U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 03-02-2014, 03:15 PM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,713,490 times
Reputation: 2538

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
In that case you're the happiest person I know.
*Makes wildly inaccurate statement
*Refuses to back it up with any supporting documentation whatsoever
*Is North Beach Person

 
Old 03-02-2014, 03:17 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,060 posts, read 16,066,811 times
Reputation: 12635
Good think you crushed him like a Nimby Komeht. Now the NIMBys are crushed and the only thing left is to crush the roads so we can go back to walking in the mud and cities will have won.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 03:22 PM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
33,877 posts, read 42,085,992 times
Reputation: 43276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
*Makes wildly inaccurate statement
*Refuses to back it up with any supporting documentation whatsoever
*Is North Beach Person

I am not going to go back and quote from every stupid thread or post you've started. I won't. I won't.
The Hell I won't:

Excellent article on why mandated parking spaces is bad public policy

Unsettling link between low density sprawl and suicide

Ending ban on interstate tolling gains ground

If you are stuck in traffic - you are the traffic.

If you are stuck in traffic - you are the traffic.

MSM report on people fleeing suburbs for the city

These are just from page 1.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 03:30 PM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,713,490 times
Reputation: 2538
You: And, just to put a cherry on it, you want people outside the urban areas to pay for your "smart planning and design.

Me: I've said no such thing.

You: Here's a bunch of links.

Me: Not a single one backs up what your claim that I "want people outside urban areas to pay for your smart planning and design."

Are we done here?
 
Old 03-02-2014, 03:39 PM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
33,877 posts, read 42,085,992 times
Reputation: 43276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
You: And, just to put a cherry on it, you want people outside the urban areas to pay for your "smart planning and design.

Me: I've said no such thing.

You: Here's a bunch of links.

Me: Not a single one backs up what your claim that I "want people outside urban areas to pay for your smart planning and design."

Are we done here?
Look at the body of your posts. Every single one exudes disdain for people who have chosen-chosen- to live outside your beloved urban cores. You also advocate making them pay confiscatory fees for doing so.

In Komeht World everyone lives in a 600 sq. ft. apartment (except those who live in luxury, locked and security patrolled buildings) go to work on buses (paid for by those who drive cars) and shop daily at non-existent mom and pop stores.

Reality is different. You can prattle about gentrification all you want but the reality is that gentrifiers are upper income and are pushing the middle class out.

You can say what you advocate attracts all groups, but it doesn't. You know it, I know it, Ray Charles can see it doesn't.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 04:01 PM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,713,490 times
Reputation: 2538
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
Look at the body of your posts. Every single one exudes disdain for people who have chosen-chosen- to live outside your beloved urban cores. You also advocate making them pay confiscatory fees for doing so.

In Komeht World everyone lives in a 600 sq. ft. apartment (except those who live in luxury, locked and security patrolled buildings) go to work on buses (paid for by those who drive cars) and shop daily at non-existent mom and pop stores.

Reality is different. You can prattle about gentrification all you want but the reality is that gentrifiers are upper income and are pushing the middle class out.

You can say what you advocate attracts all groups, but it doesn't. You know it, I know it, Ray Charles can see it doesn't.
Stop - you made a wildly inaccurate claim and have been called on it. Now you're making more wildly inaccurate claims on top of that.

Nei - if he wants to take issue with something I actually said, let him come forward with it. I'll defend anything I actually said. But I'm not going to spend any more time explaining things I didn't say.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 04:14 PM
 
Location: USA
7,478 posts, read 5,786,020 times
Reputation: 12321
I'm confused as to what's to battle here.

All around the nation, I see rotting urban cores without a job in sight. I see crumbling rowhomes covered in gang tags, failing businesses - soon to be replaced with liquor stores and check cashing places - and crime. All the while, the taxes in these places keep going up and more and more people leave.

Now, don't get me wrong - I don't LIKE any of the above. I'd actually be quite happy in a rowhome or townhome community where I could live within walking distance of some friends, some good restaurants, and some useful stores or places of entertainment. I'd still need a car to take longer trips, but in a perfect world, I would also have a short commute to work that might not even need it. But that lifestyle is not practical much of anywhere outside of a few large cities in America, and even then it might not work depending upon if there are any jobs in your field in the city itself. A bunch of problems bring the whole concept of "the victory of urbanism" to a screeching halt:

1) Lack of jobs in urban areas. While an urban environment does a fine job preventing sprawl and gridlock, it doesn't do any good at all if everyone has to drive out of the city for their job and then back into the city at the end of the day. All you do is move the traffic jam around at that point. People need to be able to live near where they work. That has failed in many suburban environments thanks to huge commutes, but it also fails in urban environments if all the jobs are out in the suburbs.

2) Dismal living conditions: Too many cities (at least in America) are still being strangled by rampant crime, poverty, and decay. Nobody wants to live like. What's the use of having lots of stuff within walking distance of you if you don't feel safe going outside at night? What's the use of getting a cheaper home if you're not safe there and taxes are through the roof on the place?

3) City congestion - old cities that have not been updated to handle new realities: There's tons of congestion and sprawl in the suburbs and plenty of people with huge commutes, but cities can be badly crowded as well. Too many cars and not enough places for them, too many people in too small an area. It can be just as bad as the suburbs, just in a different way.

