People who live in gated communities and complain about traffic congestion remind me of people who say they hate sprawl and also hate density.
Guess what. The best remedy for traffic congestion is to have lots of streets, most of them relatively narrow and slow-speed, connecting to lots of other, similar streets. Traffic engineer and N.C. State grad Walter Kulash, in an interview with me years ago, compared an efficiently functioning street network to an electric company's power grid: "a dense, highly connected network of low capacity."
What prompted this reverie was the news that the city of Asheville just banned building any more gated communities. Here's the story. The city figured out that letting some neighborhoods wall themselves off makes it even harder to build a street network of connecting streets.
Charlotte, despite its much bragged upon "connectivity" policy, not only hasn't banned gated neighborhoods, there hasn't even been a proposal for the City Council to vote on.
I have two theories why Charlotte isn't talking about such a ban.
--First, developers wouldn't like it. Gated communities are popular with some affluent buyers, who assume they're safer. Guess it depends on which crimes you're worried about. I might worry about disproportionately high rates of insider trading or hedge fund fraud in gated communities. (But seriously, I recall seeing a study a few years back done in Atlanta, that compared crime rates in a gated community with those in a comparable, but non-gated community. The gated community had more burglaries.)
--Second, even when planners and politicians are willing to displease developers -- which believe it or not does happen upon occasion -- they still operate with a mindset dating to maybe the 1960s or 1970s, in which central Charlotte truly was threatened by vast growth flowing to the suburbs. In this mindset, the city shouldn't do anything that would discourage development here.
Even though the city is experiencing growth so rapid and extreme that infrastructure can't keep up with it, and even though demand for close-in housing is so great that prices are being bid up to an unhealthy level and in-town houses are being scraped away so in-town mansions can be built -- despite all that the planners and politicians are still afraid they might scare off growth.
Silly, isn't it?
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Say 'no' to gated communities. Asheville just did
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
55 comments:
People in my Brothers Gated community PIGGY BACK with a neighbor who lives in the community; They sit and wait until the gate opens and then drive behind the car that belongs there. Gaurd shacks help but in my Mother in LAWs gaurd shack neighborhood they fired the gaurd for letting in his freinds to help car theft. I suggest Dogs in the gaurd shack if they know you your in , if they dont well you guessed it.
Mary, I mostly agree with you.
Gated communities are absurd, providing only the illusion of greater security.
But like most bad choices, we don't need government to outlaw them.
How about we just require that the garbage and recycling trucks on the route to receive pass cards?
That'll put a dent in the illusion real quick.
Guess what. The best remedy for traffic congestion is to have lots of streets, most of them relatively narrow and slow-speed, connecting to lots of other, similar streets. Traffic engineer and N.C. State grad Walter Kulash, in an interview with me years ago, compared an efficiently functioning street network to an electric company's power grid: "a dense, highly connected network of low capacity."
Sounds fine, except for the fact that power lines are only a couple of inches wide and you can easily string them in three-dimensional grids above the ground or bury them in conduits below the ground. Not to mention, electricity is made up of electrons, which flow easily through wires without speed limits, traffic signals, or anything resembling automotive congestion. Roads have to be built on the surface of the ground and they have much more limited capacity than wires do. If you took Charlotte's power grid and scaled it up to the size of roads, Charlotte would be the size of the entire state of North Carolina. Sounds great on paper; not terribly practical.
Comparing wires to roads is a fairly weak analogy, in other words.
What prompted this reverie was the news that the city of Asheville just banned building any more gated communities. Here's the story. The city figured out that letting some neighborhoods wall themselves off makes it even harder to build a street network of connecting streets.
So what happens when a developer buys a parcel of land, pays to build their OWN roads on that land, builds houses, and then puts up a wall around it? No tax dollars were spent on the road... yet the government still gets to dictate to the developer that they can't put up a wall around property that they own? Sounds like yet another lame restriction on private property use to me.
Still, it's Asheville's loss. The developers will just build their gated communities across the county line and Asheville will lose all those property tax dollars on those expensive gated community homes. Guess the lefties over there (Asheville is widely regarded as one of the most liberal cities in the state) just don't care about that, though.
