Anonymous wrote:Progressives won't be happy until the US is transformed into Soviet style bloc style housing. No one needs SFHs according to them. Neighborhoods w SFHs should be razed and demolished to make way for super sense govt built bloc housing.

Please show where what you are suggested is factual. From what I have seen, most urbanists want density focused on transportation corridors and centers, with a variety of housing types mixed in between. the problem is that moden zoning doesn't allow for the cool, funky places that many Americans love, either in Europe, or in places like Cambridge, MA.

Anonymous wrote:Most Americans live in cities so that 28 minute commute is a dream for most.

Can you please explain why you believe that commutes are longer for people who live in cities?

Most Americans live in cities so that 28 minute commute is a dream for most.

Anonymous wrote:Progressives won't be happy until the US is transformed into Soviet style bloc style housing. No one needs SFHs according to them. Neighborhoods w SFHs should be razed and demolished to make way for super sense govt built bloc housing.

I know a lot of self-described urban progressives, and I know a lot of housing policy people, and I have never heard anything ever approaching this bizarre assertion.

Anonymous wrote:Nobody has explained the economics behind building two homes on a single family lot. Those costs include getting approval to tear down a $1 million SFH and building a brand new building that contains two homes that are affordable for middle class families. It literally makes no sense to a developer - the cost of construction alone makes it untenable.

This is what makes sense to a developer: tear down a $1 million dollar home and build two $1.5 million homes.

Maybe you should have this discussion with the "Soviet-style apartment blocks" PP.

Also, you're right, nobody will tear down a $1 million one-unit house to build a two-unit house. However, plenty of people will tear down a small, old one-unit house to build a large, new $1.5 million one-unit house. These same people would likely be willing to tear down a small, old one-unit house to build a large, new two-unit house at $1 million per unit.

Nobody has explained the economics behind building two homes on a single family lot. Those costs include getting approval to tear down a $1 million SFH and building a brand new building that contains two homes that are affordable for middle class families. It literally makes no sense to a developer - the cost of construction alone makes it untenable.

This is what makes sense to a developer: tear down a $1 million dollar home and build two $1.5 million homes.

Progressives won't be happy until the US is transformed into Soviet style bloc style housing. No one needs SFHs according to them. Neighborhoods w SFHs should be razed and demolished to make way for super sense govt built bloc housing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with OP. There are many others besides the one they listed. All the attention goes to more housing, more affordable housing, and more housing. Destroying suburbs, turning them into urban areas, because we need more housing. Some of us moved to the suburbs because we like the suburbs. And, we are labeled bigots and racists for saying so.

Okay then. So what about your kid’s teachers? Police officers? Firefighters? Nurses? Should they all live an hour commute away from where they are needed?

Don't most people live an hour commute from work? And don't most people pick a home to buy or rent that is an hour or less from work? Plus, affordable housing is just a pretty shiney bow to sell the idea of a huge development of 700k to 1million dollar townhomes. Just sprinkle a couple low income units in there.

The average commute time in the U.S. is a little under 28 minutes, so no, most people don't live an hour commute from work.

The average commute time in the DC area is 43 minutes. Show proof that teachers have longer commutes, as an urbanist would say.

The point being that if people could live near where they work, the average commute could be <10 minutes. On foot, even. Historically, 30 minutes has been the limit of one's daily movement. By foot in early civilization, then by horse, then by bike, then motorized vehicle. Each mode of transportation expanded the distance one could travel in 30 minutes. The fact that suburbanites think upwards of an hour commute is normal and unproblematic shows how disconnected that development pattern is from humanity.

Anonymous wrote:OP is on the correct track here. This video explains much of the issue:

[youtube]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PVPi5tl7ZpM&feature=youtu.be[youtube]

The belief that people who think that it should be legal to build duplexes on single-family lots are suffering from mass psychosis and mental illness is ... a little unhinged.

Anonymous wrote:OP is on the correct track here. This video explains much of the issue:

[youtube]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PVPi5tl7ZpM&feature=youtu.be[youtube]

Ooo! Does that link to the Rick Astley music video?

Anonymous wrote:

This is some next level conspiracy bullshit.

OP is on the correct track here. This video explains much of the issue:

[youtube]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PVPi5tl7ZpM&feature=youtu.be[youtube]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with OP. There are many others besides the one they listed. All the attention goes to more housing, more affordable housing, and more housing. Destroying suburbs, turning them into urban areas, because we need more housing. Some of us moved to the suburbs because we like the suburbs. And, we are labeled bigots and racists for saying so.

Okay then. So what about your kid’s teachers? Police officers? Firefighters? Nurses? Should they all live an hour commute away from where they are needed?

Don't most people live an hour commute from work? And don't most people pick a home to buy or rent that is an hour or less from work? Plus, affordable housing is just a pretty shiney bow to sell the idea of a huge development of 700k to 1million dollar townhomes. Just sprinkle a couple low income units in there.

The average commute time in the U.S. is a little under 28 minutes, so no, most people don't live an hour commute from work.

The average commute time in the DC area is 43 minutes. Show proof that teachers have longer commutes, as an urbanist would say.

Which is kind of the point, no?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with OP. There are many others besides the one they listed. All the attention goes to more housing, more affordable housing, and more housing. Destroying suburbs, turning them into urban areas, because we need more housing. Some of us moved to the suburbs because we like the suburbs. And, we are labeled bigots and racists for saying so.

Okay then. So what about your kid’s teachers? Police officers? Firefighters? Nurses? Should they all live an hour commute away from where they are needed?

Don't most people live an hour commute from work? And don't most people pick a home to buy or rent that is an hour or less from work? Plus, affordable housing is just a pretty shiney bow to sell the idea of a huge development of 700k to 1million dollar townhomes. Just sprinkle a couple low income units in there.

The average commute time in the U.S. is a little under 28 minutes, so no, most people don't live an hour commute from work.

The average commute time in the DC area is 43 minutes. Show proof that teachers have longer commutes, as an urbanist would say.