Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Urban Sprawl Thread (merged)

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby TommyJefferson » Mon 01 Dec 2008, 10:52:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'W')hether it was a pure "free market" or not is irrelevant.


That was the question in the first post in this thread.

Did you read the article, or are you commenting without reading it?

BTW, there is nothing, absolutely nothing governments do that can't be done better by voluntary means, roads and transportation included.
Conform . Consume . Obey .
User avatar
TommyJefferson
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1757
Joined: Thu 19 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Texas and Los Angeles

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby MarkJ » Mon 01 Dec 2008, 13:41:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'G')overnments also create sprawl by forcing businesses, apartment buildings, and developers to provide (usually free) parking. For example, nearly all building codes require developers to provide two off-street parking spaces per house, and most apartment buildings provide at least one parking space per bedroom and sometimes more.


I couldn't imagine building a home, business, apartment building or development without substantial off-street parking.

Two off-street parking spaces per apartment are a must in my region if you want quality long term tenants. The downfall of many older city apartment buildings, multi-use office/store/apartments, multi-family homes and downtown sections was the lack of on-street and off-street parking. You often have to buy one or more neighboring structures and demolish them to create enough off-street parking.

Due to limited on-street parking, overnight winter parking bans, snow emergency parking bans, plowing, snowblowing and shoveling, you need plenty of room for off-street parking and jockeying vehicles around when clearing snow.

My typical tenants have two vehicles and occasional guests that also drive, so they need plenty of off-street parking unless they want to risk being ticketed or having their vehicle towed.

Many years ago some cities banned or reduced parking on many streets, installed more fire hydrants, more sidewalks etc which reduced parking substantially. They also started ticketing and towing the vehicles of residents, guests and service companies that parked on streets, front lawns, mouths of driveways, or that blocked sidewalks even if it was only temporary.

When people look at buying or renting a city property, many of them won't even consider a property without substantial off-street parking. The mention of no parking, odd/even parking, limited parking and shared driveways is enough to send people running for the villages, suburbs and rural areas. Even the mobile home parks have plenty of parking for residents, guests and a few toys.

When you can't compete with the quantity of land, parking and quality of life in a mobile home park, you're pretty much screwed.
User avatar
MarkJ
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue 25 Mar 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby emersonbiggins » Mon 01 Dec 2008, 14:19:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MarkJ', '
')When you can't compete with the quantity of land, parking and quality of life in a mobile home park, you're pretty much screwed.


I'll immediately let the residents of Tokyo, Manhattan, Amsterdam, Paris, London, Barcelona, Hong Kong, et. al., know that their quality of life is inferior to those living in Jim Bob's Trailer Court & RV Park because of their lack of 1:1 parking ratio and fantabulous astroturf rec court.
"It's called the American Dream because you'd have to be asleep to believe it."

George Carlin
User avatar
emersonbiggins
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun 10 Jul 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Dallas

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby mos6507 » Mon 01 Dec 2008, 14:40:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', '
')I take your words to mean that because D.C. hasn't yet been burned to the ground, the American people support the trillions thrown at Wall Street by their representatives?


In a broad sense, yes.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', '
')whereas the landscape associated with the standard US interstate is irrevocably developed with the trademark sprawl that dates as well as plaid leisure suits and shag carpeting, promulgating the patently unsustainable, 'throwaway' sense of modern American society.


There you go obssessing on Kunstler aesthetics again. I really think this sidesteps more important issues of resource utilization and carrying capacity, things that are not remedied solely by making architecture prettier or packing 6, 7, 8 9+ billion people more tightly.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', '
')Americans have been fully transformed from citizens to consumers in less than a century.


No we haven't. We've just changed the way they consume. A homesteader in the 1800s was still consuming. They were just consuming natural resources directly. Now we consume through intermediaries (corporations).

Do you think it was impossible to damage the world before oil? Ask the bison about that one.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', '
')Pretending that the trend was inevitable, or even preferable, is a toiling ruse in revisionism, and is an affront to an American society far removed, ideologically speaking, from the one we find ourselves members of today.


I think you have such a huge ideological axe to grind that you can't see any farther back than when you think we made some kind of singular detour that was solely responsible for our demise. Some mistakes were more fateful than others, but I really don't think it's as simple as that.