First, developers wouldn't like it. Gated communities are popular with some affluent buyers, who assume they're safer. Guess it depends on which crimes you're worried about. I might worry about disproportionately high rates of insider trading or hedge fund fraud in gated communities.
Mary, come on. Insider trading and hedge fund fraud are corporate crimes and are more likely to take place in an office, not in someone's home. This sounds to me like you are taking a cheap shot at the wealthy: "If you live in a gated community, it's likely that you're a white collar criminal."
Silly, isn't it?
Maybe. But can you honestly say that private groups shouldn't be able to wall off their property and prevent people from entering it?
Visitor from France stayed with me. A man who studied the US from the distance of Europe. He had read of "Gated communities" and wished to see some. His description was that they resembled a "prison for rich people".
What a surprise. Another blog post from Mary with a divisive "us vs them" tone.
Cheap shots at people who live in a way that Mary does not approve of and cheering a government that "bans" said activity.
Mary, why are you such a hateful and divisive person? Your blog does not seem to be designed to spark healthy debate. You seem to really be disgusted by people who are different then you.
Where is all of this intolerance coming from? Why can't you tolerate some diversity?
Gated communities are a bane on the city, and destroy communities the same way public housing projects do. Get rid of 'em.
If you took Charlotte's power grid and scaled it up to the size of roads, Charlotte would be the size of the entire state of North Carolina. Sounds great on paper; not terribly practical.
Did you miss the day in 8th grade when your class went over similes? All she said was that a well-designed road network is like a power grid; whether a road network actually resembles a power grid to scale is irrelevant.
As to practicality, look at pretty much any big city in the country and you'll see a standard grid... including Uptown Charlotte! That's why traffic moves FAR more efficiently in Uptown than it does in the suburbs.
The only gated communities I'm aware of in Char-Meck are far removed from the city center, have very low density, and are thoroughly suburbanized. The marginal benefits of a connectivity policy in a place like that would seem to be a lot less than in a more dense, mixed-use area. I mean, how much will it actually change the character of the neighborhood? And, given what homes sell for in such places, why can't we just treat the well-heeled owners like big boys and girls and let them make their own decisions? As a practical matter, given the demographic and use- homogeneity of the areas in which one finds gated communities, they're the only ones being "hurt" by the "lack" of connectivity.
Did you miss the day in 8th grade when your class went over similes? All she said was that a well-designed road network is like a power grid; whether a road network actually resembles a power grid to scale is irrelevant.
Did you miss the part where I said "Comparing wires to roads is a fairly weak analogy, in other words."? I understand that it's a simile; but it's not a very good one, in my opinion, and it's not irrelevant when the factors of scale are so dissimilar (how many electrons do you suppose travel through a high-tension wire every second?).
Traffic moves more efficiently in Uptown because of the use of one-way streets... there are almost no instances where someone has to turn left across traffic with no turn lanes (which always causes backups). If you drive on Providence near Colville, for example, there are no turn lanes, and this causes backups any time someone wants to turn left and there's any significant amount of traffic.
Conversely, Colony Road between Sharon and Fairview is bordered on one side by gated communities, and there is very little congestion there at any time of the day... in part, I think this is because there are turn lanes and not much cross-traffic. There certainly isn't any significant amount of traffic turning into or out of the gated communities.
I'd love to see someone post an example where a gated community was actually the scene of constant traffic congestion.
One other thing I'd back would be conversion of 4 lane roads (2 vs. 2) into 3 lane roads (1 vs. 1 with a middle turn lane). When the middle of the road is out of bounds except for turning left, traffic will flow more smoothly in both directions.
Mary, have you tried to get the construction stopped on the gated community being built on Archdale just south of Park Rd?
Prices start at the 200s if you're interested.
"Traffic moves more efficiently in Uptown because of the use of one-way streets... there are almost no instances where someone has to turn left across traffic with no turn lanes (which always causes backups). "
And this is possible because of the grid.
And this is possible because of the grid.
So... to extend the grid, what do you propose? We should tear down every house and building and rip up the streets and pave new streets in a grid pattern and then build new houses, despite the fact that local geography (hills, creeks, etc.) may make the grid non-gridlike?
