HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 5:06 PM
mthd mthd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
...

To call that antisocial is idiocy.

Sounds like you live in the outer Richmond (walk to the beach). As city neighborhoods go, that might as well be the suburbs.
i grew up with more free range as well. but for the most part, parents are no longer comfortable with that whether they’re suburban or urban. i stand by the notion that when a child’s primary outdoor space is entirely private, that’s antisocial. as a kid in the suburbs, we walked and rode our bikes to neighborhood parks, but again, most parents don’t allow that in any neighborhood these days.

and no, we don’t live in the richmond. walking distance to lafayette park, fort mason, helen wills playground, moscone playground, and, yes, aquatic park, which is actually a great beach for kids because there aren’t any waves.

for big beach fun, of course, we go to baker or ocean beach or down the peninsula a bit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 5:07 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is online now
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
That's mostly a myth.

When I was a child, many kids in New York at least took the subway or other public transit to school and certainly they did in middle and high school (age 12 and above).

Much has been written about whether anything has really changed since then and the conclusions I've seen are almost always that they haven't.

Kidnapped children make headlines, but abduction is rare in U.S.

The whole "free range parenting" movement is based on that reality--parents who simply aren't as frightened and overprotective as others and don't feel the need to "helicopter" over them constantly.

What has really changed in 50 years is the media. Whereas once we read the printed newspapers once or maybe twice a day and maybe saw the report of a missing child on a back page, today we are bombarded with missing child reports everywhere, even on the Apple watch on my wrist and the carton from which I pour milk for my morning cereal.
I guess anecdotally I don't really see kids under 12 by themselves on the L where in some other places (e.g. Romania) that wouldn't be unusual. But violent crime rates in Romania are an order of magnitude lower than the US and violent crime is predominantly in rural areas rather than urban areas.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 5:11 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is online now
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthd View Post
i grew up with more free range as well. but for the most part, parents are no longer comfortable with that whether they’re suburban or urban. i stand by the notion that when a child’s primary outdoor space is entirely private, that’s antisocial. as a kid in the suburbs, we walked and rode our bikes to neighborhood parks, but again, most parents don’t allow that in any neighborhood these days.

and no, we don’t live in the richmond. walking distance to lafayette park, fort mason, helen wills playground, moscone playground, and, yes, aquatic park, which is actually a great beach for kids because there aren’t any waves.

for big beach fun, of course, we go to baker or ocean beach or down the peninsula a bit.
Sounds like you two live within a mile of each other
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 5:12 PM
dubu's Avatar
dubu dubu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: bend oregon
Posts: 1,449
i mostly lived in the country growing up. when i lived in the city it was surrounded by forests. i ether biked, walked or skateborded to get around if there wasnt a car. thats pretty normal here in oregon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 5:36 PM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Growing up, I lived in a sequence of urban Seattle (apartment, duplex), streetcar suburban Seattle house, suburban Boise house, close-in Boise house, and Seattle house that was surrounded by apartments.

Much of my love for cities dates to ages 9-14 in suburban Boise. I was a really dysfunctional place to grow up...you're at a friends house or riding your bikes to the Circle K but otherwise you're mostly dependent on drivers. By contrast, central Boise was walkable heaven. And I as very excited to move back to Seattle.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 6:00 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is online now
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Growing up, I lived in a sequence of urban Seattle (apartment, duplex), streetcar suburban Seattle house, suburban Boise house, close-in Boise house, and Seattle house that was surrounded by apartments.

Much of my love for cities dates to ages 9-14 in suburban Boise. I was a really dysfunctional place to grow up...you're at a friends house or riding your bikes to the Circle K but otherwise you're mostly dependent on drivers. By contrast, central Boise was walkable heaven. And I as very excited to move back to Seattle.
Yeah, car-dependent places are not so great if you can't drive. And honestly, letting 16-17 year-olds drive is probably a mistake. Yes, I got my driver's license when I was 16. No, I should not have been driving myself and others around, as proven by multiple accidents and even more close calls.

It's not so much about SFH vs.attached housing, but about having somewhere you can play.

When I was very young I lived somewhere like this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.4809...7i13312!8i6656

but there was so little car traffic playing in the street was fine and of course there were parks nearby.

Then I moved somewhere like this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6601...7i13312!8i6656
which was ugly as fuck and there were no nearby amenities, but there was plenty of place to play.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.

