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

The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

strongtowns.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 209 posts

Re: The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

#141

Post by CapricornNoble »

saikit wrote: post #105

American Village in Okinawa is exactly like this. Outside of Naha, getting around Okinawa strangely feels like an American suburb.

I blame Okinawa's abysmal public transit situation on:

1. The US administering the island until 1972, while Japan itself was undergoing very effective reconstruction and public works projects post-war.

2. The mainland Japanese government treating the Okinawans almost like unwanted red-headed step-children.

And yes, the southern third of the island has the building and traffic density of an urban area with the inconvenience of American suburbs. Almost the entire population has at least a kei car, unless you work in a snack bar/kabakura (where transportation is often provided, and your job involves getting shit-faced drunk every night so you can't drive home anyway).

American Village is also my least-favorite place to go on the island: the traffic to get into that area is abysmal, especially after 4pm, and during the summer the brutal heat, sunlight, and humidity makes walking around between the buildings unappealing. Ashibina Outlet Mall is similar, but at least has slightly better overhead cover to protect from the sun.

Re: The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

#142

Post by rayiner »

reggieband wrote: post #134
rayiner wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manhattan has almost no middle class people with kids. At most there are some upper middle class lawyers/bankers/programmers fighting it out over a handful of decent public schools. I don’t consider that functional or healthy. By age 45, 86% of Americans have had kids. Out of the remaining 14%, half say they wish they had kids. Just 5% say they don’t want kids—a number virtually unchanged from 1990. You can’t call an…

This does not match my experience living in Manhattan. I lived in a building where many of the people had children and the neighbourhood had a lot of businesses and facilities for children. While they might have been in the minority, it would be a gross exaggeration to say "Manhattan has almost no middle class people with kids". I did not see any of my neighbours finances and doubtlessly they were above national medi…

In a normal population pyramid, people with kids will compromise a significant plurality of people. Nationwide, about a third of households have kids. In Manhattan, it’s half that.

Moreover, far fewer of those kids come from the middle class. 18% of kids in New York City attend private school, about double the national rate. Of the public school kids, 75% are eligible for free or reduced price lunch, double the national average. Applying some back of the envelope math, middle class households with kids comprise about 3% of Manhattan, versus 19% nationwide. That’s huge.

Re: The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

#143

Post by briHass »

leviathant wrote: post #92
kop316 wrote: post #42

I wish the author would hit the non-walkability a bit harder. To get from one section to another, cross a street. To get from one side to another, you have to cross several streets. There is one area that did the same thing where I live (The Greene Town Center). I cannot simply think of why I would want to live there, and I was their target demographic! I really can't walk around inside of The Greene without having t…

I first encountered this kind of shopping center in the suburbs of Philadelphia. Main Street at Exton struck me as incredibly strange - it's a strip mall dressed up to look like an urban downtown, right down to parallel parking spots on the street. Once you do park, it is actually fairly walkable. A couple of years later, after having moved to Philadelphia, there was something I wanted to grab at a store in Main Stre…

It's interesting that you chose that example, as I'm very familiar with the location. For what it's worth, that area is undergoing massive development and change. Not sure if you've been by recently, but they're adding hundreds of apartments directly in Main Street to finally complete the original plan of mixed residential and commercial. This is in addition to the hundreds of other apartments/condos being built within a 1/2 mile radius of that location.

The township (West Whiteland) is very aware of the issues with walking paths and sidewalks to nearby areas and train stations, and there are active plans to address it. You can check out their master plan here: https://www.westwhiteland.org/DocumentCenter/View/154/Lincol...

The other thing you might not have noticed is that the beautiful Chester Valley Trail (biking/walking) runs directly through the Main Street center, and connects to many corporate parks (e.g. Vanguard) and shopping locations in Malvern, KOP, etc. It will ultimately connect to the Schuylkill trail that runs to Philadelphia, as well as Valley Forge Park. https://pecpa.org/wp-content/uploads/3-Trail-Itineraries-Bro...