Just curious as to how you would make this work.
I agree with the comment earlier that said Mary's post was mean and spiteful.
If you interchange race for white-collar/blue collar and make the same inference that Mary made (that white collar crime happens more often in a gated community) she would be branded a racist....but since she is attcking affluent white people in gated communities it is acceptable.
I will do as Rev. Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson would do - I ask for Mary's apology to those who live in gated communities. I am offended she made the inference and think it was an said in a hateful tone.
She shouldn't be allowed to get away with class-baiting against affluent people. It's not acceptable to do that with those in poorer neighborhoods or the middle class, so why should it be ok to do it against the affluent.
Or, better yet, how about we start a discussion about how all those poor neighborhoods with lots of non-whites have higher crime & rates of forelcosure...lets do a tit-for-tat.
For shame Mary, I thought you had better standards than that.
Clay, I believe Mary is suggesting a ban on future development without connectivity (as opposed to drawing up a grid for Charlotte and implementing such a road system regardless of what stands in the way). An interesting illustration of what can happen when you don't require connectivity was described on the Urban Planet boards some time ago:
"Take an example in South Charlotte. The entire area bounded by Providence, 51, Weddington Road, and Mckee Road have no connections that go N/S.
Google map the following residences: 739 BARINGTON PL, MATTHEWS, NC 28105 and 2022 MAYNARD RD, CHARLOTTE, NC 28270. Using Mecklenburg County Polaris, I measured the distance to be about 510 feet. Driving distance on Google Maps: " 5.6 mi (about 12 mins)."
Also: 1713 STEVENS RDG, MATTHEWS, NC 28105-6862 and 2606 PEVERELL LN, CHARLOTTE, NC 28270. Distance, about 350' or driving it would take 6.8 mi (about 16 mins)."
It's all about having alternative routes. Within Route 4, there is significant connectivity, so drivers can take the most direct route to their destination. In fact, despite the density within Route 4, only one of Charlotte's top-twenty most congested intersections is within that loop. Contrast that to development outside Route 4 where all drivers (like those at the addresses listed above) are forced onto "arterial" roads (like Providence, 51, Harris, etc.) whether or not it makes sense as the crow flies.
The people who live in areas with significant connectivity are not better people than those whose neighborhoods lack it -- and I don't think Mary's saying that. My interpretation of what she is saying is that plopping development after development along arterial roads will invariably lead to greater traffic congestion on those roads and is thus bad planning.
Mary wants the sledgehammer of government to remove more freedoms. In other news, the sky is blue and the Pope is Catholic.
The Soviet Union died for a reason, Mary - why do you want to revive its corpse in Charlotte?
To all from someone who lives in a gated community:
I guess I should be offended by Mary's statement as someone has posted but I don't waste my time being offended by words others say.
First just a couple of quick comments for the poster with the google fetish- 510' & 350'- I have a suggestion- walk!
Second, I think if that is what Mary meant to say (your last paragraph)- she should be able to write it in a clear manner being a journalist and all.
Security report for this YEAR:
Vandalism/mischief-4
Animal complaints-12
Prowlers-0
Residential Theft/Invasion-1
other theft(usually off the docks)-3
Unauthorized Solicitations-1
We pay for all our own roads/water/sewer upkeep.
We have our own Emergency squad and security officers (they carry guns). Kids all over the place playing in the yards/parks/riding bikes(the swim team has almost 200 kids).
Seems pretty safe to me but someone could do anything with my kids playing in the street as anywhere else. But ask yourself, why would someone go through the extra effort to try something in a gated community vs a non-gated one?
Did i mention the cameras at the gates? It may not stop someone but it may lead to finding the people.
It is a choice I made for my family. I found the neighborhood I like and it just happened to be gated.
As someone stated before, the topography doesn't let roads be built in a grid system efficiently. The highest cost of most construction is the moving of dirt. If you think costs are high now, try making a grid road sysytem.
Well, I'm starting to ramble. So much to say but don't want to make long responses.