Last edited by SIGSEGV; Oct 3, 2020 at 6:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 6:11 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
I guess anecdotally I don't really see kids under 12 by themselves on the L where in some other places (e.g. Romania) that wouldn't be unusual. But violent crime rates in Romania are an order of magnitude lower than the US and violent crime is predominantly in rural areas rather than urban areas.
Is it that they are lower, at least since 1989, or is it that they aren't so obsessively reported (prior to 1989, house-of-horror Romanian orphanages were legendary). Most violent crime, even in the US, is between or among people who know each other. It's hard to believe that in a place like Romania, intrafamily abuse is not common but kept within the family.

I'm asking sincerely what you think, not arguing, because I don't know much about modern day eastern Europe but I get the impression it's not too much unlike Russia where alcoholism is rampant doubtlessly resulting in abuse. But on the other hand, the sorts of crazy wierdos who are allowed to exercise their "rights" by wandering western streets may be swept off them there.

I also know that dysfunctional things like the porn industry, sometimes involving very young "actors", thrives in eastern Europe as well as Russia. It's all over the internet. Typically where this is going on it represents the tip of an iceberg of child exploitation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 6:12 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
I think Europe does much better at providing "intermediate" suburban options that offer more safe/private open space but a more social environment. Smaller houses, either attached or detached, or apartment buildings with family-sized units, can be clustered around shared courtyards - everyone gets a private small yard or terrace but the whole thing is pretty park like.

In the US these kinds of developments pretty much came to an end with Radburn and Greenbelt in the 1930s... people in power believed these kinds of communities were too socialist since they had actual shared amenities. They wanted every man to have a castle instead, so they wouldn't be tempted to engage in society and do annoying things like "joining unions" or "agitating for basic rights".

The US does have (some) New Urbanist communities which offer more public space, but they are rooted in a weird nostalgic conservatism and exemplify a kind of nosy, rigid, superficial way of life. Other suburban development styles (e.g. Prairie Crossing outside Chicago) offer common open space, but the lot size/density is too low for socialization. Or they have small houses (more common in the Southwest due to water scarcity) but no common open space except driveways.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...

Last edited by ardecila; Oct 3, 2020 at 6:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 6:16 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
Sounds like you two live within a mile of each other
You mean me and mthd? Actually, sounds like we do--maybe 2 miles. San Francisco is only a square 7 miles on a side (so it's impossible for any 2 San Franciscans to live more than 10 miles from each other). Everybody lives pretty close to everybody else, especially those who don't live in the vast tracts of single family homes "west of Twin Peaks" (the neighborhoods known as the Richmond and Sunset Districts).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 6:26 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
I think Europe does much better at providing "intermediate" suburban options that offer more safe/private open space but a more social environment. Smaller houses, either attached or detached, can be clustered around shared courtyards - everyone gets a private small yard or terrace but the whole thing is pretty park like.

In the US these kinds of developments pretty much came to an end with Radburn and Greenbelt in the 1930s... people in power believed these kinds of communities were too socialist since they had actual shared amenities. They wanted every man to have a castle instead, so they wouldn't be tempted to engage in society and do annoying things like "joining unions" or "agitating for basic rights".

The US does have (some) New Urbanist communities which offer more public space, but they are rooted in a weird nostalgic conservatism and exemplify a kind of nosy, rigid, superficial way of life. Other suburban development styles (e.g. Prairie Crossing outside Chicago) offer common open space, but the lot size/density is too low for socialization. Or they have small houses (more common in the Southwest due to water scarcity) but no common open space.
Like I said, the neighborhood where I grew up was very typical of post-war suburbia. Each house sat on its own lot but very few homeowners fenced their lots, especially the front yards (my family fenced the back because we had 2 dogs and wanted to be able to let them out without letting them run totally free) so we kids basically had the entire neighborhood as an outdoor play space. And even when the back yards were fenced, it was typically chest high fencing that allowed people to talk over the fence which they often did.

We had some Democrats but no socialists I recall. The family 2 doors down were unionists but they were unusual.

I think words like wierd, nosy, rigid and superficial simply don't apply and you really have no clue what life in those times and places was like.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 7:09 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is online now
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
Is it that they are lower, at least since 1989, or is it that they aren't so obsessively reported (prior to 1989, house-of-horror Romanian orphanages were legendary). Most violent crime, even in the US, is between or among people who know each other. It's hard to believe that in a place like Romania, intrafamily abuse is not common but kept within the family.


I'm asking sincerely what you think, not arguing, because I don't know much about modern day eastern Europe but I get the impression it's not too much unlike Russia where alcoholism is rampant doubtlessly resulting in abuse. But on the other hand, the sorts of crazy wierdos who are allowed to exercise their "rights" by wandering western streets may be swept off them there.

I also know that dysfunctional things like the porn industry, sometimes involving very young "actors", thrives in eastern Europe as well as Russia. It's all over the internet. Typically where this is going on it represents the tip of an iceberg of child exploitation.

