Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Many Cities Have No Money

strongtowns.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 424 posts

Re: Why Many Cities Have No Money

#301

Post by aurizon »

pja wrote: post #197
tomcam wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone explain the downvotes?

It’s completely irrelevant to the topic at hand: Cities are not having problems maintaining their infrastructure because of politicians & building firms lining each others pockets - they are having problems maintaining their infrastructure because it is economically impossible for them to do so. Self-serving hand-wringing about corruption in politics does nothing to solve this problem. It’s just an excuse to justify…

Do not confuse corruption with overpaying yourself or ganging up to extort money. Those are legitimate political/gang activities

Re: Why Many Cities Have No Money

#302

Post by ChrisBland »

pja wrote: post #197
tomcam wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone explain the downvotes?

It’s completely irrelevant to the topic at hand: Cities are not having problems maintaining their infrastructure because of politicians & building firms lining each others pockets - they are having problems maintaining their infrastructure because it is economically impossible for them to do so. Self-serving hand-wringing about corruption in politics does nothing to solve this problem. It’s just an excuse to justify…

While I'm not taking a side, what I believe OP was referring to were 'Prevailing Wage Laws' that prevent the city from using contractors that are paid below the set union wage. If the cites are unable to reduce one of the two main drivers (labor costs) then it makes infrastructure projects more expensive for repair and maintenance.

Re: Why Many Cities Have No Money

#303

Post by pif »

yason wrote: post #216
csydas wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Russia at the moment and probably the most startling thing is how well planned many of the cities and towns are and how very clearly these cities were not made for cars. While it's a hassle for vehicle traffic because the roads were never designed to handle everyone owning a car, the benefit is that no matter where you live there is a shop nearby for essentials (groceries, clothing stores, repairs, cafe's,…

Any city planned and developed before cars is generally considered very friendly, walkable, and desirable. Europe is full of such cities and they're loved for it. If only planners, politicians and citizens would realise what they have given up just to make it convenient to drive.

> Any city planned and developed before cars...

Before cars and before skyscrapers! The model of town you're talking about doesn't scale well.

Re: Why Many Cities Have No Money

#304

Post by dpark »

maxsilver wrote: post #299
windlep wrote: post #137

I've seen the infrastructure thing come up for awhile now, and it's definitely true. In my area, as in others I've read of, they're smashing paved roads into gravel roads as the paved are too expensive. The thing that fascinates me is that it feels like a forgone conclusion that infrastructure costs cannot be made cheaper. Have we really hit the most cost effective, cheapest, most sustainable method of laying/replaci…

> I've seen the infrastructure thing come up for awhile now, and it's definitely true. Sort of. I'm not convinced their infrastructure pricing is accurate at all. I fully believe infrastructure has a higher cost in the suburbs, and that we aren't fully saving for/planning for those costs. But the numbers this article uses are insanely too high, to the point that it feels like an outright lie. Strongtowns claims it co…

> StrongTowns is claiming that infrastructure maintenance alone costs the same as leveling the entire neighborhood and rebuilding it all from scratch at retail pricing every 30 years.

This doesn't seem that surprising to me. Replacing existing utilities in place is far more expensive than laying them in the first place because you have to do it without cutting off everyone's access to water/electricity/whatever while you do it. Plus you have to work around other infrastructure and houses and dig up roads etc. And it's difficult to coordinate utility replacements so you do this stuff once for gas and later for water and again for the sewer.

On top of all that, infrastructure is just terribly expensive. Price out laying a driveway. Now imagine scaling it up by maybe 10x just for the section of road in front of your house.

Re: Why Many Cities Have No Money

#305

Post by pif »

wott wrote: post #270
yason wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any city planned and developed before cars is generally considered very friendly, walkable, and desirable. Europe is full of such cities and they're loved for it. If only planners, politicians and citizens would realise what they have given up just to make it convenient to drive.

Don't worry, for the last 50-60 years most European countries have been working hard to destroy this model and turn both cities and countrysides into a car nightmare more or less following the US model.