At first I was kind of shocked that "What a Way to Go" rolled the clock all the way back to the dawn of agriculture, and I felt myself put up a lot of defense mechanisms against that idea. Now having read some of Catton, I accept that as the turning point. I guess where I differ from a lot of people is I feel somewhat fatalist about the twists and turns that led us to this point. I don't really think there are any rogues galleries of villains to thrust all blame onto. Ultimately where we are reflects on the cumulative decisionmaking of homo sapiens, every individual, every generation, from then until now. Every tree cut down. Every starbucks coffee. Every conception. Every vote cast. Every shot fired. Every time we looked the other way. Every time we conformed so that we were not cast out. We are not just a bunch of innocent victims who have been led to the slaughter. This is the expression of who we are.
Last edited by mos6507 on Mon 01 Dec 2008, 15:01:07, edited 1 time in total.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby MarkJ » Mon 01 Dec 2008, 14:47:29

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MarkJ', '
')When you can't compete with the quantity of land, parking and quality of life in a mobile home park, you're pretty much screwed.


I'll immediately let the residents of Tokyo, Manhattan, Amsterdam, Paris, London, Barcelona, Hong Kong, et. al., know that their quality of life is inferior to those living in Jim Bob's Trailer Court & RV Park because of their lack of 1:1 parking ratio and fantabulous astroturf rec court.


What I'm discussing is regional in nature, hence why I stated in my region.
User avatar
MarkJ
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue 25 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby mos6507 » Mon 01 Dec 2008, 14:48:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MarkJ', '
')Two off-street parking spaces per apartment are a must in my region if you want quality long term tenants.


I can attest to that. In the last apartment I lived in, we had one underground parking space. There was rarely any free space on the street for parking and no meaningful visitor parking. So it was pretty much impossible for me to have any guests come over. I had to go to them, or limit myself to socializing with other tenants. This is one thing that could be ameliorated with walkable communities and public transit. But in the meantime, it's one of many annoyances of urban life that Kunstlerites don't bring up.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby emersonbiggins » Mon 01 Dec 2008, 15:09:04

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', ' ')This is the expression of who we are.


Agreed on that point. What a statement for civilization, though.
"It's called the American Dream because you'd have to be asleep to believe it."

George Carlin
User avatar
emersonbiggins
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun 10 Jul 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Dallas
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby emersonbiggins » Mon 01 Dec 2008, 15:12:12

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MarkJ', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MarkJ', '
')When you can't compete with the quantity of land, parking and quality of life in a mobile home park, you're pretty much screwed.


I'll immediately let the residents of Tokyo, Manhattan, Amsterdam, Paris, London, Barcelona, Hong Kong, et. al., know that their quality of life is inferior to those living in Jim Bob's Trailer Court & RV Park because of their lack of 1:1 parking ratio and fantabulous astroturf rec court.


What I'm discussing is regional in nature, hence why I stated in my region.


Five paragraphs earlier.

It certainly read like a blanket assertion to me.
"It's called the American Dream because you'd have to be asleep to believe it."

George Carlin
User avatar
emersonbiggins
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun 10 Jul 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Dallas
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby MarkJ » Mon 01 Dec 2008, 15:52:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MarkJ', '
')Two off-street parking spaces per apartment are a must in my region if you want quality long term tenants.


I can attest to that. In the last apartment I lived in, we had one underground parking space. There was rarely any free space on the street for parking and no meaningful visitor parking. So it was pretty much impossible for me to have any guests come over. I had to go to them, or limit myself to socializing with other tenants. This is one thing that could be ameliorated with walkable communities and public transit. But in the meantime, it's one of many annoyances of urban life that Kunstlerites don't bring up.


Some of our friends and customers that own rental properties with limited parking have a lot of tenant vs tenant and tenant vs neighbor conflict due to the guest parking issue. When they see someone parked in their spot or blocking access to their driveway or parking spot it really gets their blood boiling.

The same thing happens when our service vehicles are parked in their normal on-street or off street parking spots. People get very protective about parking and property usage when space is extremely limited.
User avatar
MarkJ
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue 25 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby mos6507 » Mon 01 Dec 2008, 16:04:26

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', ' ')This is the expression of who we are.


Agreed on that point. What a statement for civilization, though.


Sorry to expand things out to ReverseEngineer proportions. For all we know your prescription for the world could buy us some time. I just don't think it prevents a final outcome.

We're no better than J6P, really. Most if not all of us were awakened to peak oil only because we feared our own untimely demise. Many of us after initially 'getting' peak oil had big anxiety attacks and most of us are battling some kind of continual depression. Very few of us are Ed Begley tree-huggers who had already powered down despite cheap energy for the sake of doing the right thing for the planet and future generation. No, we were SCARED STRAIGHT. So how can we look in the rearview mirror and judge past decisions when we ourselves were blissfully ignorant just a few years ago? That's pure hypocrisy.

Like I said in another thread, had we read over Hubbert's papers 50 years ago, there is no way any of us would have taken the threat seriously enough to change our behaviors. In times of plenty, people consume.

