Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Reorienting Long Island’s configuration of jobs, housing and transportation does not require a radical transformation of land use patterns or Long Island’s suburban lifestyle. In fact, nothing is likely to do more for preserving the character of existing neighborhoods than steering the next generation of growth to downtowns and near train stations. Creating more housing and jobs around these central locations will limit growth pressures in existing neighborhoods, on agricultural land and in environmentally sensitive areas. It would put fewer cars on the road compared to development on open space. Most importantly, it would increase economic opportunities, in-comes and tax revenues without putting additional burdens on existing residents. (Credit to LI Index)
The demographic of American suburbia has changed. Many suburbs have evolved from low-density city escapes to highly populated municipalities. A diverse crowd of residents that range in age, race, religion, occupation, and family size now call suburbia their home. As a result, the developments of these towns are at a pivotal climax. The typical single-family home can no longer accommodate this new generation of suburbanites.
We need utilize the downtowns that have the right ingredients for success. Hicksville, Freeport, Merrick, and Bellmore, just to name a few. Have you been to Patchogue lately? I really enjoy the work that was done in Patchogue but they should have added some housing that was more affordable..
Last edited by longislandesign; 10-27-2014 at 08:48 PM..
Reason: opps
Reorienting Long Island’s configuration of jobs, housing and transportation does not require a radical transformation of land use patterns or Long Island’s suburban lifestyle. In fact, nothing is likely to do more for preserving the character of existing neighborhoods than steering the next generation of growth to downtowns and near train stations.
This statement is a bit subjective. What is not radical transformation to you may be so for a village whose main street/drag is Rt. 25A and who has limited control over measures that would slow down traffic (county/state traffic engineers would fight this). Also I don't know how it works in NYS but in some states/localities, stores and homes are required to provide surface parking spaces that take away space from pedestrian amenities. Large, visible parts of Hicksville and Freeport are occupied by parking lots. You'd also have to move privately owned shops, amenities, playgrounds, schools to places that are both near the train station and are pedestrian friendly (ie what else to do other than get from home to train). This is basically reinventing the wheel for a lot of towns and villages.
Last edited by Forest_Hills_Daddy; 10-28-2014 at 04:38 AM..
North Shore Towers on GreatNeck/LittleNeck Border has has this style of living for almost 50 years.
They have a golf course, doormen, supermarket, movie theater, gym, pools all on property and an express bus to work every day that pulls into complex and you wait in lobby for it. Plus much much much closer to Manhattan
Goodbye America, Apple pie, county fairs, Friday night football games, baseball and chevrolet.
You know when you think about it, anything that ends in "ism' is bad news. Terrorism, liberalism, now you got this urbanism. It's like smoking, it's just not good for folks.
Reminds me of a line from Ferris Bueller's Day Off
"Not that I condone fascism, or any -ism for that matter. -Ism's in my opinion are not good. A person should not believe in an -ism, he should believe in himself. I quote John Lennon, "I don't believe in Beatles, I just believe in me." Good point there. After all, he was the walrus. I could be the walrus. I'd still have to bum rides off people."
That happens when the entire project is managed by one developer and one designer. A way to go around it is to divide the project to different architects. For example, a few blocks can be to one architect, the next few blocks to another and so on. That way the development does not look monolithic.
Blocks? Perhaps in the more bombed out areas of the South Bronx. Here on LI that would require developers buying up sufficient land or acquiring commercial properties and private homes through eminent domain.
This new urbanism came about for a number of reasons. First and foremost, there is no open space for developers anymore in land constrained areas. So any new development needs to build up and not out. Second, between high taxes, low income growth, and tight credit, not enough people can afford or get a mortgage on a house. More and more younger people and retirees on fixed incomes are becoming renters. Third, towns need to increase their revenue bases in order to afford the costly public pension decisions that were made over the past decades. These public employees are retiring and the lucrative benefits promised to them are now a reality and no longer tomorrow's problem. The easiest way for towns to increase revenue is to increase population density, since more people translates into more taxes. Fourth, real estate is very much a local business. Many builders are locally owned. Local governments control zoning. This sets up a favorable ecosystem whereby builders get zoning variances to allow the new urbanism through political contributions and other "benefits" to local politicians and politically connected third parties can also benefit as builders hand out jobs to select local folks.
