTech 3y ago
      Sounds like you live in Long Island. You seem to admit that if not for the local government putting restrictions on how people use their land, individuals would choose to build multi-family structures. It is a compelled choice, even if only for a minority of the population.
      - xyzelement 3y ago
        You're right about where I live. // It is a compelled choice, even if only for a minority of the population. I think we agree here, the point is that the law aligns (rather than contradicts) the desires of the local population. Which is different than people dying to replace their colonials with tenements but the government not letting them. To some extent "everything" is compelled choice. I am precluded from building a cement factory in the middle of Bryce national park, but that probably is in line with the majority of people's desires. The original comment above asserted that laws are forcing our communities to look as they do. My point is that the laws seem to by-and-large enable us to have our communities as we wish them to be.
    - stetrain 3y ago
      > the town I live in is fairly compact (.15 acre lots, people can easily walk to main st.) This type of construction does not fit in the zoning requirements of many American suburban areas. That is a walkable community by your own description. Building walkable communities does not require high rises.
- amanaplanacanal 3y ago
  Mostly zoning.
  - xyzelement 3y ago
    That doesn't make a ton of sense. Zoning is controlled at a very local level (NY and CA had recent controversies with state attempting to claim that power.) My town is zoned for small single fam homes so people who want that kind of life come here. The town next door is clearly zoned for higher density, so has more apartments and townhouses. A different type of people live there. If you want more density, you go another town over and now you're in Queens, and you can keep going until you're in Manhattan with one of the highest densities in the world. Seems like zoning reflects people's desires and provides a diversity of lifestyles which is good. If a community/development wanted to be more walkable, they can make the zoning call on a very local level.
    - stetrain 3y ago
      What if more people want to live in a place like Queens than there are housing units there? Prices increase, and some people cannot afford to live there. Where do they go? If they move to your town, they are now "dissenters" for being the less-than-50% part of the population that might vote for things like higher density or mixed-used developments. It's difficult to vote your choices in a place you don't already live. You also describe a spectrum of types of places to live in a close geographic area that is not at all representative of most of the US. Being two-towns-over from Queens puts you in a majorly urban metro area with a level of density somewhat unique to older American cities and the Northeast in general. In my experience the towns and neighborhoods with close density building (not necessarily high-rises, you can get way high density with single and double story development than the average Target/Costco suburb), are seen as very desirable in the housing market and generally command very high prices. Places with a Main Street, with local shops and restaurants, with walkable housing and mixed development. These are the "cool neighborhoods" that people visit but often can't afford to live in. If supply of these places met or exceeded demand I would think they would be more affordable to buy housing in.

xyzelement 3y ago

// The alternative more or less imposed by law What do you mean imposed by law?

conjecTech 3y ago
I'm referring to things like single-family zoning, minimum parking requirements, and the subsidization & forced construction of highways through city centers. The situation we have today isn't some spontaneous expression of consumer preference. Federal, state and local governments have made building walkable alternatives nearly impossible and prohibitively expensive.
- xyzelement 3y ago
  This is an interesting set of points, thank you. But they seem a bit orthogonal to the conclusion. For example - the town I live in is fairly compact (.15 acre lots, people can easily walk to main st.) but does not have a lot of multi-family. When the state attempted to push through multi-family zoning, the town and every other town like it pushed back. Because it is our preference to live in this style, and we're not eager to lift zoning even if it can eventually mean I have to walk 5 mins to a Starbucks rather than ten. One town over has many more 6+ story buildings and townhouses. So folks over there have made a different choice about what kind of situation they want to live in. Is their town more walkable than mine? Not really but it does have even more variety on Main St due to increased density - great. They were clearly able to do the thing you're talking about because they wanted to.
  - conjecTech 3y ago
    Sounds like you live in Long Island. You seem to admit that if not for the local government putting restrictions on how people use their land, individuals would choose to build multi-family structures. It is a compelled choice, even if only for a minority of the population.
    - xyzelement 3y ago
      You're right about where I live. // It is a compelled choice, even if only for a minority of the population. I think we agree here, the point is that the law aligns (rather than contradicts) the desires of the local population. Which is different than people dying to replace their colonials with tenements but the government not letting them. To some extent "everything" is compelled choice. I am precluded from building a cement factory in the middle of Bryce national park, but that probably is in line with the majority of people's desires. The original comment above asserted that laws are forcing our communities to look as they do. My point is that the laws seem to by-and-large enable us to have our communities as we wish them to be.
  - stetrain 3y ago
    > the town I live in is fairly compact (.15 acre lots, people can easily walk to main st.) This type of construction does not fit in the zoning requirements of many American suburban areas. That is a walkable community by your own description. Building walkable communities does not require high rises.
amanaplanacanal 3y ago
Mostly zoning.
- xyzelement 3y ago
  That doesn't make a ton of sense. Zoning is controlled at a very local level (NY and CA had recent controversies with state attempting to claim that power.) My town is zoned for small single fam homes so people who want that kind of life come here. The town next door is clearly zoned for higher density, so has more apartments and townhouses. A different type of people live there. If you want more density, you go another town over and now you're in Queens, and you can keep going until you're in Manhattan with one of the highest densities in the world. Seems like zoning reflects people's desires and provides a diversity of lifestyles which is good. If a community/development wanted to be more walkable, they can make the zoning call on a very local level.
  - stetrain 3y ago
    What if more people want to live in a place like Queens than there are housing units there? Prices increase, and some people cannot afford to live there. Where do they go? If they move to your town, they are now "dissenters" for being the less-than-50% part of the population that might vote for things like higher density or mixed-used developments. It's difficult to vote your choices in a place you don't already live. You also describe a spectrum of types of places to live in a close geographic area that is not at all representative of most of the US. Being two-towns-over from Queens puts you in a majorly urban metro area with a level of density somewhat unique to older American cities and the Northeast in general. In my experience the towns and neighborhoods with close density building (not necessarily high-rises, you can get way high density with single and double story development than the average Target/Costco suburb), are seen as very desirable in the housing market and generally command very high prices. Places with a Main Street, with local shops and restaurants, with walkable housing and mixed development. These are the "cool neighborhoods" that people visit but often can't afford to live in. If supply of these places met or exceeded demand I would think they would be more affordable to buy housing in.