My changing neighborhood and the revival of urban America

[Az]

25 is a highrise, but not a skyscraper. (though there is no agreed definition )

[Az]

Upper class mid-rises in my city:

http://www.emporis.com/en/il/im/?id=271923

Middle and lower middle class mid/high rises

http://www.emporis.com/en/il/im/?id=215368

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Az
Why the hell would they have a building limit on height in the inner city. What, they don't like the tax revenue? the mind boggles.

LA was focused on suburbs instead of downtown so other then a small highrise district historical preservation societies got height limits in place to preserve old neighborhoods. The problem is most of the neighborhoods we such garbage they weren't worth saving. Right now there is a good mix of historical buildings being converted to new uses and totally trashed buildings getting replaced by new highrises. Add in the new subway and new trolley lines and you begin to see a new old LA.

[Az]

LA was focused on suburbs instead of downtown so other then a small highrise district historical preservation societies got a high limits in place to preserve old neighborhoods.

LA was focused on suburbs? Interesting. I thought the city of Los Angeles never saw a penny from the suburbs, them being incorporated separately ( I have no idea how, and why cities are incorporated, and what does that mean, but I know you use that word )

[GePap]

Originally posted by Az

MOst cities continue to stagnate in population or lose it.

And this cannot change without new highrise construction - but when you have run-down areas, there is no capital to build there. When this changes, floors will begin to be added, unsightly small buildings will be razed, and highrises will sprout.

not really. IN lots of areas you have significant concentrations of low buildings that could be replaced with 6-8 story buildings, and you would see significant rise in density. Or ex industrial areas can be converted. High rises are not particulalrly vital for population growth within most urban areas in the US. Also, unless ubsidized by the government, most high rises are luxury housing, not affordable to most families, except well off college educated ones. And most American cities have huge underpopulated areas- a place like St. Louis lost 50% of its population since 1945. No new building is necessary since there is so much vacant space left.

As for laws limiting density, there is a simple question of services. You can't go for density if you lack the local services to supply the area, like sufficient classrooms, fire and police personel, and parking.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DanS
I agree that some skepticism is warranted. We'll have to see the redevelopment appetite at various times during the interest rate cycle.

That said, the renewal is perhaps deeper in Washington than other American cities for a number of reasons.

On the other hand, I don't think population levels are the best way of gauging the level of urban renewal. Rather, it is better to look at the income mix, etc.

What income mix?

NYC has been undergoing "renewal" for the last 20 years, and at least in the place most affected, Mahattan, what you have gotten is a shrinking in the middle and growth in the top. You get many more individuals in the top 20% income brackets, the ones in the bottom 20% can;t really move out, and the middle gets squeezed out. I guess mixing people making 100,000 a year and people making 10,000 a year counts as a "mix"....

On the other hand, if you have general population growth, that is probably more balanced, plus you get a renewal in services, which is key to long term viability, like renewed confidence in the public school system.

[Az]

As for laws limiting density, there is a simple question of services. You can't go for density if you lack the local services to supply the area, like sufficient classrooms, fire and police personel, and parking.

Doesn't make sense. Parking accomodations are often integrated in the structure of the building, Schools can and are supporting high density areas ( like the one on the pics I posted ) You just need more of them. That's why there are levies on new construction proportional to the amount of people/ drain on resources ( at least they have them here) - they pay for all new infrastructure needed for the new population.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Az

LA was focused on suburbs instead of downtown so other then a small highrise district historical preservation societies got a high limits in place to preserve old neighborhoods.

LA was focused on suburbs? Interesting. I thought the city of Los Angeles never saw a penny from the suburbs, them being incorporated separately ( I have no idea how, and why cities are incorporated, and what does that mean, but I know you use that word )

You're right the suburbs were always a money loser for the city. That doesn't change the fact that the LA city council was controlled by developers who made lots of money putting up trash developments. That's how LA became the city of the suburb.

[Az]

Disgusting - Don't you have state-wide zoning plans?

[Kuciwalker]

No.

[Az]

Sucks

[GePap]

Originally posted by Az

Doesn't make sense. Parking accomodations are often integrated in the structure of the building, Schools can and are supporting high density areas ( like the one on the pics I posted ) You just need more of them. That's why there are levies on new construction proportional to the amount of people/ drain on resources ( at least they have them here) - they pay for all new infrastructure needed for the new population.

You can't compare the Israeli situation to the American situation. In the US the laws are far more lax, there is far less centralized control. MOst school funding comes from property taxes, and building new classrooms, specially in dense areas, is a pain in the ass and expensive to boot. Take NYC- most schools are overcrowded, sometimes significantly, and the City is forced to fight the State in the courts to get a couple Billion more for school construction. I certainly would not be easier in other large cities.

What is happening in many urban centers in the US is that better off edcuated folks want to live in the City, or are looking to work there, and begint o move into areas that were cheap becaue they had long before been abandoned. This becomes a movement as new people move into these same areas because others like them live there, and then businesses spring up to cater to them, making the area more attractive to even more of the same people. This happens by itself, and usually the municipality then has to figure out how to bring services for these people.

That is what one sees in the piece DanS posted. We are not talking about large scale new construction, though you do get that eventually, like is happening in NYC- there is mass construction everywhere in this city, and a lot of buildings being refurbished.

[DanS]

What income mix?

The city-wide income mix. If about half of your city is a ghetto, as was the case with Washington, then renewal means more people with money and fewer people without money live in your city.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DanS


The city-wide income mix. If about half of your city is a ghetto, as is the case with Washington, then renewal means a healthier income mix.

Yeah, but what industry is there to make this new situation permament? Just government?

[Az]

You can't compare the Israeli situation to the American situation. In the US the laws are far more lax, there is far less centralized control.

Yep, so it seems...