Really, the new urbanism is nothing more than what happened to Bronx, Queens and Brooklyn over time. Houses first, then apartments, then high-rises, and ever increasing population density, crime, and poverty that comes with it. Maybe not overnight, but over time as the shiny new buildings age and can no longer command premium rents and slowly move down-market and begin to attract a different clientele. I'm sure there were times with Bronx, Queens, and Brooklyn were "suburban" too. The key is to notice when this "new urbanism" thing threatens to become a detriment; then sell and try to move to an area before it's too late and property values plummet.
Blocks? Perhaps in the more bombed out areas of the South Bronx. Here on LI that would require developers buying up sufficient land or acquiring commercial properties and private homes through eminent domain.
Exactly why I think not a lot of existing villages and towns in the NYC suburbs are not suited for walkable developments. Pedestrians do not want to walk long blocks, next to streets where cars drive >20mph, and where the view is broken up by large parking lots. You'd basically have to reconfigure entire villages.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMS99
Really, the new urbanism is nothing more than what happened to Bronx, Queens and Brooklyn over time. Houses first, then apartments, then high-rises, and ever increasing population density, crime, and poverty that comes with it. Maybe not overnight, but over time as the shiny new buildings age and can no longer command premium rents and slowly move down-market and begin to attract a different clientele. I'm sure there were times with Bronx, Queens, and Brooklyn were "suburban" too. The key is to notice when this "new urbanism" thing threatens to become a detriment; then sell and try to move to an area before it's too late and property values plummet.
Actually it's the opposite. Crime in Queens and Brooklyn has fallen since the early 90s, real estate prices are climbing and both private and public investment money is pouring in. And these boroughs are becoming wealthier on average. Also the budget for Section 8 and projects is being scaled back so more of the impoverished are being pushed out by the wealthier newcomers.
I also think that not everyone wants to live urban or replicated city. There is so much beauty in this country and to continually destroy it with modern development which is basically cookie cutter and it all looks the same.
I'm more for historic preservation and small town appeal. The Friday night football games, sidewalk farmers markets, apple orchards, hay rides, and pumpkin patches.
These young folks today are all about the new turn key stuff, maybe instead of urbanism it's more along the lines of modernism. New is posh, glittery.
I'm more for historic preservation and small town appeal. The Friday night football games, sidewalk farmers markets, apple orchards, hay rides, and pumpkin patches.
The typical suburb is nothing like this. And it's not just in the NYC area. Houses w/ vinyl sides, faux columns, bermuda grass, strip malls, kids playing video games - you find them in Virginia also.
This statement is a bit subjective. What is not radical transformation to you may be so for a village whose main street/drag is Rt. 25A and who has limited control over measures that would slow down traffic (county/state traffic engineers would fight this). Also I don't know how it works in NYS but in some states/localities, stores and homes are required to provide surface parking spaces that take away space from pedestrian amenities. Large, visible parts of Hicksville and Freeport are occupied by parking lots. You'd also have to move privately owned shops, amenities, playgrounds, schools to places that are both near the train station and are pedestrian friendly (ie what else to do other than get from home to train). This is basically reinventing the wheel for a lot of towns and villages.
You are totally correct in saying it will be a radical change for the village but lets be honest...
We need to make a change some where. Long Island is dying. It is slowly going through a brain drain which is causing our youth to flee to cities and towns such as Astoria, Williamsburg, Portland, Seattle, Cambridge and Somerville.
No matter what we do, we need to make some big changes.. I for one, would rather see these changes happen near an existing dense location with existing mass transit infrastructure. Personally to me, it doesn't make sense to start knocking down suburban homes and adding 4 story condos/apartments. It does however, make sense to build upon the existing fabric of downtowns..
Yes parking, small businesses, and public amenities will need to be coordinated but it certainly can be done. If you are looking for examples check out some of the LEED Neighborhood communities, they are a great example of green design and new urbanism.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
