Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First off, I'm not an Urban Planner or Developer, just a google map junky...
That said, what are your opinions on tract housing? Obviously developers love it. It's cheap, fast, and people will buy it regardless ("Build it and they will come").
Personally, I can't ******* stand it. Aesthetically, it's garbage. I hope we can all agree on that. I just don't understand why somebody wants to live in a house that's basically identical to 5-500 of their neighbors. Without doing a study, it seems as if the lack of connectivity in these developments would cause traffic issues. With sometimes only one street leading out of the subdivision, it acts as a funnel to the collector or arterial road. In a normal grid, the flow would be a lot more dispersed, and therefore have less congestion.
Now looking into the future.... these subdivisions decrease walkability. Instead of potentially walking 20 yards to the main road, you may have to walk through you're entire subdivision to get there. My generation, the millennials, love living in a place that is walkable, authentic, and has a good sense of community. As we get more buying power and buy as close as we can to the city center, will the tract subdivisions turn into the ghetto? We are already seeing "inner-city" ghettos being gentrified significantly. With the price of homes near the city rising significantly, I can only see those thousands of p.o.s. tract housing developments turn into ghettos. Then how do we fix it? The streets and pipes are already laid out.
Can't we go back to basic grid neighborhoods?
Do you guys agree? If not, please convince me I'm wrong.
I do remember during the early 00's housing boom, hearing ads for "bigger homes, less money." of course the drawback was location. Typically 80 km from center city, and at least 20 km from jobs, hospitals or specialized services, though a big box store might be nearby. I think they were among the first abandoned after the real estate bust.
Other subdivisions never had any homes built. I remember seeing fire hydrants and some streets in open fields a few years back.
Last edited by pvande55; 06-21-2015 at 01:31 PM..
Reason: Add paragraph
First off, I'm not an Urban Planner or Developer, just a google map junky...
That said, what are your opinions on tract housing? Obviously developers love it. It's cheap, fast, and people will buy it regardless ("Build it and they will come").
Personally, I can't ******* stand it. Aesthetically, it's garbage. I hope we can all agree on that. I just don't understand why somebody wants to live in a house that's basically identical to 5-500 of their neighbors. Without doing a study, it seems as if the lack of connectivity in these developments would cause traffic issues. With sometimes only one street leading out of the subdivision, it acts as a funnel to the collector or arterial road. In a normal grid, the flow would be a lot more dispersed, and therefore have less congestion.
Now looking into the future.... these subdivisions decrease walkability. Instead of potentially walking 20 yards to the main road, you may have to walk through you're entire subdivision to get there. My generation, the millennials, love living in a place that is walkable, authentic, and has a good sense of community. As we get more buying power and buy as close as we can to the city center, will the tract subdivisions turn into the ghetto? We are already seeing "inner-city" ghettos being gentrified significantly. With the price of homes near the city rising significantly, I can only see those thousands of p.o.s. tract housing developments turn into ghettos. Then how do we fix it? The streets and pipes are already laid out.
Can't we go back to basic grid neighborhoods?
Do you guys agree? If not, please convince me I'm wrong.
Uniqueness is mostly overrated. People don't really care about it all that much, see popularity of row houses. It's typically a feature that's of secondary importance at best and rarely worth it for most people who are spending their own money as they'd rather spend it in other ways to get the neighborhood and house they want. Only once that is satisfied do you really see people spending more to have a unique house within that context.
Cutouts in better designed neighborhoods allow for permeability similar to a grid design with the better traffic flow and safety and greater desirability of living on quiet streets.
Not all of your generation is as conceited as you are and thinks your personal preference is what everyone should like. Nothing wrong with what you like, and I think it's great that you do. It's just not my cup of tea. San Francisco wouldn't be my first place to live, although I probably would go for something more walkable and dense than where I live now if money were more no object. That's contrasted that I don't have the same Keeping up with the Joneses mentalities that many do, which does including competing on neighborhood.