> most European countries have been working hard to destroy this model

No. Most European countries have been working hard to improve their economy.

Re: Why Many Cities Have No Money

#306

Post by nickjarboe »

xenadu02 wrote: post #64
Gustomaximus wrote: post #37

> When we added up the replacement cost of all of the city's infrastructure -- an expense we would anticipate them cumulatively experiencing roughly once a generation -- it came to $32 billion. A generation is what, 25 years? If you expect to replace all roads/electricity poles/sewers etc every 25 years you seriously need to look a quality. For this I feel this whole article is off. > Humans are predisposed to highly…

A concrete road is good for 50 years at best. Water and sewer lines somewhere between 50-100 years.

If you "over engineer" the road it can last much longer. The 580 interstate in Oakland was built in the 1960's to standard US interstate specs but bans large trucks 99.9% of the time. It is in almost original condition. The parallel interstate (the 880) in Oakland has all the trucks and is in very bad condition with constant repair.

Re: Why Many Cities Have No Money

#307

Post by pif »

panglott wrote: post #244
princeb wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think the auto is a red herring. i think what it is is that these cities have a level of lifestyle that happened to be commiserate with the revenue that they can generate, because the more expensive infrastructure- fibre, 4g, or undergrounds, tram lines, auto traffic control, or even a large network of roads, have not or cannot be built in. when i travel to the cities in the developing countries in asia, and speak…

The auto is at the center of what's unique about American towns. The chart in the article essentially says that the urban core generates surplus revenue that is used to subsidize low-productivity outlying areas. The car is at the heart of why the outlying areas are so large and thus need so many direct and indirect subsidies, and a direct source of the subsidies and costs. See something like "The High Cost of Free Pa…

> the urban core generates surplus revenue that is used to subsidize low-productivity outlying areas

What's so surprising about it? You work (and produce) in the overcrowded center and then go back to a nice suburb for the evening.

Re: Why Many Cities Have No Money

#308

Post by pif »

yason wrote: post #216
csydas wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Russia at the moment and probably the most startling thing is how well planned many of the cities and towns are and how very clearly these cities were not made for cars. While it's a hassle for vehicle traffic because the roads were never designed to handle everyone owning a car, the benefit is that no matter where you live there is a shop nearby for essentials (groceries, clothing stores, repairs, cafe's,…

Any city planned and developed before cars is generally considered very friendly, walkable, and desirable. Europe is full of such cities and they're loved for it. If only planners, politicians and citizens would realise what they have given up just to make it convenient to drive.

> Europe is full of such cities and they're loved for it.

Sure, Florence is beautiful and lovable, but I personally like the possibility to also drive to a commercial center, buy what I need for a few days, drive back home and park my car in a closed garage conveniently connected to my apartment via a lift, or my house via a door.

Re: Why Many Cities Have No Money

#309

Post by danans »

intrasight wrote: post #295
intrasight wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the 21st century. Urbanites are not impoverished.

Not sure why the downvotes. There way more activity in the urban core here now, and both young adults and empty-nesters are choosing to move into the city. What used to be boarded-up storefronts are now cafes, bookstores, art galleries, restaurants, etc. Please don't continue giving progressivism a bad rap by sticking with this "impoverished city" bs.

Neither young adults nor empty-nesters are the demographic that impoverished school-age children are associated with, so those populations moving into the urban core doesn't have a very direct positive impact on the educational outcomes of schools that impoverished children attend.

Re: Why Many Cities Have No Money

#310

Post by mercer »

pif wrote: post #308
yason wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any city planned and developed before cars is generally considered very friendly, walkable, and desirable. Europe is full of such cities and they're loved for it. If only planners, politicians and citizens would realise what they have given up just to make it convenient to drive.

> Europe is full of such cities and they're loved for it. Sure, Florence is beautiful and lovable, but I personally like the possibility to also drive to a commercial center, buy what I need for a few days, drive back home and park my car in a closed garage conveniently connected to my apartment via a lift, or my house via a door.

Over here in Holland we use bikes for all of that. It gets you some free exercise and it's less polluting.
Post reply on HN