Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
ryonguy
Jun 27, 2013

Odobenidae posted:

Hate suburbs? Want to throw up? Look up Phoenix, Arizona on google maps.

Want to laugh? Check out the East Valley in the same area where between '00 and '07 idiots built up massive shopping centers on the intersections of the 1-mile grids in anticipation of the residential neighborhoods that were about to be built. I worked for a butcher shop driving delivery to little independent restaurants and nothing was more hilarious/sad than delivering to a sports bar in the middle of four square miles of nothing. Let's just say not too many of them survived.

For my own zoning nightmare, I bought a plot of property I eventually want to build a house on. I wanted to go with a small house, as I enjoyed living in a Mother-in-law house that had to have been less than 700 sq ft, and I want to keep costs down. Guess whose town has 1300 sq ft minimum housing sizes? Well, it must be for "No houses too small to inhabit" or some other sensible reason right?

Guess whose town also has no building codes? Nope, the square footage requirement is literally the only housing restriction. The city engineer told me, verbatim, "You can build a mud hut as long as it's thirteen hundred square feet." Imagine an HOA run by Three Olives for the full effect of how housing works around here.

Also, that McMansionHell blog is loving hilarious and seriously pro-read.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

ryonguy
Jun 27, 2013

Badger of Basra posted:

Where the hell do you live? This sounds like a fair housing suit waiting to happen.

Oh, believe me, I am going to challenge it. It was pretty clear the city engineer didn't think to highly of it, and he said I could apply for a variance.

I could use any and all advice on that front though (think of me as the anti-Grover if you will).

edit: for another idea of what my area is like, Johnson came pretty close to tying Clinton's percentage here.

ryonguy fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Dec 9, 2016

ryonguy
Jun 27, 2013

Badger of Basra posted:

If you live in a blue state and have a Democrat state legislator you could maybe contact them as well.

:smithicide:

..Ohio.

For a less jokey response, I am almost certainly flying solo in this. This is more about being able to build the type of house I want versus any sort of social justice; if I could it would be great, but fighting entrenched Republican local and state governments in the process of getting a building permit for a glorified hut for myself is a little more than I want to handle.

ryonguy fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Dec 9, 2016

ryonguy
Jun 27, 2013

Odobenidae posted:

drat. I just found https://earthengine.google.com/timelapse/, it's really cool for visualizing growth. Seeing the few farms in the area being paved over before your very eyes sure is something. It's like watching a hungry amoeba under a microscope.

Phoenix is probably a prime example of suburbs done wrong. Land was cheap because it was complete poo poo, so the 'burbs just sprawled out every direction. About the only thing done right (?) was building on a grid. You also never see a building taller than three or four stories because why bother, buy the quarter square mile next to us if we need to expand.

Residential housing was cheap and lovely too. I could put my hand on the interior wall of my house and feel the heat from the sun if it was in the right direction. $300 a month electric bills for sub 2000 sq ft was not uncommon for at least half the year.

ryonguy
Jun 27, 2013

quote:

I sell high end real estate and I love this city!

ryonguy
Jun 27, 2013

Tiny Brontosaurus posted:

I agree! Those ways are called "the power of local governments." Welcome to the conversation.

But local government is bad so [return to start].

Not gonna lie, the problem with my real estate is directly tied to local government. However, it's more tied to local government having two realtors on the zoning board, so again the problem is more about crooked pieces of poo poo that are maximizing their profits versus "GUBBERMINT MEAN!".

ryonguy
Jun 27, 2013

The Oldest Man posted:

Yeah it does, because you no longer have to pay a shitload of unionized public sector employees to have a bus service. I'm about to blow everyone's mind: self-driving is good for public transit because it plays on transit's strengths (professionally maintained and regularly replaced fleet vehicles that do a ton of miles) while nearly eliminating public transit's biggest problem (you need a lot of expensive operators). Eliminating those labor costs (and the pension liabilities of future drivers) makes public transit expansion something you can do much faster, cheaper, and without the threat that the entire system will collapse in a recession.

It's less good for Uber because Uber's maximally efficient business model is contractor serfs who buy the cars for them and they already have that. They're investing into automated cars because they want to survive the next ten years, not because it'll be a better business than what they already have.

Uber's hosed because their fares already don't cover their costs even before they drive people out of business with their low fares:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/12/can-uber-ever-deliver-part-five-addressing-reader-comments-and-questions.html

And anybody can buy a self driving car once they come to market, including cab companies, so that's not going to save them.

Also, now that a millions of people are out of work for having the audacity to have fought for and maintained livable wages, it is up to you to find work for them that pays a comparable salary. Not just for the lazy, fat, unmotivated (going by your obvious opinion of unions) workers, but also for the taxes they pay, and the goods and services they can no longer afford, and therefor all the businesses they support. If nobody can afford the future, it's not going to happen.

ryonguy
Jun 27, 2013

boner confessor posted:

the bigger problem is the budget squeeze

No it's surely those lazy slobs who want a living wage. If only we could purge ourselves of these untermensch who demand to eat and live on the real earner's dime, then we could have a technological utopia.

New post on McMansionHell:

http://www.mcmansionhell.com/post/154653904191/a-pictorial-history-of-suburbia

What say the thread, good or bad?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

ryonguy
Jun 27, 2013

Badger of Basra posted:

Here's an interesting DC area story about land use discrimination from an angle I hadn't heard of before: islamophobia!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...f2fd_story.html

Just redlining in another form.

  • Locked thread