Thad
Politicians are not afraid of scaring off growth - they are afraid of scaring off payoffs, er, "campaign contributions." Developers have a stranglehold on this town. I didn't mind when they were gating the rich people inside their brick corrals out in the sticks, but now they are ruining some of Charlotte's oldest and prettiest neighborhoods. Have you seen all of the brick walls going up along in-city Providence road? It is starting to look like a tunnel.
"For shame Mary, I thought you had better standards than that. "
If you've read the blogs throughtout the past year, you will find that Mary sticks it to well to do suburban folks all the time (even though she live just like one of them). She has been known to call those who live in 4500 sq. ft. houses and driving SUV's as 'idiotic'. It's when she gets into these rants that I clinch my teeth and join Rick and Clayj's side in agreement for a moment.
Mary, pick your battles. pick them wisely.
Danimal
It's amusing to see how many people think the government can do nothing right, but put all their trust in private developers.
Seriously... who is more likely to screw you in the rear with no accountability? An elected local politician or a corporate sleazeball making deals from his office in Atlanta?
All the little creeks and ravines and ridges in the Charlotte area encourage the building of cul-de-sacs and of neighborhood which are, if not acually walled off, are readily accessible if at all by one or two main roads feeding onto major thoroughfares.
IMHO, the best way to bring about connectivity is through expanding the Greenway system to include most of the creek ravines and of building bicycle and foot paths between these cul-de-sac-ed neighborhoods.
For example, the educational complex that is Meyers Park HS, Alexander MS, and Meyers Park Elem. backs up on neighborhood streets which 'as the crow flies' are very close. Building bicycle/pedestrian paths (including bridges across some of the gullies) would connect up the neighborhoods and make it possible for more students to walk or bike to school.
(BTW, unless things have changed in the last few years, CMS does not allow students to bike to school. Sheer idiocy! When I was growing up I biked to school, as did many of my schoolmates, from 5th though 12th grades. In Minnesota. There weren't many fat kids around then. Now?)
I grew up in Eastover, and I loved the network of connecting streets. I still like commuting through there. If I get behind someone slow, I can swing over to another street and travel on a different road. The traffic fans out so no one road is overwhelmed. So when we looked for a home of our own, we looked for a neighborhood with similar connectivity...and so we moved into a house that was 20 years old. The new neighborhoods we saw tended to have cul-de-sacs leading to central roads, and those looked like they'd be hard for early-morning commutes. I'm very happy in my older neighborhood with various ways in and out.
Re: the suburban bashing.
I noticed from day one in this city that in some quarters there was an attitude that "we Myers Park/Dilworth/Eastover/Elizabeth,etc. dwellers are just a little bit morally superior to all of you out there in the boondocks". Not long ago an article in The Observer about the "Friday Friends" lunch project stated that the organizers hoped to “include people outside of Dilworth and Myers Park, since they were “less likely to know people of other ethnicities”. Mary herself wrote on this blog site that many move to the suburbs because they fear diversity.
To me these types of generalizations about the suburbs reflect a real insularity. Charlotte has had a tremendous surge of growth, bringing in people of all sorts. No, the growth has not been managed well--the lack of roads and the lack of schools in the suburbs are two examples of the county either being in denial of what was happening or just plain shoddy planning. That so many of our civic leaders could not see what was happening makes one question their leadership and management capabilities.
There are always going to be wealthy who might choose to live in ways that we do not approve of (By the way, do you suppose any hedgefund managers in Myers Park or Dilworth--but maybe that's not possible since those are "properly developed" neighborhoods), just as there are always going to be poor people whose lifestyles we don't approve of either (and that also create problems for the rest of us--maybe just not development problems.)
Yes, it would be wonderful if the whole city could have been built on a grid, but that didn't happen (not suprising given the topography). The poster who suggested greenways for connection is absoutely right. That's gradually happening here in the suburbs too. But remember, the same folks who are blasting suburban style development also did not (and probably do not) want schools built for easy access by individual communities--that might cater to that fear of diversity you know. Oh, the hypocrisy of it all!
Another thing-
Funny thing,all these connected neighborhood roads that can move cars freely through the neighborhood start building speed humps, chicanes (spelling?) to slow down/discourage traffic from travelling through them.
