Yeah I think a lot of city dwellers would be fine with new building if it looked like building more of Paris, instead of building High Rise Home Depot Clearance Bin or commie block housing.
Most new stuff, at least in New Hampshire and Mass, is just SO UGLY inside and out. The people complaining about new construction do have legitimate grievances here.
(I say all this as a huge walkable towns, new urbanist-ish advocate)
If you think that’s bad, look at building concessions to special-use buildings, like elder care facilities.
Though I did not have a hand in this, as I don’t live there anymore, my old neighborhood successfully blocked the city from allowing developers to build a building that would allocate less than 100sqft of total (not living!) space per the elder person being cared at the facility. Bunk beds and all. Essentially a distopian hellhole.
Now, 3 story townhomes with reasonable sqft going up. Smaller spacing than I would personally want, but it’s A) housing and B) livable for a family, so it’s a win in my book.
Efficiency studios are drastically more livable than roommate situations. I hope the activists who “protect” me from having an apartment too small are not under the illusion that they’re helping.
I want to agree with you, but I don't think this is true. The average building height in Paris is 6 stories. People in my SF neighborhood cause a ruckus over 3 story buildings because they're too tall.
Who cares how "ugly" these structures are when we desperately need housing stock? Are you seriously suggesting we should be okay with delaying/blocking construction based on aesthetics when things are so clearly fucked up?
I think requirements on the architecture of new construction, the materials, the look, etc. is less burdensome than limiting the key features of the new development (number of units, floorplans).
Placing some restrictions to ensure you don’t make cookie-cutter concrete boxes is not so bad. Banning new, denser construction entirely is the true problem.
I've heard the same argument in Seattle, home owners who are "fine" with Parisian-style buildings, however they only came around long after the point where demand started replacing lower-income people enmasse.
When we wait too long, the market demands cheaper housing ASAP - style goes out the window.
Comments
Yeah I think a lot of city dwellers would be fine with new building if it looked like building more of Paris, instead of building High Rise Home Depot Clearance Bin or commie block housing.
Most new stuff, at least in New Hampshire and Mass, is just SO UGLY inside and out. The people complaining about new construction do have legitimate grievances here.
(I say all this as a huge walkable towns, new urbanist-ish advocate)
One big problem with high density affordable housing in CA is that the building codes for apartments are substantially weaker than for condos.
In particular, apartments have much lower sound proofing standards.
I guess the local politicians don’t realize that poor people (and millennial engineers) also need to sleep.
If you think that’s bad, look at building concessions to special-use buildings, like elder care facilities.
Though I did not have a hand in this, as I don’t live there anymore, my old neighborhood successfully blocked the city from allowing developers to build a building that would allocate less than 100sqft of total (not living!) space per the elder person being cared at the facility. Bunk beds and all. Essentially a distopian hellhole.
Now, 3 story townhomes with reasonable sqft going up. Smaller spacing than I would personally want, but it’s A) housing and B) livable for a family, so it’s a win in my book.
If only Santa Monica would average 3 stories...
Efficiency studios are drastically more livable than roommate situations. I hope the activists who “protect” me from having an apartment too small are not under the illusion that they’re helping.
I want to agree with you, but I don't think this is true. The average building height in Paris is 6 stories. People in my SF neighborhood cause a ruckus over 3 story buildings because they're too tall.
Who cares how "ugly" these structures are when we desperately need housing stock? Are you seriously suggesting we should be okay with delaying/blocking construction based on aesthetics when things are so clearly fucked up?
Are Paris-style 6-story buildings allowed by the laws of your local area?
I think requirements on the architecture of new construction, the materials, the look, etc. is less burdensome than limiting the key features of the new development (number of units, floorplans).
Placing some restrictions to ensure you don’t make cookie-cutter concrete boxes is not so bad. Banning new, denser construction entirely is the true problem.
I've heard the same argument in Seattle, home owners who are "fine" with Parisian-style buildings, however they only came around long after the point where demand started replacing lower-income people enmasse.
When we wait too long, the market demands cheaper housing ASAP - style goes out the window.