Summary: I don't see any triumph of urbanism, at least not in America. I see a nation that instead has continued to neglect problems for years, eagerly leaving behind old and crumbling regions to pave over new ones, while all the while failing to address the problems. There is no reason our cities cannot be great places like those in Europe and other locations, but there's no will or leadership to do that. There's too much money to be made selling new, overpriced homes vs. fixing up old neighborhoods and changing and improving them for modern living.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 06:20 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
27,165 posts, read 29,650,120 times
Reputation: 26646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rambler123 View Post
I'm confused as to what's to battle here.

All around the nation, I see rotting urban cores without a job in sight. I see crumbling rowhomes covered in gang tags, failing businesses - soon to be replaced with liquor stores and check cashing places - and crime. All the while, the taxes in these places keep going up and more and more people leave.

Now, don't get me wrong - I don't LIKE any of the above. I'd actually be quite happy in a rowhome or townhome community where I could live within walking distance of some friends, some good restaurants, and some useful stores or places of entertainment. I'd still need a car to take longer trips, but in a perfect world, I would also have a short commute to work that might not even need it. But that lifestyle is not practical much of anywhere outside of a few large cities in America, and even then it might not work depending upon if there are any jobs in your field in the city itself. A bunch of problems bring the whole concept of "the victory of urbanism" to a screeching halt:

1) Lack of jobs in urban areas. While an urban environment does a fine job preventing sprawl and gridlock, it doesn't do any good at all if everyone has to drive out of the city for their job and then back into the city at the end of the day. All you do is move the traffic jam around at that point. People need to be able to live near where they work. That has failed in many suburban environments thanks to huge commutes, but it also fails in urban environments if all the jobs are out in the suburbs.

2) Dismal living conditions: Too many cities (at least in America) are still being strangled by rampant crime, poverty, and decay. Nobody wants to live like. What's the use of having lots of stuff within walking distance of you if you don't feel safe going outside at night? What's the use of getting a cheaper home if you're not safe there and taxes are through the roof on the place?

3) City congestion - old cities that have not been updated to handle new realities: There's tons of congestion and sprawl in the suburbs and plenty of people with huge commutes, but cities can be badly crowded as well. Too many cars and not enough places for them, too many people in too small an area. It can be just as bad as the suburbs, just in a different way.

Summary: I don't see any triumph of urbanism, at least not in America. I see a nation that instead has continued to neglect problems for years, eagerly leaving behind old and crumbling regions to pave over new ones, while all the while failing to address the problems. There is no reason our cities cannot be great places like those in Europe and other locations, but there's no will or leadership to do that. There's too much money to be made selling new, overpriced homes vs. fixing up old neighborhoods and changing and improving them for modern living.
That was like every possible stereotype of cities in the history of the universe.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 06:51 PM
 
9,520 posts, read 14,816,131 times
Reputation: 9769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
The D.O.T.s are still operating on retrograde 1960s thinking that roads, wider, faster, straighter are the answer to traffic woes. It's so damaging on so many levels. And they are completely entrenched - with a huge amount of political power, vast sums of money to play with and an enormous industry that depends on D.O.T.s continuing their destructive path all donating quantities of money to pols to perpetuate the cycle.
Thing is, you cut off the roads, you cut off the funding for your urban fantasy projects.

Quote:
Right now every D.O.T. in the nation is trying to figure how to raise revenue - they're almost universally hitting upon tollways - once anathema to car people. That door is opening up a whole new line of thinking among D.O.T.s for ways to deal with traffic with managed tollways.
DOTs and urbanists love tollways -- but only when the tollway funding is diverted to their pet projects. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is spending its toll funds building 1 World Trade Center, for instance (in addition to the usual high salaries for administrators and patronage jobs). When toll funds are actually required to pay for roads, urbanists aren't so hapy with them,

Quote:
NIMBYs on the other hand, are not persuadable. They belong to the class of people who will never get it. The only thing to do with NIMBYs is crush them.
Out on the SF Bay peninsula, it isn't NIMBY. It's BANANA -- Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone. And yet SF is the #2 urbanist paradise in the country, following NYC. The NIMBYs are the one complaining that their vibrant walkable neighborhoods are being taken over by nasty boring whitebread rich people who belong in the suburbs.
 
Old 03-02-2014, 07:00 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,504,059 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by nybbler View Post
Thing is, you cut off the roads, you cut off the funding for your urban fantasy projects.


DOTs and urbanists love tollways -- but only when the tollway funding is diverted to their pet projects. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is spending its toll funds building 1 World Trade Center, for instance (in addition to the usual high salaries for administrators and patronage jobs). When toll funds are actually required to pay for roads, urbanists aren't so hapy with them,


Out on the SF Bay peninsula, it isn't NIMBY. It's BANANA -- Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone. And yet SF is the #2 urbanist paradise in the country, following NYC. The NIMBYs are the one complaining that their vibrant walkable neighborhoods are being taken over by nasty boring whitebread rich people who belong in the suburbs.
Personally I hate tolls and would probably consider myself an urbanist. The East Coast seems to be riddled with stupid toll roads. I do get it from time to time with costly bridges that require a stream of money for upkeep, but that is about it.
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top