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.
It's not that easy. You can't just expand the supply of housing 20 to 30 times without doing anything else. For example, most US cities are not set up with adequate public transportation. Unless you magically create a public transit system that goes everywhere everyone wants to go, and convince everyone to use it, you're going to be adding 20 to 30 times the number of cars to the roads.
I would add that the utilities infrastructure (water, sewer, gas, electric) does not magically have 20 to 30 times the capacity available for more people.
I would add that the utilities infrastructure (water, sewer, gas, electric) does not magically have 20 to 30 times the capacity available for more people.
This, probably isn't as big a problem as others mentioned here. Some of it, yes.. But electric isn't likely to be a problem because it will wind up requiring less electricity/gas for heating/cooling for the densely populated folks than if everyone had their own house.
Water and sewer.. I don't think there's that much difference. Use a little less from things like not watering a lawn, not having a large house to clean, etc.. But I don't think there's a huge difference there.
This, probably isn't as big a problem as others mentioned here. Some of it, yes.. But electric isn't likely to be a problem because it will wind up requiring less electricity/gas for heating/cooling for the densely populated folks than if everyone had their own house.
Water and sewer.. I don't think there's that much difference. Use a little less from things like not watering a lawn, not having a large house to clean, etc.. But I don't think there's a huge difference there.
The point is that all aspects of the infrastructure would need to be completely rebuilt. For example, you have a plot of land with single-family houses in which a total of 20 people are taking showers, flushing toilets, washing dishes and doing laundry. Now, without making any other changes, you convert that land into a high-rise in which 400 people are doing the same. They will be using 20 times as much water as the original residents, on the same water and sewer system. It will be totally overloaded. No, they won't be watering lawns, but watering a few lawns doesn't take up enough water for 380 people's daily needs.
The point is that all aspects of the infrastructure would need to be completely rebuilt. For example, you have a plot of land with single-family houses in which a total of 20 people are taking showers, flushing toilets, washing dishes and doing laundry. Now, without making any other changes, you convert that land into a high-rise in which 400 people are doing the same. They will be using 20 times as much water as the original residents, on the same water and sewer system. It will be totally overloaded. No, they won't be watering lawns, but watering a few lawns doesn't take up enough water for 380 people's daily needs.
You just lay bigger pipes if needed, its really not as big of a deal as you think. Even in NYC, the size of the water pipes rarely exceeds 2 inches, since the water volume throughput of a pipe scales much higher than the actual physical size. Denser dwellings use resources a lot more efficiently, so putting in bigger infrastructure for shorter distances is a lot cheaper than putting in smaller infrastructure for longer distances/more subdivisions.
For example, a lot of bigger single family homes have 1 inch diameter water pipes. A 2 inch pipe is enough to supply water to an apartment building. A 240 inch diameter pipe would be enough to supply water to the whole state of Tennessee if you cram them all into a single city.
This, probably isn't as big a problem as others mentioned here. Some of it, yes.. But electric isn't likely to be a problem because it will wind up requiring less electricity/gas for heating/cooling for the densely populated folks than if everyone had their own house.
Water and sewer.. I don't think there's that much difference. Use a little less from things like not watering a lawn, not having a large house to clean, etc.. But I don't think there's a huge difference there.
The failure to expand water service was a significant issue in San Diego.
First it manifested itself as low household water pressure. Not the worst thing in the world, but a real inconvenience if had to live with it daily for 20 or 30 years.
The City didn't really get motivated to take action until a large urban canyon fire in the mid-80s. When the fire crews showed up, the water pressure out of the fire hydrants wasn't enough to supply multiple fire hoses. 60 houses burned down because of it.
You just lay bigger pipes if needed, its really not as big of a deal as you think. Even in NYC, the size of the water pipes rarely exceeds 2 inches, since the water volume throughput of a pipe scales much higher than the actual physical size. Denser dwellings use resources a lot more efficiently, so putting in bigger infrastructure for shorter distances is a lot cheaper than putting in smaller infrastructure for longer distances/more subdivisions.
For example, a lot of bigger single family homes have 1 inch diameter water pipes. A 2 inch pipe is enough to supply water to an apartment building. A 240 inch diameter pipe would be enough to supply water to the whole state of Tennessee if you cram them all into a single city.
If there were some Civil Engineers who were capable of planning ahead, I might consider this worth while.
However, when engineers plan a project that requires digging up a street and repaving it, then 3 months after that project is complete they have to dig up the new pavement again for another project...
Or, when they re-do the storm drain system to "make it better", then when the first real "gully-washer" hits town there is 6 inches of water in the streets...
Or, when they build a new, "state of the art" waste treatment plant that will handle all the sewage from the county for the next 20 years, then a few years later state that they can no longer accept waste from anywhere else, because the plant can't handle it; Therefore, septic tank pumping businesses are failing because they have no place to dump the sewage, and septic tanks in the county and in surrounding counties are not being pumped...
Or, when you go into a restaurant and have to ask for a glass of water because they do not automatically give you a glass like they used to. There simply isn't enough potable water anymore! A bigger pipe isn't much use if there isn't potable water to fill it.
I recently read that there is a shortage of good clean sand to make mortar and concrete. Without mortar and concrete, how ya gonna build all them new houses?
There is a lot to think about when "planning ahead".
Just read some news about "rent a backyard" idea that is emerging, which makes me wonder:
Why don't cities allow building very dense apartment building, like those in Hong Kong? Seems it can increase the housing supply 20 to 30 times easy.
I'd suspect NIMBY'ism would put a squash on many of those plans.
Here in metro Boston, housing is in demand and expensive. ANY time there are plans to put up a 52+ unit apartment, or low-income housing in some of the nicer suburbs to ease the housing crunch, people come out to protest those plans and block it.
Seems people are fine with the idea of additional housing, but don't want to actually live next to it.
I recently read that there is a shortage of good clean sand to make mortar and concrete. Without mortar and concrete, how ya gonna build all them new houses?
There is a lot to think about when "planning ahead".
I've heard this too, about sand shortage. People steal it from our beach here.
It's not that easy. You can't just expand the supply of housing 20 to 30 times without doing anything else. For example, most US cities are not set up with adequate public transportation. Unless you magically create a public transit system that goes everywhere everyone wants to go, and convince everyone to use it, you're going to be adding 20 to 30 times the number of cars to the roads.
The people are already there. Either they already have cars or not. For example we have a home on our street that has three families living in it. They already have 11 cars. I would love for each of the families to be able to afford a place of their own. Then they would take some of those cars to another home somewhere else.
In some pockets of Los Angeles they have built these buildings with 300 square foot apartments. They have stainless appliances in them. They look nice, just very small.
In Ventura Ca they have built a lot of mixed use as fill in projects. Store fronts on the first floor and apartments or condos on the upper floors. I have seen plans for some that have retail or restaurant space on the first, offices on the second, and apartment or condos on the third, 4th, or 5th.
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.
