Economy Great Article Breaking Down the US Housing Crisis & Why Government Isn't Doing Anything About It

[Rob Battisti]

You don't have any direct evidence that mixed zoning ONLY results in these negative connotations yoire assigning to it. You're making a feelings argument.

Mixed zoning is great. Plopping a dominos pizza next door on your cul-de-sac isn’t.

 

[Sinister]

I think what it really comes down to for a lot of NIMBYs is that they don't want to allow out-groups(poors, blacks, immigrants etc) to be able to live and work in their neighborhoods and they see exclusionary zoning as a way to achieve that.

Yeah, this is at the heart of why things like public pools were eradicated, and why planned neighborhoods increasingly have guarded gates, behind the walls are the parks, basketball courts, pools. And if you're not a resident there one is definitely gonna yell at you about it, even if you're a guest of a resident.

 

[terrapin]

You don't have any direct evidence that mixed zoning ONLY results in these negative connotations youre assigning to it. You're making a feelings argument.

It's absolutely a certainty that if you bring in hundreds of people into my neighborhood for businesses that more crime will come in too... that's a fact of statistics. It's also absolutely certain that it'll bring more light pollution and more noise.

That's all bad for humans man.

I'm fine with new neighborhoods being designed that way. I think it can be done in a way that is incredibly beautiful and I've seen it done that way. But cramming that into existing neighborhoods is a really stupid idea and you can absolutely count on my voracious vote against it.

 

[Islam Imamate]

No, it's not absurd. It's good for human beings. Human beings should come first here and the grocery store front with lit up parking in the middle of the neighborhood is a ridiculous idea.

The devil is in the details man. And so you need to really hunker down here and explicitly state your positions. Specifically what businesses and don't add in any other ones. Name every single business you would allow, name the size of that business, the color profile, the physical profile, are they allowed signs? what are the hours of operation. Where will people park? In front of other houses? LOL that's a no.

Really you're just not giving enough information for anyone to even know what you think. This can be done well but it has to be done from the ground up. Just shoving it into existing neighborhoods is a terrible plan. It's not even a plan actually.

Part of the point of allowing commercial units within walking distance of residential ones is to limit the need for parking so ideally there would be little to no parking available. Obviously I can't give you a comprehensive list of all the details here and now as its something that might look different across various localities. What I'm talking about here is not just some strange hypothetical, there are examples of such neighborhoods around the world and even in the US.

People don’t want them.

If they're allowed to be built I'm almost certain you'll see them crop up. The market finds a way when you allow it.

People want new ones.

Yes they do want new mixed use developments but you're against allowing that.

It's absolutely a certainty that if you bring in hundreds of people into my neighborhood for businesses that more crime will come in too... that's a fact of statistics. It's also absolutely certain that it'll bring more light pollution and more noise.

That's all bad for humans man.

I'm fine with new neighborhoods being designed that way. I think it can be done in a way that is incredibly beautiful and I've seen it done that way. But cramming that into existing neighborhoods is a really stupid idea and you can absolutely count on my voracious vote against it.

Source: "Trust me bro"

 

[terrapin]

Part of the point of allowing commercial units within walking distance of residential ones is to limit the need for parking so ideally there would be little to no parking available. Obviously I can't give you a comprehensive list of all the details here and now as its something that might look different across various localities. What I'm talking about here is not just some strange hypothetical, there are examples of such neighborhoods around the world and even in the US.

If they're allowed to be built I'm almost certain you'll see them crop up. The market finds a way when you allow it.

Yes they do want new mixed use developments but you're against allowing that.

Source: "Trust me bro"

get specific man. your argument is not developed enough to be an argument. what types of businesses, how big? hours of operation, color schemes, can they have lit signage, light regulations, alcohol sales etc.

if you cant get that specific you don't even have an argument.

 

[terrapin]

I think what it really comes down to for a lot of NIMBYs is that they don't want to allow out-groups(poors, blacks, immigrants etc) to be able to live and work in their neighborhoods and they see exclusionary zoning as a way to achieve that.

lol.... of course it does. they must all be racist.

the insane slander of the left on display here. ffs man....

 

[Islam Imamate]

get specific man. your argument is not developed enough to be an argument. what types of businesses, how big? hours of operation, color schemes, can they have lit signage etc.

if you cant get that specific you don't even have an argument.

