4 ms·

Ok yeah, if you look at a single location and ignore the multitude of other neighborhoods that aren't like that, you'll find that experience. For note though, n

Ok yeah, if you look at a single location and ignore the multitude of other neighborhoods that aren't like that, you'll find that experience. For note though, normally the library is at Arapaho just outside the neighborhood, so an easy and pretty safe bike ride for a 12 year old. It's at a temporary location due to a fire at City Hall leading to a lot of renovations. You're just completely ignoring all the stuff at Cityline. Walking distance to a grocer there. Right on the light rail. A few bus lines. That 12 year old could ride down to Arapaho station and hop on the bus to go to where the library usually is. Or living near Richardson Terrace. Or near Cottonwood Park. Or Glenville Park. Just because there's not a listing there today, this second, doesn't mean there won't be one there in a week or a month. Picking the right place to live, it's entirely possible to live car-free. I know what it's like and what's possible, as I did it for a bit. And once again you bring up zoning laws and just completely forget how those exist. Once again you're essentially arguing nobody has any control over zoning laws, they just appear from the ether ruining everyone's lives with everyone powerless to change them. It's too bad nobody could ever do anything about zoning laws, those were just written in stone 70 years ago by the gods and cannot possibly be changed by the people there. The suburbs ultimately are the way they are today because people keep voting for people who choose to not change the zoning laws. Our towns could be different if people wanted to change the laws, but the majority don't. You can point to all kinds of history (history I do know) as the reasons why they were originally built, but ultimately they're still there because that's what the majority of people living there choose. Ultimately, suburbs exist because that's what the majority of people choose. I'm not arguing it's right or wrong here, I'm just arguing against this concept that nobody really wants to live in the suburbs, they're only forced to. Some people are, sure, but not the majority. Don't get me wrong, I do want there to be more choice in housing. I'm happy places like Cityline and others exist. I vote for more transit, denser zoning, better bike infrastructure, etc. But I go to City Hall, I watch the streams for planning meetings. I talk to neighbors and friends. They way more often than not like the more car dependent suburbia. I'm often seen as a nut for choosing to take transit when I've got a perfectly good car. They wonder why I choose to bike places. So don't think I'm someone who is arguing against housing choice overall, I'm very much for it. But you can't change it if you don't acknowledge reality. And the reality is, most people currently living in suburbia want suburbia. Go read up about the Plano Tomorrow plan and all the local politics around that, then tell me nobody chooses the suburbs. Some planning for more density and suddenly city hall is packed with people ready to fight against it. I see this kind of stuff all over the country. https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2021/09/what-comes-after-plano-tomorrow-more-suburban-character/ https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2021/09/what-comes-aft... https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2019/07/23/heres-how-the-stunning-delay-on-controversial-plano-tomorrow-vote-might-shift-citys-political-dynamics/ https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2019/07/23/her...