Thad
I can see maybe not allowing anymore gated communities within the city limits, but I don't see the issue outside of those limits. When people spend a lot of money on a house it might be worth it to them to purchase in a gated community. Obviously there shouldn't be a train station with a gated community next to it...
I drove through Weddington last week. It was sickening as to the number of gated communities I saw. Traffic congestion was horrible through that town as well. I thought with a grid pattern and connectivity how much better the planning could have been.
Thad,
A speed bump slows traffic down -- it does not prevent cars from using connective streets. It's not that people can't cut through (although I'm sure that a significant portion of residents on connective streets would prefer to see no through-traffic), it's that they can't race through.
I understand they are there to slow cars down, but most people will avoid those streets as much as possible. Not good for cars/environment either. Go figure.
Thad
The irony of this discussion is that no one has put a definition on the word "community" as it relates to the word "gated."
Communities come in all sorts of different shapes and sizes and gated ones are no exception. Tufton Brae, a new "gated" development on Carmel past Colony, is four houses. To suggest that it could be morphed into a thoroughfare street is absurdity. It is bounded on all sides by previously established subdivisions and street connectivity would entail tearing down houses. Most infill gated communities are located in the nooks and crannies of other, larger developments (note Whitehall in Myers Park, Dovewood between Royden, Seven Eagles between Quail Hollow Country Club and Park Road). Mary's real qualm is with large scale gated subdivisions such as Longview. Unfortunately, her evaluation falls short there as well. Longview is confined on all sides by previously established subdivisions with cul-de-sac streets feeding to major roads.
So when do gated communities singlehandedly hurt traffic flow? Practically never. Ungated suburban communities are equally as inefficient. No one uses Providence Country Club Drive in ungated Providence Country Club to cut between Providence Road and Tom Short or Ardrey Kell Roads.
The synergistic effect of all of this self-contained neighborhood planning is what puts pressure on arterial roads. Gated communities are no worse than the rest, especially since their size is generally smaller than ungated communities. The solution to traffic flow isn't elimination of gated communities- it's elimination of poor neighborhood design as a whole. And who is building the worst designs? Ryan Homes, NV Homes, K.Hovnanian, and every other tract builder who is just interested in placing the maximum number of houses possible on the land. Who is building the best designs? Community planners like Crescent Resources who have longterm stake in the land. Surprise surprise- homes in Crescent Resources neighborhoods are far more expensive than those in tract neighborhoods. Don't hate on people who earn lots of money, they are usually the ones buying houses in the best designed neighborhoods.
About this "tunnel" on Providence Road, would you want your children running out on one of the busiest streets in town because it abuts your back yard? Didn't think so. The wall was a necessity given the location.
Interesting how many people here are trying to revise the history of the road network. This business about the "topography" causing cul-de-sac development is nonsense, pure and simple.
Inside 277 (and in the older neighborhoods just outside of it) you have street grids, because that was how development was done prior to the 1920s. Built for efficiency, connectivity, easy public transit (streetcars) and simple logic.
Outside 277, but inside 485, you have the next 80 years or so of development. Beginning with Myers Park and spreading outward, it's mostly made up of linear arterial avenues (the old market roads) that are fed by curving, landscaped neighborhood streets. Those streets are designed to simulate country roads, maximize lawn space, and generally make things look as pastoral as possible (look at old pictures of Queens Rd. and you'll get the idea).
Outside 485 you essentially have modern subdivisions, which are basically identical in style regardless of topography: one or two access roads which branch off into cul-de-sacs and dead ends. These, of course, feed onto country roads which were built for minimal traffic. The design is intended to minimize through-traffic, absolutely maximize the number of lots per neighborhood, and remove front yards from the country roads by the longest distance possible.
Topography, schmopography. Ever since the automobile became a middle-class commodity, neighborhoods have been built for minimal connectivity and maximum greenery. This, of course, is an effort to create the illusion of estate living in areas that are utterly unfit for actual estates. Bad neighborhood design has been our choice as a society for nearly a century, not some necessity foisted upon us by nature. Time to pay the piper!