Well I was born in 1986, so I can't remember too much pre-revolution, and left Romania in 1992 (though have gone back regularly). Any deviant behavior on the streets would have gotten you swiftly disappeared prior to 1989, most likely (you can find many old-timers who reminisce on how "clean" Romania was under Ceausescu). But yes there of course were many abuses by the state, including the orphanages (which are an artifact of Ceasusecu's "pro-growth" anti-abortion and anti-contraception policies.).

There are certainly some communities (especially among the Romani minority orin rural areas) that may not be properly reporting domestic violence. And organized crime which includes sex trafficking of young girls is indeed a major problem (see e.g. https://www.insideover.com/society/h...g-factory.html ).
Corruption with government officials looking the other way or being bribed doesn't help.

But I think outright kidnappings "off the street" of sorts are fairly rare, at least in the major cities. And probably the fact that guns are so restricted means that even though there is organized crime, it rarely affects "normal" people. Bucuresti has a murder rate of 0.9/100,000 and is a very safe city to walk around all night long (well, except for the drivers!).
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.

Last edited by SIGSEGV; Oct 3, 2020 at 7:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 7:53 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
We had some Democrats but no socialists I recall. The family 2 doors down were unionists but they were unusual.
This is not about socialism as a formal political party. As you surely know, the US is uniquely hostile to any kind of shared amenity, social safety net, or service program. We can't even get basic healthcare without people yelling about socialism... it was even worse in the Cold War era of red-baiting, which you surely know. Unfortunately, some of these people were able to set policy at the FHA and (ironically) forced every developer to build the same kind of cookie-cutter housing development coast to coast. This was done on such a large scale it's hard to say what the political impacts were but surely it played into the rugged individualism in American culture.

I do think the time might be ripe for these kinds of planning ideas to stage a comeback in the US... the problem is that the ideal of the single-family house with a big yard is so deeply ingrained in the culture, people are conditioned to want that even when a different kind of home is objectively a better fit for their needs. Also, our cities now sprawl so much that developers can't find big sites within 45-60 minutes drive of the core city. You simply can't build anything on the scale of Greenbelt, MD anymore in most cities without it being remote and inaccessible. I do see some developers experimenting with cottage courts, though, which are a better solution for small infill sites.

Quote:
I think words like wierd, nosy, rigid and superficial simply don't apply and you really have no clue what life in those times and places was like.
I was describing New Urbanist communities like Seaside or Celebration today, not suburban neighborhoods in the past. These New Urbanist developments address some of the problems of typical American suburbia, but many people find the culture to be creepy for valid reasons.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...

Last edited by ardecila; Oct 3, 2020 at 8:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 7:59 PM
Stay Stoked Brah Stay Stoked Brah is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 225
I've lived in a single story ranch no garage, a sfh split level 2 car garage, a 3 story sfh new build colonial 3 car garage, numerous 2 or 3 bed apartments all were garden style, a 3 bed brownstone no parking, a cramped 5th floor urban apartment no parking, another new build 2 story, 3 car garage suburban sfh, a 19th century 3 story and basement victorian double family home no garage but a driveway to double stack 2 cars, a new build TOD unit with assigned garage parking. I generalized about 5 others that I also lived in.

Some were leafy suburbs, some were inner-city downtown, some were first ring suburbs, some were greenfield developments. I have not lived in an exurban or rural area. I figure that will come later in life if all goes to plan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 9:28 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
the ideal of the single-family house with a big yard is so deeply ingrained in the culture, people are conditioned to want that even when a different kind of home is objectively a better fit for their needs. Also, our cities now sprawl so much that developers can't find big sites within 45-60 minutes drive of the core city. You simply can't build anything on the scale of Greenbelt, MD anymore in most cities without it being remote and inaccessible. I do see some developers experimenting with cottage courts, though, which are a better solution for small infill sites.
"Objectively better" according to whom? Maybe people want this type of housing becuase they just do. As it happens, I grew up not too far from Greenbelt, MD and nobody I ever met thought of it as any sort of paradise.

Quote:
I was describing New Urbanist communities like Seaside or Celebration today, not suburban neighborhoods in the past. These New Urbanist developments address some of the problems of typical American suburbia, but many people find the culture to be creepy for valid reasons.
This stuff could well be the same sort of utopianist dream that has failed before. Celebration, which at one point I also lived fairly near, had a positive reputation mainly because Disney builds high quality Potemkin villages. It is the Cinderella's Castle of tract housing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2020, 10:13 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
"Objectively better" according to whom? Maybe people want this type of housing becuase they just do.
Owning a home requires a lot of maintenance, not everyone has time/skills to do this themselves or the money to hire it out, especially single parents or the elderly. Even the traditional nuclear family may not be able to commit to this kind of burden.

But in our system, the only alternative to homeownership is a rental apartment which is often in a large complex and comes with little to no outdoor space. If you need more than two bedrooms, too bad. So, definitely not great for kids. There should be a whole spectrum of housing choices, but in most parts of the country it's an either/or...
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2020, 1:12 AM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is online now
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,786
There's little demand for housing types outside of SFH and apartment complexes in most areas. Especially smaller/ less affluent. A developer is not going to build a condo building or whatever if there's negligible demand. The market is a lot bigger/ diverse in larger metro areas hence more options in housing types.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2020, 2:16 AM
benp's Avatar
benp benp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 627
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
There's little demand for housing types outside of SFH and apartment complexes in most areas. Especially smaller/ less affluent. A developer is not going to build a condo building or whatever if there's negligible demand. The market is a lot bigger/ diverse in larger metro areas hence more options in housing types.
How do you know there is no demand? No developers in Houston even offer duplexes, or even allow it in their subdivisions. Duplexes, guest houses, etc are deeded out of most of Houston. There are few that even exist at all. Some offer "patio homes" but not all, as an option for housing. It probably comes down to profit for the developers, not demand. Higher profit for developers on SFH.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2020, 2:52 AM
llamaorama llamaorama is offline
Unicorn Wizard!
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,204
For some reason duplexes are rare across the greater Houston area but fairly common in other parts of the state. I'm not sure why.

It's interesting someone from Buffalo would point this out. I just kind of noticed it a few weeks ago when I was casually searching online home listings to see how much owning a duplex would cost and found that lo and behold, there weren't any. In College Station they are absolutely everywhere and same with the Killeen-Fort Hood area. Little towns seem to have a good number of them too, I think they fill the role of affordable rental housing in places too small to justify a big suburban style apartment complex with hundreds of units.

A duplex in Texas is usually one story and has about the same overall footprint as a typical 4-bedroom house and costs about the same, but instead it's split down the middle into two apartment-sized units that have one or two bedrooms. There are also four-plexes too which are two story, but that means two of the units don't get a yard.

This is an interesting option if you are single but want to be a property owner and want to live in a detached dwelling with a private fenced yard in a suburban setting, but you don't need an entire house. Secondly, you can then be a secret landlord by renting out the other half through a property management company.

You do see semi-detached full-sized houses with 3 or 4 bedrooms and a 2 car garage that are connected to the house next door on one side but not the other in places like the DFW metroplex but I never saw the point of those.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2020, 1:46 PM
Investing In Chicago Investing In Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,592
I grew up in Manhattan (Washington Heights) in a multi unit building. As a young kid (up until 12 or so) I found myself to be quite board. I grew up on this block: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8347...7i16384!8i8192

We didn't have many options for stuff to do right outside our building, play time was essentially on the stoop. My parents would take us to Uncle Lou's house in the Country, which we looked forward to, because we could explore in the yard and run around freely...Uncle Lou's "Country House" was on Staten Island, on this block: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6184...7i16384!8i8192
which doesn't look all that different than the 3-flat steely posted in what looks to be Lincoln Square or Ravenswood or somewhere up that way.

IMO, it's not so much the multi family part that is an issue for kids, its the lack of places to run around and be kids.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2020, 2:26 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago View Post
I grew up in Manhattan (Washington Heights) in a multi unit building. As a young kid (up until 12 or so) I found myself to be quite board. I grew up on this block: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8347...7i16384!8i8192

We didn't have many options for stuff to do right outside our building, play time was essentially on the stoop. My parents would take us to Uncle Lou's house in the Country, which we looked forward to, because we could explore in the yard and run around freely...Uncle Lou's "Country House" was on Staten Island, on this block: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6184...7i16384!8i8192
which doesn't look all that different than the 3-flat steely posted in what looks to be Lincoln Square or Ravenswood or somewhere up that way.

IMO, it's not so much the multi family part that is an issue for kids, its the lack of places to run around and be kids.
Probably one of the few authentic experiences of childhood in multi family housing posted here.

The rest is mostly over-romanticized notions from a bunch of adults who think cities are far richer places (For children) than they really are.

Truth is, nowadays the suburbs aren’t what they were in 1970. They are diverse (in both viewpoints and ethnicities, unlike center cities which are mostly politically uniform), they offer a vast diversity of experiences, they obviously are more spacious as well. I’m not sure what my kids are losing by not living in Lincoln Square, for example. This is more about making adults happy, I don’t think the kids really care about being able to walk to the local bank, for example.
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:40 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.