Re: The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

#144

Post by mc32 »

pkroll wrote: post #108
mattrp wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that Santana Row is particularly well done... but I think the author is reminiscing for something more like downtown Palo Alto. What he misses is a few things: a) Palo Alto can hold onto its old town feel because it’s literally the epicenter of Facebook, google, sand hill road and Stanford university. Some random town in Florida isn’t going to have all that. B) in places like Florida, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Hous…

In Chicago, is the link between crime and lack of access to decent produce one way, or the other? Nobody wants to put grocery stores (or most stores) in high-crime areas.

I guess we might find out over the next few years.

The new DA in SF isn’t pursuing shrinkage/theft under $950 (due to Prop 47). Of stores shutter due to losses at least we can say it contributes to the desertification.

Re: The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

#145

Post by briefcomment »

Bootwizard wrote: post #76

I live in a place exactly like this in Florida called Baldwin Park. It's much better designed and I love living here. The main difference is a few things (and these really matter to me): 1. All the parking is parallel parking along all the streets. This ensures that the number of businesses don't need their own massive ugly parking lots 2. There are actually apartments here above the businesses, so that it's always a…

The same author wrote about this place three years ago.

He seems to like it.

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/5/31/baldwin-park-a...

Re: The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

#146

Post by reggieband »

rayiner wrote: post #142
reggieband wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This does not match my experience living in Manhattan. I lived in a building where many of the people had children and the neighbourhood had a lot of businesses and facilities for children. While they might have been in the minority, it would be a gross exaggeration to say "Manhattan has almost no middle class people with kids". I did not see any of my neighbours finances and doubtlessly they were above national medi…

In a normal population pyramid, people with kids will compromise a significant plurality of people. Nationwide, about a third of households have kids. In Manhattan, it’s half that. Moreover, far fewer of those kids come from the middle class. 18% of kids in New York City attend private school, about double the national rate. Of the public school kids, 75% are eligible for free or reduced price lunch, double the natio…

Sounds like you are moving the goal posts. If you said "less than average amount of middle class families per capita" then that is obvious. You said "almost no middle class people with kids" which is in my experience misleading and almost certainly false. Given the massive population of Manhattan, even if the percentages are as skewed as heavily as you believe they are, that means there is still a significant and visible population of middle class families. Certainly enough to support a large number of businesses specifically for them.

One of the surprises I had when moving to NYC was the amount of families. I didn't expect it, thinking most of the population would be young single professionals.

Re: The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

#147

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

atombender wrote: post #88
mtberatwork wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You get something that is an entertainment product—it looks cute, but it’s functionally like a movie set or a theme park. Its design has the aesthetic signifiers of a traditional town, but none of the functionality, none of the deep responsiveness to the needs of the people living there. I think he encapsulates things nicely here. Barring some exceptions, town/village life in the US is basically non-existent. There…

There are absolutely tons of towns like that, but they're old towns that grew organically from villages. Cold Spring, NY, Shelbourne Falls, MA and Santa Fe, NM are some examples that come to mind. What this blog is talking about is really new developments and the gradual transformation of old, previously functioning towns.

I live near Santa Fe, NM and I cannot possibly agree with this characterization. Most modern (i.e. non-tourist) commerce in S.Fe is on Cerrillos Road. While I support this arrangement to a large degree, Cerrillos is a 4 mile long strip mall, in essence. In a car, it's convenient. On foot, it's a nightmare. There is a bus running up and down, but the bus rarely seems to have much ridership.

The old core of S.Fe contains almost none of the basic essential retail outlets for day to day life. There are no supermarkets, no hardware stores, for example (Kaunes is about as close it gets). You see very few people walking around other than tourists. It is true that the Rail Yards is a moderately successful (re)development of a downtown area that was previously ... well, rail yards. But it hasn't really done much to change the retail/hang out situation other than adding an REI, a brewery and a movie theater. All good things (for me) but they don't change the fact that living in S.Fe without a car will remind you constantly that you don't have a car.