Actually, this note is kind of like the opposite of a gated community, but as transit development is a never ending theme here:
Living Next to the Train Tracks Becomes Fashionable
Mass transit is making room for development, transforming space that was often a graveyard for non-running equipment into multi-use projects that offer housing, retailing, restaurants, and offices steps away from the train station.
Reconnecting America, a national nonprofit that encourages development around transit stops, says there are 100 of these developments around the country, with 100 more on the drawing boards. It predicts that by 2030, there will be 16 million households living near transit stations, up from 6 million today.
The idea is paying off in the Washington, D.C., suburb of Arlington, Va., where there has been 40 million square feet of development near five closely spaced Metro stops. This has helped drive land values in the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor up 84 percent from $2.18 billion to $4 billion. The two-square-mile area provides 30 percent of Arlington’s real-estate tax revenues.
Source: The Wall Street Journal, Kemba J. Dunham (06/11/07)
Furthermore, and just to have a little fun, I looked up the definition of Ghetto at Webster's Dictionary Online:
The name ghetto refers to an area where people from a given ethnic background or united in a given culture or religion live as a group, voluntarily or involuntarily, in milder or stricter seclusion.
Should Gated Communities be called Ghetto's?
UD
UD-you added
"The name ghetto refers to an area where people from a given ethnic background or united in a given culture or religion , voluntarily or involuntarily, in milder or stricter seclusion.
What section would the gated community fit in. I keep trying to find the link bu cannot.
Please help me understand.
No specific ethinic background
No given culture
No Religion required
Left with "voluntarily or involuntarily, in milder or stricter seclusion.
Includes almost everyone in a single family house.
Also, when all the property values near the south rail line increase (good, right?), will that not force the middle fixed income people that already live there to move because of increasing taxes for more trains/museums/etc. and privledge of living so close to the rail line?
Thad
I suspect that many of those high rise condos in the city also fit UD's ghetto definition. Don't you have to own or be visiting an owner to get into the buildings and use the amenities? Sounds like seclusion to me!
(See how silly name calling can get!)
Should Gated Communities be called Ghetto's?
My neighbors in my gated community are from India and Kuwait. I am from Germany.
Where do you dream up these insane sterotypes?
Mary Newsom and Uncle Dennis come across as the most racist and intolerant people on this board. This complete lack of tolerance for people who want to live different lifestyles is alarming. A common element of Mary and Uncle Dennis is the inane insults of anything other than what they approve of.
I was going to completely avoid this thread, but since Arlington, VA has been falsely mentioned twice as a good example of TOD changing an area, I couldn't let the errors pass.
I moved here from Arlington, VA 3 years ago. I lived in the Rosslyn/Balston corridor mentioned in the referenced article.
First of all, using rising real estate values in that corridor as validation of TOD is a false premise. Real estate values in the entire county of Arlington appreciated that much in the first half of this decade. Not just that corridor. They appreciated so much that Arlington County actually lowered its tax rate because the government received such a windfall profit. That didn't happen just because of the TOD development.
Second, TOD became feasible in the referenced corridor because density and traffic in the overall area finally reached levels that justify it after decades of the rail line's existence. What is being proposed in Charlotte is the exact opposite. The density is being artificially created, sometimes at taxpayer expense, to justify the rail.
Prior to the dot com telecom boom of the late 90s, the Arlington area was not overly crowded - even though the DC metro area was already much bigger than Charlotte ever will be. Then that area became the center of an IT explosion - both in the dot-com and telecom industries. This occurred mainly because they are highly regulated industries and it was beneficial for these new companies to co-locate in the DC area with the federal regulators. That drew literally hundreds of thousands of additional people to the area.
Basically, looking at DC and saying it is a model for TOD in a city like Charlotte is – as usual for the pro-railers – an apples-oranges comparison.
As for complaining about gated communities…
If Danimal says he agrees with me (even though I didn’t comment on it) it must be ridiculous.
Oh, and UD, you never answered my question about a more diverse urban neighborhood than my cul-de-sac.
Show me a neighborhood where there is income, ocupational, race, and educational diversity that is not government mandated, and I'll bet you it is a suburban neighboorhood.
