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

Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

strongtowns.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 564 posts

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#391

Post by danans »

fsloth wrote: post #8

Fantastic cultural divide. This is one of the reasons why I read HN. Most of Europe is more or less walkable - one reason is that the largest urban centers predate cars, but intentional design AF (anno ford) is also a factor. I can bike or walk everywhere, and the only reason I have a car is that it makes grocery shopping much, much easier. I am not very green or anything, I just like to keep things simple. You can c…

> but intentional design AF (anno ford) is also a factor.

Unintentional design, or rather emergent structure (as extolled by Jane Jacobs who was/is a guiding light for urbanists), is also a reason. So things like not destroying neighborhoods for multi-lane expressways, and not doing exclusive residential zoning, thereby allowing small scale non-industrial businesses to be interspersed with housing.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#392

Post by scandox »

EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote: post #253
scandox wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think the double question mark is a tad disingenuous there. Everyone will have their own peculiar circumstances. We, for example, are a family of 4 and our shop for ten days is I would guess 30/40 kilograms. The grocery is 2.5 kilometers away and the journey includes one very dangerous roundabout. So I think a car is reasonable.

Well, that's $10 Uber ride, three times a month.

Yeah it's conceivable...but:

1. Uber isn't big in Ireland, so not so reliable

2. Taxi or Uber won't wait for me to shop

3. Taxi or Uber won't have appropriate child seats for my kids

4. My car cost 1,400 euros and is useful in other situations.

But honestly I dislike cars alot - it just makes sense at present.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#393

Post by gkop »

xyzelement wrote: post #352
wayoutthere wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Existing homeowners don’t want more “nice” places because it reduces the value of their own homes. When you have more options and less of a perception of scarcity, prices adjust. We really erred in allowing homes to become a vehicle of generational wealth. It creates perverse incentives that prevent cities from growing in ways that serve their populations, and instead only serve people wealthy enough to own property…

> Existing homeowners don’t want more “nice” places because it reduces the value of their own homes. Well - what does that actually mean? I own a home, and I am not interested in a huge apartment building going up next door (for reasons that aren't property values) but I have no objection to the boundary of my town expanding, or a new town being established a little bit down the road. Yes sure those things will creat…

Huge apartment buildings are “lumpy” and indeed impose externalities locally. I’ve been thinking a lot recently about if we could evenly distribute housing, we could cut through some of the NIMBY opposition. Quad plexes by right [0 for example] makes a lot of sense to me. If you’re OK with a quad plex next door, IMO you’re not part of the problem. Unfortunately, in many places SFH owners will come out in force to fight nearby quad plexes.

[0] https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2020/08/portland-changes...

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#394

Post by quantumofalpha »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #351
quantumofalpha wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author is spot on. You just happened to be working for the scrappiest/shittiest faang that's all. Shop around, there is decent money to be made in Europe - but of course it's not as easy to walk into it as in the US today. Oh and don't forget that it's TC that matters in big public tech, not salary.

>You just happened to be working for the scrappiest/shittiest faang that's all. You know, with this statement you've just proved his point, that good tech wages in Europe are super scarce when you need to be very picky with wich FAANG you join for good compensation. That's basically skimming the cream off the cream you just skimmed. How much are you left with now, ~1% of the total tech jobs?

Amazon is worst payer among them in the US as well. Facebook and Google pay decent money in London and Zurich, almost on par with US in the latter, London is maybe ~30% less.

> How much are you left with now, ~1% of the total tech jobs?

If you want top 1% pay, you gonna have to hunt for top 1% jobs, seems obvious, no?

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#395

Post by CapitainEvident »

jseban wrote: post #30
rekado wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never owned a car in my life, never got a drivers license. I live in a walkable city (Berlin, close to the border). When I need to haul things around the city I take the cargo bike. For decades I simply carried groceries in a big backpack and walked to the markets on foot (they are all within a 10 minute radius from where I live). I'd call the layout of my neighborhood functional and efficient. Adverse weather h…

Yeah and if you stopped doing that and instead used a car to buy your groceries or ordered them delivered to your doorstep, you would have more free time and more energy. People want free time and energy. Just because it "works" for you to walk in the cold rain carrying groceries in a backback, doesn't make it the best solution. If there are better solutions, why insist on doing it the worst possible way?

Seems to me you’re the one insisting in doing something in the worst possible way.

I have a high street lined with shops on my way home where I can stop by, have a quick chat, perhaps pick up something that caught my attention as the scent of freshness overwhelmed my senses when I walked into the shop owned by a person that invites me for a drink and has visited my house socially.

The newest place near me right now was opened by an investment banker that chose to optimise for his hairline in his own words, so when I stop there to get stock up on exotic groceries, that is the best solution for me and if it’s raining, so what? I’ve got towels at home.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#396

Post by Steltek »

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #346
nemo44x wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s many towns in the USA where kids can walk to school and shops are walkable, etc. especially on the east coast there are numerous pre-war towns like this. But your experience is in California, a place notorious for being designed around the highway.