One great thing here are hundreds of speed bumps on residential streets. These do provide a distinct message ("Slow the F*CK down") when driving in those neighorhoods, but they do not change the car-centric nature of the city.

Re: The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

#148

Post by ghaff »

alistairSH wrote: post #55
rayiner wrote: post #12

> Until you deal with the parking problem—which is done by building truly mixed-use places where people can meet their daily needs without hopping in the car—you haven’t created true urbanism. Daily needs means jobs for both you and your spouse, which won’t be in some random subdivision in Florida. It means schools, which don’t appear to be there either. It means the kids’ after school activities, again, missing from…

Are you fellow Restonite? If so, "Hi!" RTC and the current major development is an interesting case... RTC predates the expansion of the subway system, so drive-to urbanism was, as you suggest, a reasonable option given other constraints. Now that the Metro is (almost) expanded past Reston to the airport, there is (was?) an opportunity to build a true human-scale urban environment (at least within the designated deve…

>you have to cross 8 lanes of traffic coming from the east

I remember I was once staying in Tyson's or somewhere around there. I could see a number of restaurants in the shopping center from my hotel but there was literally no way of crossing the 6-8 lane road between me and the restaurants. I had to get into my car to drive the few hundred feet.

Re: The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

#149

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

bluGill wrote: post #128
danans wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But while they might say they like those benefits, most people will choose the benefits of low density living, This is heavily dependent on one's conditioning. I grew up in a late mid-century low density suburb - nothing like the exurban sprawl you see today, but still very far from walkable. I instinctively moved from that to high density older neighborhoods as an adult. At least at the moment the trend tends to b…

People want it all: 100 acres in the middle of downtown, with great suburban schools nearby. Don't forget about various shopping, parks, lakes, or whatever else your preferred lifestyle wants. Depending on your situation in life you will choose from the different available compromises. Note I said available compromises. Legal zoning rules often prohibit some of the choices. In most suburbs you cannot buy a house with…

> People want it all: ....

what many of us want is a change to ... Legal zoning rules.

Along with the racism that they've been used to enforce, zoning rules in the US have done more to contribute to the creation of hollowed-out communities than almost anything else. Residential-only neighborhoods, total segregation of retail from residence, parking requirements, exclusion of large scale, quality rental accomodation, focus on single family lifestyle, lack of sidewalks ... bit by bit you go from towns that work to towns that are just dormitories.

Re: The Rise of “Movie-Set Urbanism”

#150

Post by kop316 »

treis wrote: post #118
kop316 wrote: post #42

I wish the author would hit the non-walkability a bit harder. To get from one section to another, cross a street. To get from one side to another, you have to cross several streets. There is one area that did the same thing where I live (The Greene Town Center). I cannot simply think of why I would want to live there, and I was their target demographic! I really can't walk around inside of The Greene without having t…

> I really can't walk around inside of The Greene without having to watch traffic (I am simply amazed at how recklessly folks drive in there). If you're talking about the one in Ohio, I'm not sure you have reasonable expectations of what walkable means. There's not going to be many places where you can walk in the street without having to watch out for cars. But if your expectation is more like I can walk to shops an…

I am talking about that one. My expectation would be those streets shouldn't be there in the first place honestly. I should be able to walk from one side of that mall to the other without worrying about cars.

Parking lots surround it in the first place. Do you really need to have parking 10 ft away from every shop?

Another poster mentioned the grove in LA. That is actually a pretty good model for what I'd say is a good walkable outdoor mall. There's no car traffic in the Grove, and no car traffic in the farmers market.

I'd also add in, this is different from a downtown in that is was planned. It wasn't like they had constraints based on locations, public roads, etc. If we were talking like revitalizing an actual downtown (like Oregon District), I'd be a bit less critical. But when I see planned "downtowns" that make it so the pedestrian is still subservient to the car, and it doesn't have all the amenities I actually need to live there (which I'll give that I probably have to drive somewhere to work, but still, even something as basic as a grocery store), Sorry, not really interested.

Post reply on HN