Not some closed off tower or TOD.
Well, I see that no one really read the definition of "ghetto" that I posted.
"voluntarily or involuntarily, in milder or stricter seclusion."
Most of the gated communities that I have seen do not have affordable housing in them. Probably do not have rental units in them. The amount of seclusion may vary, but is seems like it fits the broader description.
Should High Rises also be part of that, probably, though the pricepoints vary widely in most condominium buildings.
I can't speak for Ms. Newsom, or anyone else for that matter. I have met her on occasion, and she doesn't seem to be the person some here refer to.
And as to diverse communities, Downtown is a great example. The Third Ward around Gateway Village has section 8 housing, rental workforce housing, student housing, single family homes, townhouses, mid-rise condominiums, and a rescue mission to boot.
The other wards also have significant diversity, with the Second Ward being an exception due to such a low concentration of dwellings for now.
As I have said before, I thank God that everyone is not like me, how boring would that be! I respect your wanting to live in cul-de-sacs, or development plans, or gated communties,or farms, or downtown condos, or wherever.
I choose to live where it is best suited for me, and I hope you live wher it is best for you.
UD
Most of the gated communities that I have seen do not have affordable housing in them.
So... the people who live there can't afford the houses they live in? Or is it that YOU can't afford the housing that's found in gated communities?
Please STOP using the word "affordable" in that way. When you feel like saying "affordable", please substitute the word "cheap", because that's obviously what you really mean.
More accurately, what is meant by affordable housing is that which is either taxpayer subsidized or government mandated or both, to be cheap enough for people who are too poor to afford housing similar to the other houses in the neighborhood.
And sure some of us read your definition of 'ghetto' UD. But don't get in such a twit if no one responds the way you wish they would to it.
I want a neighborhood that I can walk through and not run; I want a neighborhood that i dont spill my coffee on my shirt while Im strolling through because of walking fast as hell.
I want a neighborhood for my People only I want it segregated from Others; I am from the planet zepton and our People are light Blue in color ; Now can you imagine seeing us walk down you downtown in broad daylight. We have rights also. We are coming here to Charlotte to make this our home. We dont know much but we can tell the future and some of us can heal People by our touch. We are coming back .
"Also, when all the property values near the south rail line increase (good, right?), will that not force the middle fixed income people that already live there to move because of increasing taxes for more trains/museums/etc. and privledge of living so close to the rail line?"
Hey Thad, I'm sure you are enjoying your property value increasing in your gated community. Should the people above not enjoy rising property values as well, or is it all about you, to hell with the rest? As for twistng the rising tax rate for additional city amenities into this argument, not only do property values go up, but so does the quality of life of a city as it becomes more well rounded with more transportation and cultural choices. I think it's win-win for those who have lived along the corridor all along.
Uncle Dennis lamented:
"Most of the gated communities that I have seen do not have affordable housing in them. Probably do not have rental units in them."
I have seen many rental properties that are gated communities. Quite often the rent is quite reasonable. I lived in one for a year that cost $650 per month. Gated with a poll for the community.
Uncle Dennis, you are utterly clueless.
More of Newsom's 'I'm jealous because I don't have something somebody else does, I feel inferior, so won't government ban it so I don't have to feel bad anymore.'
You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer.
They tried that in the Soviet Union, we all know how that turned out.
We are supposed to be the land of life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
WHy the h-e-double ell do you care what kind of neighborhood people live in?
Side note: You argument for more, smaller blocks and connected streets only descreases greenspace and increases impurvious space, resulting in greater water runoff, etc.
Mind you own busisess, Mary.
to anon who posted-
"Should the people above not enjoy rising property values as well, or is it all about you, to hell with the rest? As for twistng the rising tax rate for additional city amenities into this argument, not only do property values go up, but so does the quality of life of a city as it becomes more well rounded with more transportation and cultural choices. I think it's win-win for those who have lived along the corridor all along."
I don't know where you got the impression I wanted all others to go to hell. I was pointing out the fact about middle class people living in "affordable" housing for years now have to move becauce now there city is "world class". That is the point I was making.
Thad
Perhaps gated communities are a sign that government has failed.