> There’s many towns in the USA where kids can walk to school Especially where there's no bus transport within 2 mi of the school. Kids walk to school inches away from dangerous roads. > many towns in the USA shops are walkable, etc "Many" is doing a lot of lifting here. What's a good estimate of the percent of platted neighborhoods (or Census Designated Places or zip-codes or whatever) that are generally walkable? L…

I don't think you can get a quantity (ie ".1%") from a non-quantifiable thing like "generally walkable". I consider my town very walkable except for grocery stores, which is a pretty core aspect.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#397

Post by necovek »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #295
null_object wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It would not really have been possible to build all this shopping in the city center, so there is the physical limitations. I think this is the main problem, that the cities outgrow themselves, and it is just so much cheaper and economical to build mega-malls instead of smaller centres for shopping and amenities. But this is a matter of chosen-lifestyle . This was really brought home to me talking to my mother-in-la…

There is unbelievable competition in Amsterdam right now for grocery delivery. The big markets all offer it, then there are specialized delivery apps like Picnic (cheap), Crisp (quality) and Peter Pot (all reusable packaging). Then, in the past year, the VC funded fast delivery apps showed up: Gorrilas, Flink, Zapp and Getir. Driving to buy groceries may be necessary today, but maybe not tomorrow.

If delivery happens by the same means you would have been doing it (eg. a car), it adds nothing to the communal or ecological value of a neighbourhood — it's merely a consumer's convenience in saving time.

Only if delivery was organized in a way to deliver to multiple households in the same area does it start to make sense from an ecological perspective: but your neighbourhood still has to have those delivery trucks in the walking/biking paths.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#398

Post by CalRobert »

snarf21 wrote: post #308
CalRobert wrote: post #21

The planet boils because Americans are afraid of living in places as beautiful as the ones they vacation in. If you're an American who'd like to escape, check out the Dutch American Friendship Treaty, or Portugal's new visa for remote work. PT's NHR tax program makes it very popular for FIRE too. It's not Amsterdam but moving to Dublin from LA did wonders for my happiness. The next goal is living somewhere my kid can…

LA != America. I've lived in cities and rural mountains. I loved the walk-ability of Boston with really good public transport.However, most cities have awful public transport. Additionally, I can afford to live in/near a city. A lot of people can't and drive because they can get 2x the space with a yard for kids to plan in for less than a 1BR in the city. They get an awful commute in the bargain but I don't think it…

Fair point, but it's more complicated than that.

People choose where to live for a huge variety of reasons. I moved to Dublin because I wanted to live in Europe and it was the easiest place to get a job and a visa at the start of my career. It also was vastly more bike friendly than the place I came from. I rode my bike and walked everywhere and had no car for several years. I loved (and still love) that work culture is less-poisonous and everyone who works full time gets a month off a year.

Then, after having a kid, I got a 100% remote job. There were a lot of things I liked about Dublin, but it turns out I like paying basically nothing to buy a house an easy bike ride from a train station where I can restore degraded grazing land in to native broadleaf forest even more. Had there been reasonable options in Dublin (2 bed flat we could afford in a completely car-free area near secular schools), or if I had already been naturalised as an EU citizen, we would've looked at something else.

Meanwhile, the 1 year move to San Diego was because I wanted to try starting a company with a San Diegan. Also, California is vastly superior for funding. The decision to give up and leave California came after the very operators of this site rejected interviewed us and said no. Oh well.

Also, I didn't say everyone should move to a beautiful city, I shared my experiences and what I hope are useful tips for anyone else interested in the same. I don't even live in a beautiful city anymore, I live in the countryside, because it's cheap as hell, beautiful, and gives me more freedom to do what I want with my life. But I miss walkable, and cycleable, cities. In a few years we might move again, though we'll see how the gulf stream is looking at that point.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#399

Post by gkop »

pronlover723 wrote: post #15

I'm pretty addicted to "Not Just Bikes" youtube channel which seems to be either directly or indirectly related to stongtowns https://www.youtube.com/c/NotJustBikes It's frustrating. Even though I'm currently in SF, SF still doesn't feel remotely as nice as many other places outside the US. Public transportation is slow and although the muni is okay the busses are kinda gross compared to good non-US cities. There are…

SF neighborhoods are missing strong social fabric and welcoming vibes. I moved to Oakland after 7 years of stretches in the Lower Haight, Inner Mission, Outer Sunset, Outer Richmond, Cole Valley, Divisadero, and Potrero Hill, for a better sense of community. I love it here, but must admit I’m afraid to name my Oakland neighborhood for fear of (further) letting the cat out of the bag. I feel like SF is a sink for the forces that lead to social tension, and it protects Oakland somewhat in that way.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#400

Post by epidemian »

jseban wrote: post #241
globular-toast wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Motorised traffic, and cars in particular, are prioritised over non-motorised traffic everywhere I've been in the world, including Stockholm. The problem is cultural. You see, motorised traffic wins by default, unless there are strict rules to stop that happening. If you think about a street full of pedestrians, some will be quicker and stronger than others, but it's not OK for them to use their might to take priorit…

> The problem is cultural. You see, motorised traffic wins by default, unless there are strict rules to stop that happening. It's not cultural, motorized traffic wins because it's more powerful. > Right now a child is being taught to give way to cars because if they don't the car will kill them. Vehicles with enclosed cabs like cars are the worst because the drivers are completely removed from the road. Their experie…

> Subways, trams and buses will also kill them, that's just as dangerous.

Do you have any source for this? AFAIK it's not true. Trams and subways specifically kill way less people than cars, even though in many places they transport more people than cars do.

For buses, IDK, but i would be surprised if a single bus was twice as likely or more to kill a person than a car. And a single bus transports way more people than a car.

Post reply on HN