Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore?

#281

Post by xibalba » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 2:32 PM UTC

BrianHenryIE wrote: post #150

xibalba wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is not faster to way to discredit oneself than to offer a pat, single variable explanation. As others point out, Americans like and want to transport themselves by car. Let's accept this, work with it, and build around it instead of lusting after a minority defined Utopia.

Wrong. I tried to find the tweet, but it was succinctly put ~"it's said people in Los Angeles love their cars, but people in LA have no choice but to own a car, it's not love, it is necessity". In every city that has made a concerted effort to accommodate all modes of transport, driving as a percentage has gone down. "build it and they will come" is better suited to transport than it ever was to SaaS. It is easy to c…

1 minute of Googling:

"81% of Americans agree with the sentiment that their car reflects who they are...59% consider themselves as someone who is passionate about cars, trucks, motorcycles, or other vehicles" [1]

78% of Americans personally enjoy driving moderately to greatly [2]

> Wrong.

> In every city that has made a concerted effort to accommodate all modes of transport

These are strong claims without citation. Your subsequent comments in this thread reveal a fairly extreme and inflexible viewpoint on cars which you advance through many logical fallacies (straw men, false dilemma, and hasty generalizations). In other words, I don't think you're evaluating this issue in good faith or rationally. So, I'm not going to engage beyond this comment.

The main point of my initial comment was to point out that this "walk-able utopia" goal is not shared by a great number of people and contravening both the will of the majority and the current state is an exercise in futility and thus a waste of a society's time and resources.

[1] https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/american-attitudes-on...

[2] https://news.gallup.com/poll/234416/driverless-cars-tough-se...

Re: Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore?

#282

Post by supermatt » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 2:35 PM UTC

0x0nyandesu wrote: post #279

supermatt wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, your confusion is endemic of the problem with government statistics using disposable income as an indicator of prosperity, and is even being quoted by others in this thread. Indeed, you likely googled "historical disposable income" to back up your statement - which is exactly the problem with using the incorrect term. I wont make the comparison to 100 years ago (as you did) because that was a period of…

I'm not confused lol. In America homes are just bigger now than they used to be. You can still go small though. No one said you had to take on a huge mortgage. That's why discretionary is a bad metric to use.

I see, so people are in poverty because their houses are too big...

Maybe you should check your privilege. Your 50% discretionary income is FAR from the norm.

Median income is less than 45k (gross - this means before tax, etc) - than means 50% of the population earn LESS than that. 25% earn less than 24k. 10% earn less than $9k...

These people cant afford a small house, let alone a big one...

Re: Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore?

#283

Post by bradstewart » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 3:32 PM UTC

closeparen wrote: post #100

tortarga wrote: post #63

As the article hinted at the simple answer is Car Dependency. Suburbs are regulated and built to accommodate cars now and not people. The topic is explored thouroughly on the 'Not Just Bikes' youtube channel. https://www.youtube.com/c/NotJustBikes which uses information from urban planning group 'Strong Towns' https://www.strongtowns.org/ .

There are some very nice older suburbs, with much higher densities than would be thought of as suburban today, that provision parking for every home. The venerable alley is basically an accommodation for cars, but a much more humane one. The sweet spot seems to be about 1920-1940.

The Lake Vista neighborhood [0] in New Orleans nailed this as well, but sort of flipped the alley concept. Still has street access and parking for every home, but the "front" of most houses faces an alley-width, pedestrian walkway. It was always one of my favorite areas to hang out as a kid, never really understood why until now.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakeshore/Lake_Vista,_New_Orle...

Re: Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore?

#284

Post by quesera » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 3:39 PM UTC

ericmay wrote: post #205

robbrown451 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are mistaking the word "conservative" for a political position. The parent is using it as in this definition "averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values." Steep roofs are more traditional. I'm definitely not buying the idea that asymmetrical houses are "stressful" in any meaningful way. I mean, I guess you could say anything that is interesting and non-bland is stressful, but that is qu…

Sure, my “this is unnecessarily political” radar might be off. Especially given there is a lot of angst about Trump’s decision to mandate all federal buildings follow Greco-Roman architecture (maybe the only good thing he ever did) so there is a pushback now where anything “conservative” or traditional is bad and modern is good kind of thing. I’m surely overreacting. But I’d also challenge this notion that buildings…

Sorry, "conservative" is not intended politically -- it's the word that the industry uses to describe itself.

Not architecture in general, but definitely residential homebuilding.

There are many good reasons for this. Embodied knowledge, building for unknown future buyers, buyer preference for familiarity in expensive products, buyer hesitancy about resale, liability for inappropriate materials choices or poor execution of unfamiliar methods, etc.

The commercial space is a bit more adventurous, certainly in facade but also in design. They have more leeway thanks to sturdier structural components (e.g. steel beams and floor pans) which can support a broader range of layouts, etc.

I disagree with the overly-simplistic theories on symmetry though. Sure, symmetry is pleasing in general to humans, but some of the most attractive and appealing structures are asymmetrical. Your example of "imposing" skyscrapers is unfair. Of course imposing things can be stressful.