If police actually went after crooks instead of directing traffic after a Bobcats game, who would need gated communities.
The USA is moving in the direction of the Phillipnes and Panama. In 30 years 95% of the country will be a dirt poor underclass, and the other 5% of the ultras wealthy will live in palaces gaurded by guys with M-4's.
You can pick virtually any government program, and it is a complete failure, complete waste of money, and ultimately unused by the very rich.
Our middle class is evaporating. Government is making it worse by spedning more and in turn flushing the money down the toilet.
The poor will always get screwed, the rich will always get their way, etc.
Before attacking Mary please read what she wrote.
The piece was about traffic congestion and gated communities. Crime was an aside.
Traffic is handled better by more connections, which gated communities do not provide, is her point.
She finishes by saying Charlotte usually bows to developers, except occassionally.
Beyond that I never saw where she said anything about the people living in them.
She used the word "silly", which she knows I deplore, to describe the idea that some minor actions which would improve road travel,
would be met with histrionics by developers, the chamber and a majority of city council, all fearing any such action would slow down growth.
The comments, as usual, run off in varying directions based on single words or sentences Mary or some other wrote, as often as not distorting the meaning of the original comment, all too often becoming vituperative in attitude.
But along the line of the original - the engineering design of the intersection of NC 16 at I-485 is very poor.
Outbound on north 16 from 485 north required a new red light, instead of the obvious cloverleaf. Traffic now backs up on north 16 in the afternoon all the way to the next light, which is almost 1/2 mile away, causing southbound 16 to wait at the light.
There should have been a full cloverleaf as 16 is a major artery.
Why is there not?
Lewis Guignard
Lewis, a huge chunk of the traffic on NC 16 at I-485 is caused by people commuting to and from Union County... Weddington, Waxhaw, etc. My guess is that whoever planned that interchange completely failed to anticipate that Union County might see a surge in development once I-485 brought a major highway within a couple of miles. The obvious solution is to rebuild that interchange with a full cloverleaf (no more traffic lights) and to widen NC 16 to four lanes all the way to Waxhaw.
But again, this has nothing to do with gated communities.
My mistake.
I-485 at 16 near Gaston County line.
While the traffic is created by people traveling somewhere, Denver area perhaps, the intersection design is lacking in forethought.
Probably some developer owns the land which would have been used to provide the cloverleaf.
Lewis
Probably some developer owns the land which would have been used to provide the cloverleaf.
And your point is what?
Lewis --
In answer to why there is not a full coverleaf at 16/485 is that NC DOT -- in its infinite wisdow -- considered the entire southern leg of the beltway a "rural bypass" and built it to that standard.
They've already rebuilt the interchange at least once and have repeatedly pushed back a new interchange at Weddington road which would relieve pressure on the 16 exit.
Yaay, NC DOT.
Scru0 trskced ti the burbs. No gates to jnoiw. Better for noew?
Yaaa NC Dot.
Thank you.
I suppose the same answer is true on the north western leg, where NC 16 is crossed by 485 on the other side of town. Short-sighted planning.
I will admit we have more lanes on 485 on this end initially, so they're doing something right.
So much for the sarcasm about developers owning the land.
Lewis
I live in a gated community but I don't complain about traffic. I am just rich.
Side note: You argument for more, smaller blocks and connected streets only descreases greenspace and increases impurvious space, resulting in greater water runoff, etc.
Depends on where you're looking. While traditional blocks might reduce the amount of (wasted) greenspace in between buildings (see Colony Rd. for many egregious examples), it drastically reduces the amount of space required to build a neighborhood. That means more real natural greenspace nearby, in the form of old-growth forests and rural fields. It might not be the artificial landscaping we're used to, but it's a hell of a lot prettier and better for the environment.
Also, the reduction of permeable space is counterbalanced by increased storm-drain efficiency. You NEVER hear about the city's traditional neighborhoods being flooded, partially because they're better drained than their suburban counterparts. It's easy for a handful of storm drains to take care of a whole city block's water runoff; but suburban development is so badly drained that they have to build those grotesque "ponds" near major developments to capture the massive amount of runoff.
Post a Comment