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.
My neighborhood has a few cul de sacs. I have never waited behind another car to exit this neighborhood, that I can recall.
Granted, my neighborhood is small. Maybe ban cul de sacs for huge neighborhoods that don't have enough exit points?
I mean, Preston is huge and has dozens of cul de sacs, and I never see exit traffic backed up leaving there, but there are also plenty of exits.
Not sure cul de sacs are the culprit here.
I don't think cul de sacs are necessarily traffic culprits (if there are enough entrances/exits to neighborhoods) but sometimes they can be deterrent to walkability - if a dead end doesn't connect, it may end up being an unnecessary farther walk/bike ride to somewhere (meaning people have to hop in their cars for even short trips).
Like someone said though, there are choices people choose to make - being able to walk/bike places is one reason I personally chose to live ITB so I'm personally biased
Thanks for turning my comment using this Op-Ed into a thread, Pierre.
Op-Ed is spot on... and I'll requote the standout parts to me...
Quote:
I live in University Park, a wonderful racially and economically diverse neighborhood, with a wide range of housing stock, from homes costing in the $500,000 range to small, one-story rentals. But lately, tear downs and empty space have been filling up with two-story houses of at least 2,000 square feet, with large porches and wooden porticoes, all in the half-million dollar and up range. It’s easy to see what’s happening: as the older African-American homeowners die off, their houses will be torn down, and large, expensive homes erected. Pretty soon the neighborhood will be lily white, upper middle class, and lose most of its character. It’s called gentrification. I call it the development disease.
But that’s not all. Surrounding Cameron Village on Oberlin Avenue are three apartment buildings which have altered the landscape and have absolutely no aesthetic distinction. The newest of these, 616 at the Village, my 21-year old nephew referred to as “generic”; it’s so boring to look at, it practically gives me narcolepsy. Not surprisingly, all of them charge pretty steep rents – a 600-square-foot, one-bedroom at the Village can run over $1,100 monthly.
Quote:
Trust me on this. Developers do not care about aesthetics, a neighborhood’s character, history, and, for the most part, building housing for people with moderate incomes. All they care about is tearing things down and building something bigger so they can charge higher rents or purchase prices.
I’ve seen this before. I’ve lived in Los Angeles, where endless strip malls have made parts of the city cosmic eyesores. I’ve also lived in New York, where Manhattan has basically become so expensive, thanks to the multi-million dollar condos being built, only Russian oligarchs and Saudi sheiks can afford it. And I’ve also lived in Philadelphia, where a respect for neighborhoods, housing stock and history is practically woven into the cultural DNA.
Raleigh is becoming increasingly characterless and soulless by the day. But apparently, this is what y'all want. *shrugs*
My neighborhood has a few cul de sacs. I have never waited behind another car to exit this neighborhood, that I can recall.
Granted, my neighborhood is small. Maybe ban cul de sacs for huge neighborhoods that don't have enough exit points?
I mean, Preston is huge and has dozens of cul de sacs, and I never see exit traffic backed up leaving there, but there are also plenty of exits.
Not sure cul de sacs are the culprit here.
It doesn't affect each neighborhood's ingress and egress. But all of these cul-de-sac communities funnel all traffic to a few main arteries which bear the brunt of traffic problems in the Triangle. And what's far worse, by their nature of privacy and exclusion, these communities make it hell for the DOT and local municipalities to plan for increased traffic in the area.
Raleigh is becoming increasingly characterless and soulless by the day. But apparently, this is what y'all want. *shrugs*
The problem is I don't think there's a city in the US that has done growth/development well, so there are no examples to look to so we can figure out what the formula is for successful growth.
Population is increasing, and with everyone wanting to live until they're 150 years old, this won't slow down anytime soon. The Triangle isn't the first area to be gentrified, and won't be the last.
The problem is I don't think there's a city in the US that has done growth/development well, so there are no examples to look to so we can figure out what the formula is for successful growth.
Smart growth by itself is tough. Smart growth without displacement is even tougher.
Raleigh touts itself as being progressive and intelligent... almost arrogantly. So the "smartest guys of this state" should be creative enough to do both to a fairly decent measure. So you'd think.
Smart growth by itself is tough. Smart growth without displacement is even tougher.
Raleigh touts itself as being progressive and intelligent... almost arrogantly. So the "smartest guys of this state" should be creative enough to do both to a fairly decent measure. So you'd think.
The problem is that you have so many competing interests and when you try to cater to everyone so that they are happy, you end up with a watered down plan that really doesn't do anything successfully.
Austin is a fairly progressive city and struggles with the same problems that Raleigh has - they are way past us in terms of transit but still deal with massive traffic problems and housing prices are getting out of hand there as well.
It doesn't affect each neighborhood's ingress and egress. But all of these cul-de-sac communities funnel all traffic to a few main arteries which bear the brunt of traffic problems in the Triangle. And what's far worse, by their nature of privacy and exclusion, these communities make it hell for the DOT and local municipalities to plan for increased traffic in the area.
I think it's a hard sell to convince people who are dropping 700k plus in this area on a house to get directly hooked up with a neighborhood with homes in the 200-300k price range.
Just the reality of the situation. It's not even elitism. It's "preservation of property values."
You have far more to lose in a home worth more than 500k than you do in a home for around 200k or less. If the market fluctuates, it hits people higher up in price much harder.
And, it has been my observation that (generally) you'll find more people who don't put much into their lawns and exterior home maintenance (or in keeping the generally narrow streets) free of cars parked beside the roads that keep fire and other safety vehicles from being able to safely pass.
But, you don't even have to go high on home costs.
You can adjust it... do you want to buy a SFH for 450k and be hooked directly to some transient, lower budget duplexes that are mostly rentals that the landlord doesn't care about?
What if part of these are HOA and the adjoining, older neighborhood is not?
People care about property values more than perceptions of traffic.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Portland seems to have gotten a lot of accolades for its "sensitive urban planning" ...
More of an apples to oranges example, but I'll continue to try to look for others...
Portland has an urban growth boundary. Making new construction pricey on mainly infill lots. This has caused high home prices and very small lots. Something I hear complaints about in this forum daily. You can not have your cake and eat it too.
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.