eesmith 3y ago
> if you look at a single location and ignore the multitude of other neighborhoods that aren't like that, you'll find that experience. You specified a city, not a neighborhood, of a place I've never been. There were plenty of worse places I could have picked in the city. So, looking at Cityline Dr. Hah! Are you talking about the 'Residences at CityLine'? That's new construction clearly not following the traditional R1 requirements for setback that dominates much of US suburbia. And at $600K+ it's far outside what most people can afford. > Picking the right place to live, it's entirely possible to live car-free. Sure. Streetcar suburbs like Oak Park, IL are a classic example of a suburb where people can live car free. Problems are 1) nearly all of them are too expensive for most people to have the choice to move there, and 2) zoning laws prohibit new construction. And note that I said "easy to live comfortably without a car." Give me an address in Richardson, then think about where the local preschool, playground, elementary school, pediatrician, library, grocery store, restaurants, green space, sports practice, doctor's office, dentist, optician, and hospital are. Bonus points if you can meet up with friends at a bar, drink, and walk home at 11pm feeling safe. (Walk because you've had a few beers and don't want to risk a DUI.) How long does it take to walk or use mass transit to get there? And how much does it cost to buy a house there. > And once again you bring up zoning laws and just completely forget how those exist. Did you forget my discussion of how racism was an intrinsic component in American suburbia? The laws about minimum lot sizes and preventing building apartment complexes in single-family neighborhoods was a direct response to keep black (and poor) people out. > Our towns could be different if people wanted to change the laws, but the majority don't. Isn't Texas one of the places that requires a supermajority to allow zoning changes? My research suggests a 3/4ths vote is needed - hardly a majority. (NC appears to require a 4/5ths supermajority?!) Which means a town can't change its zoning even if a simple majority of the people want to change. In any case, generations of bad urban planning policies based in no small part on racism mean most people think the only two options are "single-family suburbia" and "dense urban". You yourself made that mistake. > most people currently living in suburbia want suburbia. Great! I don't want to change that! Suburbia is fine! What I don't like that most people don't have a choice to live in a suburbia which isn't car-dependent. I propose changing the laws to get rid of parking minima, and changing them to allow multi-family homes in R1-zoned area -- just like the suburb where I grew up. For example, the Biden administration's Build Back Better Agenda is looking at using the same monetary tools that pushed the scale to the traditional post-war American suburb - federal funding - to remove restrictive zoning. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/09/01/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-immediate-steps-to-increase-affordable-housing-supply/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases... If you approve of the democratic principles which lead the FHA to promote R1-zone suburbs in the 1950s and 1960s then you should approve of the same principles being used now to get rid of exclusive zoning. > and suddenly city hall is packed with people ready to fight against it. And only 25% of population can decide the future of city zoning. How do you know that represents the majority viewpoint?

eesmith 3y ago

> if you look at a single location and ignore the multitude of other neighborhoods that aren't like that, you'll find that experience. You specified a city, not a neighborhood, of a place I've never been. There were plenty of worse places I could have picked in the city. So, looking at Cityline Dr. Hah! Are you talking about the 'Residences at CityLine'? That's new construction clearly not following the traditional R1 requirements for setback that dominates much of US suburbia. And at $600K+ it's far outside what most people can afford. > Picking the right place to live, it's entirely possible to live car-free. Sure. Streetcar suburbs like Oak Park, IL are a classic example of a suburb where people can live car free. Problems are 1) nearly all of them are too expensive for most people to have the choice to move there, and 2) zoning laws prohibit new construction. And note that I said "easy to live comfortably without a car." Give me an address in Richardson, then think about where the local preschool, playground, elementary school, pediatrician, library, grocery store, restaurants, green space, sports practice, doctor's office, dentist, optician, and hospital are. Bonus points if you can meet up with friends at a bar, drink, and walk home at 11pm feeling safe. (Walk because you've had a few beers and don't want to risk a DUI.) How long does it take to walk or use mass transit to get there? And how much does it cost to buy a house there. > And once again you bring up zoning laws and just completely forget how those exist. Did you forget my discussion of how racism was an intrinsic component in American suburbia? The laws about minimum lot sizes and preventing building apartment complexes in single-family neighborhoods was a direct response to keep black (and poor) people out. > Our towns could be different if people wanted to change the laws, but the majority don't. Isn't Texas one of the places that requires a supermajority to allow zoning changes? My research suggests a 3/4ths vote is needed - hardly a majority. (NC appears to require a 4/5ths supermajority?!) Which means a town can't change its zoning even if a simple majority of the people want to change. In any case, generations of bad urban planning policies based in no small part on racism mean most people think the only two options are "single-family suburbia" and "dense urban". You yourself made that mistake. > most people currently living in suburbia want suburbia. Great! I don't want to change that! Suburbia is fine! What I don't like that most people don't have a choice to live in a suburbia which isn't car-dependent. I propose changing the laws to get rid of parking minima, and changing them to allow multi-family homes in R1-zoned area -- just like the suburb where I grew up. For example, the Biden administration's Build Back Better Agenda is looking at using the same monetary tools that pushed the scale to the traditional post-war American suburb - federal funding - to remove restrictive zoning. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/09/01/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-immediate-steps-to-increase-affordable-housing-supply/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases... If you approve of the democratic principles which lead the FHA to promote R1-zone suburbs in the 1950s and 1960s then you should approve of the same principles being used now to get rid of exclusive zoning. > and suddenly city hall is packed with people ready to fight against it. And only 25% of population can decide the future of city zoning. How do you know that represents the majority viewpoint?