The DMV needs a YIMBY revolution

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most Europeans cities and towns were laid out before the advent of the automobile - which is why they are walkable because they had to be. And so they planned public connective transit because they had to and did that very well.
But there are many areas of Europe that are not connected by transit and are not walkable. The poster above is referencing major towns.
They do have some wastelands of parking and strip mall areas, not as much as the US, but they do exist. They are ugly and tucked in the back away from town centers.

There is a difference between advocating for multi-family dwellings and arguing against urban planning centered around the automobile. Don't conflate the two as they are completely different issues.

The point is, all of those "pre-car" walkable places are the ones that everyone loves to visit Clearly more livable and human scale. So why not make that the norm, rather than auto-centric dreck that we have in every cookie cutter suburban area in the US?

Europe is nice to visit but I prefer to reside in my car-dependent exurb where there is plenty of parking for my Escalade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most Europeans cities and towns were laid out before the advent of the automobile - which is why they are walkable because they had to be. And so they planned public connective transit because they had to and did that very well.
But there are many areas of Europe that are not connected by transit and are not walkable. The poster above is referencing major towns.
They do have some wastelands of parking and strip mall areas, not as much as the US, but they do exist. They are ugly and tucked in the back away from town centers.

There is a difference between advocating for multi-family dwellings and arguing against urban planning centered around the automobile. Don't conflate the two as they are completely different issues.

The point is, all of those "pre-car" walkable places are the ones that everyone loves to visit Clearly more livable and human scale. So why not make that the norm, rather than auto-centric dreck that we have in every cookie cutter suburban area in the US?

Because they're not real. They're fantasy lands subsidized by the state, mostly made up of Airbnbs, and wholly dependent on the tourist economy. They're glorified versions of colonial Williamsburg that can't get deliveries of normal sized appliances and everything costs 3X the regular price. Heck, there's dozens of quaint (the old version of walkable) villages throughout Europe begging people to move there because none of the locals are staying.

[Anonymous]

If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With all this increased density, how will you handle the next pandemic?

If there are lots of parks, that helps. We live near Fort Totten Park and many socially distanced gatherings happened there. Kids played. Dogs played. Our park was finally fully utilized. It was great. Dense housing doesn't mean there is nowhere to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

Toronto is among the localities that have adopted compact growth and made it hard to build new outer suburbs. I wonder the if there's a correlation between restricting construction of new outer suburbs and increasing housing prices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most Europeans cities and towns were laid out before the advent of the automobile - which is why they are walkable because they had to be. And so they planned public connective transit because they had to and did that very well.
But there are many areas of Europe that are not connected by transit and are not walkable. The poster above is referencing major towns.
They do have some wastelands of parking and strip mall areas, not as much as the US, but they do exist. They are ugly and tucked in the back away from town centers.

There is a difference between advocating for multi-family dwellings and arguing against urban planning centered around the automobile. Don't conflate the two as they are completely different issues.

The point is, all of those "pre-car" walkable places are the ones that everyone loves to visit Clearly more livable and human scale. So why not make that the norm, rather than auto-centric dreck that we have in every cookie cutter suburban area in the US?

People also love to visit museums, the Grand Canyon, and Disney World.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most Europeans cities and towns were laid out before the advent of the automobile - which is why they are walkable because they had to be. And so they planned public connective transit because they had to and did that very well.
But there are many areas of Europe that are not connected by transit and are not walkable. The poster above is referencing major towns.
They do have some wastelands of parking and strip mall areas, not as much as the US, but they do exist. They are ugly and tucked in the back away from town centers.

There is a difference between advocating for multi-family dwellings and arguing against urban planning centered around the automobile. Don't conflate the two as they are completely different issues.

The point is, all of those "pre-car" walkable places are the ones that everyone loves to visit Clearly more livable and human scale. So why not make that the norm, rather than auto-centric dreck that we have in every cookie cutter suburban area in the US?

People also love to visit museums, the Grand Canyon, and Disney World.

What does this have to do with building human scale habitable places for everyday living? Do we need strip malls to be this fugly, why can't we build parking BEHIND the businesses and have sidewalks instead of having to trudge across parking lots? There are functional towns the are such PITA to walk around becuase they were built without any consideration for aesthetics or even convenience, just mindlessly plopped around busy roads. E.g. Vienna Maple street drag, Mclean's sad downtown (despite so many usable businesses), Eden Center, etc. Even Tysons sucks and they can't get it right, but at least it has some hope with street level human scale walkability being plausible with some investment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It costs $$$$ to build anything, labor and material costs are out of control. With inflation even cars are way more expensive than before. People who already own homes cannot even afford renovations, how do you think shiny modern highrises can possibly emerge that would be affordable to regular people who cannot afford cra* old houses and condos today.

You think a city of the future will just spring up because aliens will drop an army of robots to make it happen?

Because they will build tiny apartments with thin walls. Ideal for high density living.

The cost conundrum still remains. Tiny apartments have kitchens and baths too, appliances, floors, windows, labor and materials costs. Doesn't matter even if the land is cheaper if you build up. The costs to build are the highest they'd ever been. How do you get cheap builds that would make housing affordable in areas where labor/material costs are $$$.

[Anonymous]

The YIMBYs need to all get together and buy some land and build a dense utopian place where they can all live. I am sure they will have all the skill sets needed for their utopian society to thrive.

Once they set a fine example everyone will follow.

[Anonymous]

Hi OP - let's get down to what you care about - you. What do YOU own? Because I suspect nothing. And you want to level - set not for the good of anyone - but YOU! And the answer is - NO. But there are many other countries that welcome your ideas - the old communist block apartments in Russia are all you need. Explore that and enjoy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

But those that can do buy and take care of their properties - preserving and increasing the value. Sounds like - gulp - capitalism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

YIMBY is pushed by folks who don't own a back yard and have heavy payments on their honda and think a plant is a huge responsibility. Next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With all this increased density, how will you handle the next pandemic?

If there are lots of parks, that helps. We live near Fort Totten Park and many socially distanced gatherings happened there. Kids played. Dogs played. Our park was finally fully utilized. It was great. Dense housing doesn't mean there is nowhere to go.

Parks were closed in Fairfax County. It was illegal to gather there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

[Anonymous]

This kind of nonsense reminds me of the poster who was insisting homeowners sell their homes and move so that younger families could move in. Just an astounding mindset. No doubt, they also advocate for their student loans to be forgiven too, even while the rest of us worked many years to pay ours off.