I've mentioned some of these details, specifically that the focus should be on small retail and restaurants. Asking me about color scheme and hours of operation is silly though, try to be serious here. Those things are going to vary wildly based on a whole host of factors.

If you're genuinely curious then here's an article that goes over some of what I've hinted at here

So how do we reconcile our desire for small-scale, neighborhood commercial with our current retail paradigm? How can we deliver the types of retail spaces our cities and communities are asking for from the ground up?

Enter the Accessory Commercial Unit (ACU). A close cousin to the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), and distant relative to the family-owned and operated storefronts that our country was built on, ACUs are just what they sound like: small commercial units that are accessory to the principal residential use on the site. Think granny flats, but granny gets to sell homemade jam and baked goods out of the front half of her suite. Although they are not a silver bullet, ACUs are a step towards democratizing retail space and a shift away from our Euclidean Zoning roots that created the high-cost, high-tax, high-emissions cities we see today.

First, let’s take a moment to recognize that the concept of ACUs does not fit nicely into our current land use or lending boxes—hence the long list of barriers people like the Lawrences have run into. It’s not a corner store, because it’s located on a residential lot; it’s not a food truck, because it’s a permanent structure; it’s not really an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), because it’s not just for living; and it’s more “intense” than a home-based business.

Next, let’s recognize that that’s okay. ACUs ask us to rethink what needs to be regulated and what we can allow to organically grow in our collective garden. ACUs are an opportunity to add diversity to our urban ecosystem that for too long has remained a monoculture.

We’re not talking about allowing industrial uses with noxious fumes and unbearable noises in someone’s backyard. We’re talking about low-impact, small-scale, hyper-local, homeowner-driven passion projects that will strengthen the social and economic fabric of our neighborhoods.

lol.... of course it does. they must all be racist.

the insane slander of the left on display here. ffs man....

#notall but definitely some.

 

[Sinister]

It's absolutely a certainty that if you bring in hundreds of people into my neighborhood for businesses that more crime will come in too... that's a fact of statistics. It's also absolutely certain that it'll bring more light pollution and more noise.

That's all bad for humans man.

I'm fine with new neighborhoods being designed that way. I think it can be done in a way that is incredibly beautiful and I've seen it done that way. But cramming that into existing neighborhoods is a really stupid idea and you can absolutely count on my voracious vote against it.

Light, sound, and people moving around is all bad for humans. Something a non-human would say. Lol

 

[terrapin]

I've mentioned some of these details, specifically that the focus should be on small retail and restaurants. Asking me about color scheme and hours of operation is silly though, try to be serious here. Those things are going to vary wildly based on a whole host of factors.

If you're genuinely curious then here's an article that goes over some of what I've hinted at here



#notall but definitely some.

Well, those are the kinds of details that I think are causing people to talk past each other in this discussion and so it's not really worth having the discussion if you aren't willing to list them.

I also think neighborhood has to be defined because there's going to definitely be a place where I would disagree with homeowners trying to keep businesses out of being anywhere near their neighborhoods. But if we're talking about the street, I live on having a restaurant put in. Yeah, everyone can f*** right off with that stupid idea.

Also you guys are pretending that hundreds more people brought in daily to a neighborhood wouldn't result in more crime and asking for statistics for that. And you know damn well, that's a profoundly disingenuous line of thinking.

Anyway, I don't really care if you have a different opinion at all. Frankly, I'm just going to vote the way I'll vote and that's it.

 

[Sinister]

Well, those are the kinds of details that I think are causing people to talk past each other in this discussion and so it's not really worth having the discussion if you aren't willing to list them.

I also think neighborhood has to be defined because there's going to definitely be a place where I would disagree with homeowners trying to keep businesses out of being anywhere near their neighborhoods. But if we're talking about the street, I live on having a restaurant put in. Yeah, everyone can f*** right off with that stupid idea.

Also you guys are pretending that hundreds more people brought in daily to a neighborhood wouldn't result in more crime and asking for statistics for that. And you know damn well, that's a profoundly disingenuous line of thinking.

Anyway, I don't really care if you have a different opinion at all. Frankly, I'm just going to vote the way I'll vote and that's it.