We must find a way through this without resorting to "coulda shoulda wouldas" or being all snarky and satirical like Kunstler.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby cube » Tue 02 Dec 2008, 03:31:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MarkJ', 'H')ere's an example of what they can do to aid in demolition process.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')url=http://kaaltv.com/article/stories/S673285.shtml?cat=10151]Mpls. approves $5.6M to redevelop foreclosed properties[/url]

The money will be distributed as follows:

$500,000 will establish financing mechanisms to purchase and redevelop foreclosed homes and residential properties, including using soft seconds, loan loss reserves and shared equity loans for low and moderate-income homebuyers.

$1,464,800 will support the First Look Program, a new national pilot project launched in Minneapolis to coordinate the transfer of real estate-owned properties from financial institutions nationwide to local housing organizations, in collaboration with state and local governments.

$1,515,200 will be used to acquire vacant foreclosed properties that are not candidates for rehabilitation, demolish them, and hold them as vacant parcels until the market is ready to absorb new development of owner-occupied housing units.

$1,700,000 will be used to demolish blighted structures. To date, the city has more than 900 properties on its vacant and boarded list.


$420,000 will cover program administration costs.

The $5.6 million in federal funds for Minneapolis was part of a larger $58 million package the state received for foreclosure relief.
and where did government get the money to do this? --> collect taxes from the productive part of the economy

This is NOT a net gain to society.

This is simply just taking money from person A and giving it to person B.
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby mos6507 » Tue 02 Dec 2008, 10:21:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '
')and where did government get the money to do this? --> collect taxes from the productive part of the economy

This is NOT a net gain to society.

This is simply just taking money from person A and giving it to person B.


I'm with you on that, although it's not because I want to see suburbia crash and burn, but because I want housing prices to properly correct itself so I can buy into it without becoming just as house-poor as the schmucks who went into foreclosure before me.

It's clear that government is in panic mode and has decided to let go of all restraints as far as direct interference in the market. History will judge whether such meddling was prudent or not.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby MarkJ » Tue 02 Dec 2008, 11:46:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', 'a')nd where did government get the money to do this? --> collect taxes from the productive part of the economy

This is NOT a net gain to society.

This is simply just taking money from person A and giving it to person B.


Semi-Free Market principles don't work in many areas due to low or negative property values, high taxation, building/safety/fire/local codes, labor & material costs, local economic issues etc. Demolition, clean-up, construction, renovation, maintenance, repairs, rents, heating costs etc are subsidized with a redistribution of income tax, property tax and sales tax dollars and/or tax breaks and other incentives.

Myself, family, friends and many business associates never would have purchased, renovated, demolished or rented many city properties without subsidized improvements, subsidized rents and other incentives.
User avatar
MarkJ
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue 25 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby cube » Tue 02 Dec 2008, 13:20:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MarkJ', '.')..
Myself, family, friends and many business associates never would have purchased, renovated, demolished or rented many city properties without subsidized improvements, subsidized rents and other incentives.
I think I see what you're saying.
Basically you're saying, "Because government offered $1 million in incentives you invested $3 million into building property. So the community has actually benefited! Put $1 into the black box and pull out $3."
Sorry that doesn't cut the mustard.

With a subsidy:
a) The city that received these federal grants benefited.
b) Society in general (the entire USA) lost $1 million.
c) You invested in city A.

No subsidy:
a) The city in question would lose.
b) Society would not have to pay the tax
c) If you didn't invest your money in city A then you surely would of placed it in city B.

Like I said before a subsidy is just taking money from person A and give it to person B. In this case taking from the whole of society all for the benefit of one city. So again we would of been better off with a free-market economy instead of government intervention.
Where is the "net-gain" in a subsidy? I don't see it.
Last edited by cube on Tue 02 Dec 2008, 13:39:30, edited 1 time in total.
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby cube » Tue 02 Dec 2008, 13:45:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'C')ube, you seem to have a deregulating anti-government agenda. But not all taxes are bad.
You obviously don't know me.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'W')hen a neighborhood is run down but accessible and potentially valuable it makes sense to invest public funds. It can't be done otherwise.
This is where you and I disagree.

I believe aside from very very very basic things like for example putting up traffic signals so we all don't crash into each other and kill ourselves, government's power to help society is much more limited then what you think.

I am not a fan of urban renewal / revitalization projects.
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Why Sprawl is a Conservative issue

Postby cube » Tue 02 Dec 2008, 14:27:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '.')..So you believe damaged urban slums should be sold to the highest bidder? Like New Orleans?
New Orleans cannot be saved. There's a difference between bravery and foolishness.
Sending a man to the moon was engineering bravery. Trying to save New Orleans would be engineering foolishness.

//

If a business fails then we should let it die-off.
That's the way the free-market works.
Why shouldn't the same rule apply to cities?
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron