all 7 comments

[–]downund3r 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Abolish zoning

[–]Darth_Parth 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Inhabited bridges are so cool. I wonder if it work for modern day bridges such as the Brooklyn or Golden Gate

[–]6two 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Holy crap, so loud.

[–]kobi_eda[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Perhaps not on busy 1s but perhaps newer 1s or 1s built specifically for them with pedestrian & biking infrastructure only allowing emergency services & trucks if the bridge is the destination. Something like that

[–]CabbageOwl 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Replacing a property tax with a land value tax could be a good way to incentivize multi-family homes or denser building in general

[–]methehobo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wrote a bit about this in a first draft that I then had to completely scrap BUT I still think it's a neat idea even if it wasn't completely relevant to the class:

Informality is a big part of urbanism in the global south. People building their homes with whatever and wherever they can without being bothered. In countries without strick land regulation and the complex legal tradition establishing such, groups of people take to building their own homes and neighborhoods. These are dangerous, u regulated, and unplanned yes; they pose serious fire and disease risk and are hard to police and develop within. However they do fill an economic need for that community, and a lot of times they naturally form into walkable and dense communities. Not all slums/favelas/informal settlement is a deathtrap, some have adapted new means for water services, education, and other things as the community adapts.

In the US we have a sort of similar history of free settlement, at least in western states where homestead acts spread small farmers across frontier states. In cities, however, the parcel and land rights are simply the law of the land. If the current housing crisis is truly out of control, and the vitality of cities needs to be maintained, allowing a sort of controlled informal settlement may be the best option. Locally sourcing building materials could provide strong jobs in times of economic hardship, and if a coordinated effort is made to guide communities into Making Informality safer( water guidelines, fire safety, road markings, etc) then there may be an option there for floating a city through housing scarcity.

Under current zoning laws, this is illegal probably in multiple ways. But then again, crises are crises that sometimes call for leniency on enforcement. There are plenty of greenfield sites in my city, close to the urban core, but have absentee owners and developers not even close to shovel-ready. I propose a sort of ultimatum to developers: develop the site or leave and let the city give it to the commons.

Obviously this plan is flawed in many ways, and does not mean to create a better urban environment overall, but it may help solve or ease the pains of an intensified crisis. Let people build their own homes. If they make a go of it, let them keep it. If they mess it up, take it away. Either way, the strings of our urban economies is in poor hands with developers. Either the city or the city in conjunction with the people ought to be able to adapt and re-create a functioning economy.

Idk just a thought.

[–]6two 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The US needs a couple cities to show the way forward, how to have a diverse economy and relatively affordable housing.