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

Put tiny businesses back into residential neighborhoods

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 427 posts

Re: Put tiny businesses back into residential neighborhoods

#71

Post by bezmenov »

smoe wrote: post #43
aahhahahaaa wrote: post #13

How did we slip away so far from this being fairly obvious? Cities have worked well this way for hundreds of years. Maybe the industrial revolution made cities too unpleasant? Were we too spoiled by the automobile industry and government roads? White flight from cities into the suburbs?

Never been to an US residential area and only "know" them from tv shows. Are they really pretty much completely devoid of businesses as this article indicates? No grocery / mom and pop stores, bars, restaurants, hair dressers etc.? That sounds very inconvenient. I always assumed you'd get some basic commercial everywhere.

A greater shock for many is the complete lack of footpaths/sidewalks virtually anywhere outside of commercial districts or inner-most metros.

The idea of walking anywhere is insane. To get from a typical suburb to the nearest business district or strip mall would usually require walking several miles along the shoulder, with frequent illegal crossing of arterial roads.

Re: Put tiny businesses back into residential neighborhoods

#72

Post by Cogito »

duxup wrote: post #54

I like this idea mostly, except maybe the restaurant with outdoor seating. Not sure I would want that to pop up next door / be loud late into the evening.... At least I wouldn't expect it to just pop up.

In my experience, the licensing laws typically deal with this. If a restaurant or bar, they can't serve alcohol or have live music after 9pm, or similar rules.

Works pretty well, and I'd much rather have the small restaurant or bar next door than not!

Re: Put tiny businesses back into residential neighborhoods

#73

Post by lazyasciiart »

tinyhouse wrote: post #70
munk-a wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just afford - often time those suburbs specifically barred non-whites from owning property. Additionally red-lining and racist loan practices forced that wealth gap to grow. But I think that's separate from the car issue, mostly. Originally satellite communities had commercial services - local shops and the like. But those were phased out due to a lack of demand, I think due to societal shifts that were egged on…

Are you speculating or do you have specific examples? It sounds far fetched. Not to mention that whites are not even a majority in many of the wealthy suburbs. Many of Asian and Indian families.

They haven't been legal for decades but yes, it's a real thing that had a massive impact, just like redlining. https://www.mappingprejudice.org/what-are-covenants/

Re: Put tiny businesses back into residential neighborhoods

#74

Post by brendoelfrendo »

Spooky23 wrote: post #30
madamelic wrote: post #2

Mixed use zoning is just about the best case situation for everyone. - Less reliance on cars, which results in less parking, which results in less traffic... it becomes self-perpetuating. - Better walkability - Knowing your corner store clerk or at least having a rapport with them - Healthier citizens, due to them walking everywhere (Go to NYC and see how few overweight people you see... not many unless they're touri…

In theory sure. In reality, the financial system is oriented towards big capital. My aunt ran a coffee shop that was established by grandparents in 1939. It was in the lobby of a office building in he central business district of our little city. The building was bought by a Chinese investor. Like other similar stores, her rent went up 5x and she shuttered. I live in a mixed use urban neighborhood. 50% of he storefro…

Pretty much. Modern mixed-use developments are basically born again shopping malls. We don't have the density for "real" mixed use, so it's just a development project like any other; I'm sure there are real, integrated, mixed-use projects, but the ones I see in small urban/suburban areas are detached from the surrounding area and often detached from public transport, basically to sell overpriced apartments to lifestyle-minded HENRYs.

Re: Put tiny businesses back into residential neighborhoods

#76

Post by tinyhouse »

In the Boston area many of the nearby towns are what I call "urban suburbs". Very family friendly, many single- or two-family homes, but also very walkable and many shops throughout the town. I'm talking about towns such as Brookline, Cambridge and Arlington. They are really nice towns to live in and in very high demand.

Re: Put tiny businesses back into residential neighborhoods

#77

Post by digitalsushi »

Imagine how much better your life would be if one house on your suburban cul-de-sac was a sleepy pub.

I can't tell you any of my neighbor's names. I've been here ten years.

But if I could walk for 6 minutes and get a beer, we'd all know each other's names. We'd all have babysitter coverage, neighborhood watch, a reason to keep the car in the garage, and slightly bigger bellies, overnight.

Re: Put tiny businesses back into residential neighborhoods

#79

Post by rodgerd »

aahhahahaaa wrote: post #13

How did we slip away so far from this being fairly obvious? Cities have worked well this way for hundreds of years. Maybe the industrial revolution made cities too unpleasant? Were we too spoiled by the automobile industry and government roads? White flight from cities into the suburbs?

> How did we slip away so far from this being fairly obvious? Cities have worked well this way for hundreds of years.

Capitalism. Economies of scale. Taxpayer subsidies for car infrastructure. Nowadays Amazon, Uber Eats, etc.

Try actually running a local dairy or restaurant or electronics store and see how long it takes for you to be crushed out of existence by people driving to the supermarket 5 km away, or just ordering from VC funded loss-making delivery companies, or the like.

Re: Put tiny businesses back into residential neighborhoods

#80

Post by claudeganon »

nitwit005 wrote: post #49
Spooky23 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory sure. In reality, the financial system is oriented towards big capital. My aunt ran a coffee shop that was established by grandparents in 1939. It was in the lobby of a office building in he central business district of our little city. The building was bought by a Chinese investor. Like other similar stores, her rent went up 5x and she shuttered. I live in a mixed use urban neighborhood. 50% of he storefro…

Investors have proven willing to keep homes and apartments empty as well. The behavior seems bizarre to me, but it seems you have to set tax policies to discourage it.

Because the real estate is being used as a value store for people moving money from overseas, engaging in money laundering, or as a hedge against other bets. Once exchange value is given priority over use value in markets for things like housing, you run into all kinds of nonsensical arrangements and deleterious social consequences.
Post reply on HN