this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2024
149 points (96.9% liked)

Fuck Cars

9368 readers
307 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
149
Yes in my backyard: Democrats are changing their tune on housing policy (www.businessinsider.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/19212604

Paywall removed: https://archive.is/DIorS

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 40 points 2 weeks ago

In-city land owning GenX here: YIMBY through and through. Been fighting for it at the city level for decades now.

I hate how stupid and short sighted so many people are. Selfishness has destroyed our cities, gutted our neighborhoods, and given our cities over to monopolies by driving out small and medium businesses. Cities and neighborhoods cannot be kept in amber. They either grow and adapt or they die.

Let's start building our city core through dense housing, removing automobiles (they don't make cities better, and they certainly destroy them), and making places for people instead of asphalt wastelands.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I think the thing that would help the most would be to get rid of single family only zoning. That should result in a lot more, higher density housing being built. However, that's not going to bring down the price of single family homes. In fact, it would probably make them more expensive. Maybe not everyone would think that's such a good thing, but it's absolutely necessary if we want to reduce car dependency.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It honestly might bring down the price of single family homes, just not in cities.

One reason the suburbs even exist is that there isn't space in the city for everyone. Many suburban families would rather live downtown but cannot as they do not have the mega millions to own a 3br condo.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

One reason the suburbs even exist is that there isn't space in the city for everyone. Many suburban families would rather live downtown but cannot as they do not have the mega millions to own a 3br condo.

But I think the reason there isn't space for everyone in many cities is because a large percentage, or even a majority of the land in many cities is zoned for single family only, even very near downtown areas. I think parking requirements have a lot to do with it as well, since they result in parking lots being built where condos, or other multifamily housing could be built. Theoretically if you get rid of single family only zoning and the parking requirements, more housing units could be built, even larger units, increasing their supply relative to the demand, thus bringing down the per unit price.

But maybe that theory is flawed. Maybe the problem goes deeper than zoning and parking requirements. A lot of these real estate developments are investments, and investors have an incentive to not build so much housing that the per unit price goes down significantly. Some people might argue that developers and investors could make up for lower per unit prices in volume, but that's only true if they are large enough and have capital resources to produce at that higher volume, which might be fine for very large developers and investment companies, but not for smaller ones. Plus, large or small, why try to make money selling or renting more units at a lower per unit price when you can make the same amount of money selling or renting fewer units at a higher per unit price?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

Sorry if my previous comment wasn't clear: I was agreeing with you but saying SFH would be more expensive in cities because it would represent lucrative development land and that would be part of the price.

As for the developer / investor incentives: I don't think that's a big issue. Sure some developers who intend to own afterwards will be disincentivized but plenty of people built with the goal of selling immediately, and making it cheaper and easier to build and sell will make those kinds of developers winners in the market.

We'd want robust regulations around building quality (soundproof your goddamn walls and floors) but all the red tape around other homeowners complaining about how big your apartment building is should be dropped.

Anything under 7 stories should be green lit if it meets safety and quality regulation.

This will also massively help cut down on gentrification.