You then go on with a lot of exactly what I'm talking about -- viscerally held opinions which are presented as absolutes. Boston City Hall makes you consider suicide? It's not an attractive or organic building, I agree, but that's a bit dramatic, no?

I don't know anyone who loves that building. But I know many people who love other brutalist buildings. I'm a fan of Jane Jacobs and Christopher Alexander, but I think they both express well-developed opinions and reasonable conclusions, but few absolute truths. Jacobs aspires to a bit more empiricism than Alexander, and I think she fails at that despite being "correct" IMO.

Buildings, cities, and humans are extremely complicated organisms. Some are failures, but describing the reasons is not simple.

PS: My proposal for "the only good thing" was withdrawing from the Universal Postal Union Treaty, which made it more expensive for US businesses to ship products to US customers, than for foreign businesses to do so.

Re: Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore?

#285

Post by dave333 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 7:43 PM UTC

Village Homes in Davis Ca

https://www.villagehomesdavis.org/home

Widely viewed as an improvement over plain tract suburbia but not copied anywhere that I'm aware of although cohousing does the same sort of thing on steroids. Reason might be that buyers have selfish insular motives initially and don't see the benefits of community.

Re: Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore?

#286

Post by UnFleshedOne » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 8:07 PM UTC

ironmagma wrote: post #96

theamk wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, the article specifically addresses your point: > consider college campuses and their central quads, which typically do not have automobiles even today. The ones people admire are the older ones, not the newer campuses, which tend to be functional but aesthetically mediocre

Not just with campuses, but cities too. We generally need to import good aesthetics from the past, which should be a sign that the current system is broken. Good things should be possible to create in the present.

Might be related to the way modern art is ugly by design. Since it became easy to create beautiful things at scale, the "art" appreciation scene moved into ugly stuff, because only sophisticated art experts can appreciate the stuff, thus separating themselves from the common rubble.

Re: Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore?

#287

Post by Smoosh » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:22 PM UTC

fgnbdfgx wrote: post #236

0x0nyandesu wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing with Tokyo is that the cops do their jobs. A homeless person asking for money on a Tokyo subway is unheard of. I'd love something like Tokyo in the USA but it will never work because crime on American public transport is rampant. Hell just last week a women was raped on a Philly subway and no one did a thing. Adult hood in America is coming to terms with the fact that I'll never live to see this cleaned up…

>last week a women was raped on a Philly subway and no one did a thing Technically, according to what I've read, they did do something. They recorded it.

Gotta keep those crime stats high to increase the police budget!

Re: Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore?

#288

Post by 0x0nyandesu » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:25 PM UTC

supermatt wrote: post #282

0x0nyandesu wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not confused lol. In America homes are just bigger now than they used to be. You can still go small though. No one said you had to take on a huge mortgage. That's why discretionary is a bad metric to use.

I see, so people are in poverty because their houses are too big... Maybe you should check your privilege. Your 50% discretionary income is FAR from the norm. Median income is less than 45k (gross - this means before tax, etc) - than means 50% of the population earn LESS than that. 25% earn less than 24k. 10% earn less than $9k... These people cant afford a small house, let alone a big one...

Lol this is hacker news. I could care less what you think about my privilege. It's hilarious that you're assuming my so-called privledge when my family came to the USA with almost nothing. I'm not here to be your little social justice pawn while you make assumptions.

Just to be clear so there's no ambiguity. I don't care about the poor in america. I seriously could care less. My entire family immigrated to the USA in the 90s and none of them are poor. They all self made themselves into upper middle class lives within 20 years. Meanwhile Americans born in America with every advantage and privilege just whine all day and want more more more for nothing.

Also sick and tired of constantly having social justice internet warriors tell me I'm privileged when I'm literally self made from zero. It's not privileged when you work your way up from fast food to six figures tech work. that's called "earning" things. Please learn the difference.

Re: Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore?

#289

Post by AussieWog93 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:42 PM UTC

fgnbdfgx wrote: post #237

AussieWog93 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough. Any Irish people reading this? Which areas are more architecturally beautiful? Catholic or Protestant?

Are you trying to start something?

If I was, I picked the wrong topic. Far more likely to start a punch-up here by mentioning affirmative action, US partisan politics or Rust.

Re: Why can't we build nice neighborhoods anymore?

#290

Post by ironmagma » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:50 PM UTC

UnFleshedOne wrote: post #286

ironmagma wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just with campuses, but cities too. We generally need to import good aesthetics from the past, which should be a sign that the current system is broken. Good things should be possible to create in the present.

Might be related to the way modern art is ugly by design. Since it became easy to create beautiful things at scale, the "art" appreciation scene moved into ugly stuff, because only sophisticated art experts can appreciate the stuff, thus separating themselves from the common rubble.

I definitely think the ugliness of modern art is related to the economics. Why invest a lot of time or thought into something, when you can convince someone to believe that those don't matter?