Its profoundly disingenuous to ask you to provide evidence of something you claim aside from your personal feelings. You are literally using a sanitized version of a segregationist argument, you're just being more vague with it. Some of the areas in the world with the least amount of crime have mixed zoning. The problem is social conservatives on this board content that this is because of homogeneity, as opposed to that the design of the area itself lends to there being less social discontent, and presence of robust social resources. Ive lived in both urban areas and suburbs because of the split of my parents, suburban kids were always doing just as terrible sh*t as urban kids, and abusing substances far more. From my experience the only difference between suburban crime and urban crime is kids in the suburbs get in trouble with the law less because it's less heavily policed. Aside from that you're just complaining that a place might be open later than you personally like, and that people might be having a good time there.

 

[terrapin]

Its profoundly disingenuous to ask you to provide evidence of something you claim aside from your personal feelings. You are literally using a sanitized version of a segregationist argument, you're just being more vague with it. Some of the areas in the world with the least amount of crime have mixed zoning. The problem is social conservatives on this board content that this is because of homogeneity, as opposed to that the design of the area itself lends to there being less social discontent, and presence of robust social resources. Ive lived in both urban areas and suburbs because of the split of my parents, suburban kids were always doing just as terrible sh*t as urban kids, and abusing substances far more. From my experience the only difference between suburban crime and urban crime is kids in the suburbs get in trouble with the law less because it's less heavily policed. Aside from that you're just complaining that a place might be open later than you personally like, and that people might be having a good time there.

Yes, it is profoundly disingenuous because more people means more crime everywhere else on the planet. So give me a break dude with that B*******.

 

[terrapin]

Light, sound, and people moving around is all bad for humans. Something a non-human would say. Lol

That's not even a point.

 

[Sinister]

Yes, it is profoundly disingenuous because more people means more crime everywhere else on the planet. So give me a break dude with that B*******.

What's disingenuous is making a feelings argument, admitting you cannot substantiate it, and using it as a means to judge people you don't know merely because they're people you dont see every day. Its just a prejudicial argument based on the notion that more people = more crime, which is statistically always going to be the case, but doesn't necessarily indict the newcomers as the criminals, they could easily be the victims of the crimes, and isolationism/segregationist arguments almost always also suggest that the crime towards the newcomers is their own fault for daring to come.

 

[Sinister]

That's not even a point.

Neither is suggesting that perfectly human occurrences are bad for humans.

 

[terrapin]

Neither is suggesting that perfectly human occurrences are bad for humans.

light pollution and noise pollution and crime are bad for humans.

 

[Rob Battisti]

Yes they do want new mixed use developments but you're against allowing that.

News to me

 

[Andy Capp]

Pro NIMBY Ftw!

Although the poors in this thread are golden for comedic relief, wouldnt never want them moving into my area.

The feeling is mutual.

 

[Andy Capp]

I mean, he’s also down for having RVs permanently stationed in his neighbors front yard next to the smoke shop. Sounds like a party!

I think this all comes down to lowering the standard of living and claiming you made housing affordable.

He specifically said grocery stores, not smoke shops. This kind of disingenuous framing is why people shit on you, you know that, right?

 

[Sinister]

light pollution and noise pollution and crime are bad for humans.

None of which are exclusively results of mixed zoning.

 

[Sinister]

Mixed zoning is great. Plopping a dominos pizza next door on your cul-de-sac isn’t.

I didnt see this reply earlier. Twice in my life I've lived in apartments in commercial areas. Once for a short time in San Fran, the other time in Dania Beach, Florida. Both were great. In San Fran there was a very good pizza shop literally downstairs and across the street. No one minded the aroma of pizza at any hour. And it was a popular place with Police, so no real concern of crime. They closed at 9pm. No issue with noise.

In Dania Beach I lived right above a playhouse. My ex and I were a young couple living there and they'd let us watch rehearsals and get in free for shows sometimes. It was also less than a block from food and grocery shopping. Also the only 2 times in my life I survived well without a car. San Fran has great public transit, and Dania I found a job walking distance from our apartment and worked for that Company for 8 years total. That job helped me transition to Vegas since I worked for the same store here when I first got here.

Just seems to me like you and terrapin are making mountains out of mole hills with this.