I mostly agree with his sentiment, but with a lot of caveats for being in the USA vs somewhere like the Netherlands.halgy wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 9:38 amAny examples of that? Bonus points if it is in a city analogous to Omaha.Vitruvius wrote: Wed Apr 24, 2024 6:18 pmAnd the market can be just as saturated and competitive when housing development is incremental, resilient, thoughtfully designed, and gives the human being priority over automobiles.Athomsfere wrote: Mon Apr 22, 2024 9:25 pmThat is the only real way to work on affordably housing...Vitruvius wrote: Mon Apr 22, 2024 5:08 pm And as far as the affordable housing crisis, this project was never about affordability. However, that may change once the market is saturated and competitive.
Dense, incremental, built at the human scale, interesting architecture: All are sort of the polar opposite of what we have been building for 70 years or so.
Can all of these things exist? Absolutely. I'd argue that's even the end goal. But right now: Perfect is the enemy of good.
If we try to do it all at once, you get a band of NIMBYs for each of those points.
There is too much traffic
There is no transit
There isn't enough parking
It doesn't fit the character of the street, block, or area
Its going to bring down property values
It's too expensive, no one will live there.
At best, most modern American developments can choose to try and address one of those items and have a shot at being built. IMO. So I'll take adding density and affordable housing first, because getting people into those areas clears the way to make all the other things easier in the next round of development.