Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
The challange for planners is to create an environment that maintains the yard and garage but attracts cool stuff. You are correct that the demand for those two items overrides good zoning when faced with a cost question.
In the inner city the demand is for houses with garages with tiny yards they are just unaffordable so their is more profit to be made by subdividing and building duplexes and 4 plexes with garages.
When people choose burb they are choosing house over condo. They might be choosing house over duplex but rarely are the choosing house over house. They are making the same decision that many of the inner city families have made. Bought a house that fits their family as close to downtown as they could afford.
The disdain from the latte sippers is always funny to see. Better planning in suburbs to crate walkable communities is important
|
Walkable communities with cool stuff dominated by single family detached houses are not mutually compatible. This is as true in inner city as it is in the suburbs. Cool stuff and amenities within walking distance requires enough people within walking distance to make such businesses viable. While suburb design is meant to get as many houses into a plot of land as possible, that's also what makes it not suitable for walking: the cul-de-sac and boulevard design is great for getting more houses, and making it easier for cars to drive there faster than a grid system would allow. But a different system would mean developers can't make as much money off their land, and the places would take longer to get to by vehicles and transit.
The old grid system is really the only thing that creates the illusion of walkable neighborhoods in the inner city that maintains their detached SFH landscape. But when you start looking at some of the great areas, it's happening because those houses are going away, not because they're still there and other factors are taking over.