Are you talking about brand new tract housing or any type of tract housing development built since the dawn of mankind? Because my current home is in a tract ... built in 1926. I assure you my neighborhood is quite walkable, built in a grid, and quite connected. The only garbage around here is in the 70-gallon totes behind everyone's garage.
I know of plenty of tract homes built in the 50s that are in very desirable neighborhoods; same with developments built in the 70s through the 90s.
Not to mention the millennials who are moving into 1920s tract housing by the droves.
You can't go painting one type of housing with the same brush. There's something your generation has yet to learn.
Tract housing has nothing to do with a lack of connectivity; that's a result of the particular road plan used. Identical houses? Well, not everyone can afford to have their own custom house designed and built, and that's been true for many years.
As for walkability, the only way you're going to have the kind of walkability you want is if you have lots of little "main streets" with businesses on them. That's simply not practical at suburban densities; there's not enough population to support the business. Doesn't matter if they're tract houses or not.
Uniqueness is mostly overrated. People don't really care about it all that much, see popularity of row houses.
Indeed. There are whole neighborhoods in Philly where 90% of the housing stock is comprised of one identical house plan. Tract housing can be done well or poorly, just like any other form of architecture.
In terms of general aesthetics, I think the best streets meet a happy medium betwixt the two extremes. We don't tend to prefer blocks where every house is identical. But we also tend to be turned off by blocks where every single house is different (e.g., a grand victorian house next to a ranch, which is in turn next to a 1920s brick foursquare. I think the best streets are those where the massing and setback of houses is similar to identical, but the ornament and colors can vary widely.
Are you talking about brand new tract housing or any type of tract housing development built since the dawn of mankind? Because my current home is in a tract ... built in 1926. I assure you my neighborhood is quite walkable, built in a grid, and quite connected. The only garbage around here is in the 70-gallon totes behind everyone's garage.
I know of plenty of tract homes built in the 50s that are in very desirable neighborhoods; same with developments built in the 70s through the 90s.
Not to mention the millennials who are moving into 1920s tract housing by the droves.
You can't go painting one type of housing with the same brush. There's something your generation has yet to learn.
Exactly! I was a visiting nurse in Denver in the mid-80s. There are many, many tracts of bungalows from about 1900-1920 there; some go on for blocks in several directions. You never had to ask where the bathroom was to go wash your hands; it was always in the same place. But then, there are only so many floor plans, period. many ranch houses simply have the second floor on the first, if you get my drift.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nybbler
Tract housing has nothing to do with a lack of connectivity; that's a result of the particular road plan used. Identical houses? Well, not everyone can afford to have their own custom house designed and built, and that's been true for many years.
As for walkability, the only way you're going to have the kind of walkability you want is if you have lots of little "main streets" with businesses on them. That's simply not practical at suburban densities; there's not enough population to support the business. Doesn't matter if they're tract houses or not.
Exactly again! My town has laid out its newer subdivisions loosely following the grid in the old part of town, though there are a few more curving streets. Most cities do have regualtions as well about how many access/egress roads are needed; the more homes, the more roads.
Missing in every single discussion about walkability, grid design, amenities, etc. is the lack of realization by many commentators is that design concept just came back into vogue fairly recently.
Prior to that the design protocols recommended large lots, no sidewalks, cul de sacs, and so on. I remember, crap must be 25 or 30 years ago, asking at a planning meeting why the street design wasn't gridded like the rest of town. The answer was that grids were "sterile" and the new concept was to add visual interest with curves, etc. Some of this is of course dependent on terrain.
So those who criticize the way developments were laid out have to realize that was what was recommended, taught in urban planning and design programs and in some cases (such as MD) mandated.
As an aside, drawing from my now ending 30+ year career as a high school teacher, is that (and this is my anecdotal observation) many people over the last 20 years craved uniformity. Which in my opinion, is why we have the continuing push to put public school kids into uniforms. That extended to housing construction.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
