HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2022, 11:30 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
The Strongest Case For Urban Density Isn’t Aesthetics, It’s Math

The Strongest Case For Urban Density Isn’t Aesthetics, It’s Math


Mar 24, 2022

By Alan Cole

Read More: https://fullstackeconomics.com/the-s...tics-its-math/

Quote:
.....

You can house, at most, the number of people you build homes for. The more homes you build, the more people can afford to live in your city. People in expensive markets who like to block new houses give you a lot of pushback on this point. They like to distinguish between “luxury” and “affordable” housing units, and they worry the market might supply too many luxury units and not enough affordable ones. But this is a red herring. Markets have a lot of flexibility along quality dimensions. Residents, whether owning or renting, can occupy housing that might not have been intended for their income bracket.

- What is much more inflexible is rigid, strict permitting. If your city only permits, say, 200 new homes, with 600 new bedrooms, it would be impossible for your city to satisfy 2,000 new residents. In the end, the cities that build get the people. Compare, for example, San Jose and Houston. The San Jose metropolitan area has gained just under 500,000 people since 1990. Houston gained 3.8 million. And if you look at their building permits, it is extremely clear why. Each city added about two and a half people for every new unit it permitted over the period. — The reason so many people want to live in cities is so they can travel to offices, shops, restaurants, and other people’s houses. People also might need services that come to them, like plumbers and electricians. Many people’s lives involve dozens of these routine trips per week. Density makes these trips shorter. It’s just math.

- Let’s consider a stylized example. A city with a million indoor locations of some kind. For simplicity, let’s avoid distinguishing them by type. And let’s say that each has to sit on its own 200-by-200-foot square lot, a generous amount of yard space you might expect in a wealthy suburb. And let’s arrange them in a 1000-by-1000 lot grid. — This city would be a square 38 miles on a side. If you assume the roads follow a grid system, and no diagonal shortcuts, the average trip from a randomly-selected location to another randomly-selected location is about 25 miles. (The average trip is ⅓ of the grid’s length in each direction, but it takes some multivariable calculus to prove this.) That’s a lot of driving! But there are some reforms you could make. You could make the lot sizes smaller: 120-by-120 feet. Then your city is just 23 miles by 23 miles, and your average trip from one location to another is just 15 miles.

- You can also stack locations on top of each other. Make the buildings four units high on each lot, and you only need the city to be 500 lots in each direction to get a million locations. This makes your city just 19 miles by 19 miles, even with the more generous lot size, and the average trip becomes just 13 miles plus three stories. Combine both reforms, and your city is just 11 miles by 11 miles, and the average trip is just 8 miles and three stories. Admittedly, lots of people prefer to live on their own lot, and prefer it to be larger rather than smaller. But people also hate long travel times, and density has considerable advantages on that front. — In practice, the world is a little bit more complicated. Most of the homes might be in one part of town while businesses might be in another neighborhood. Some streets have more traffic than others. But this heterogeneity helps you further take advantage of density. You can fill the valuable central locations, which have shorter trips, with the tallest buildings.

- Ultimately, mathematical arguments for density⁠ like the ones I’ve made here, or the ones written in longer form in books like Donald Shoup’s The High Cost of Free Parking, are much more ironclad than the appeals to the aesthetics of Amsterdam. Yes, people find those places beautiful. But many people find single-family homes in San Jose beautiful, too. It is the numbers, more than aesthetics, that drive the need for dense cities. — Sprawly low density, especially as practiced in cities like San Jose, saddles people with horrendous driving times. The density of places like Paris or New York supports shorter trips and faster ways of getting around. Maybe that’s not the most fun argument for urbanists who love to bike and live in row houses; it doesn’t appeal to any kind of deeply-held identity. But if people don’t share your aesthetic or identity, the practical argument is the better way to go.

.....
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2022, 2:56 AM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
Build that shit dense!
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2022, 9:27 AM
JoefreyDavies JoefreyDavies is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2022
Posts: 1
Very interesting thoughts. A bit of an analogy with Adam Smith's invisible hand theory and market management through supply and demand. Actually, it's very interesting, because when I was at university I had problems with mathematics. Later I started using a service https://plainmath.net/post-secondary with post-secondary and other math questions for students, which helped me to improve my knowledge. I have a lot to think about.

Last edited by JoefreyDavies; Aug 1, 2022 at 9:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2022, 11:54 AM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,478
Gladly in Brazil, despite the high ownership rates, the overall organized bureaucracy of being a very strong public sector, when it comes to construction, Brazil is extremely market-friendly.

Developers have little problem on get their highrises built when zoning allows. NIMBY is just small talk with not much political power.

There's no secret: allow the market to build a lot, with virtually no density restrictions and housing and rent prices will be reasonable.
__________________
London - São Paulo - Rio de Janeiro - Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2022, 4:56 PM
Gantz Gantz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoefreyDavies View Post
Very interesting thoughts. A bit of an analogy with Adam Smith's invisible hand theory and market management through supply and demand. I have a lot to think about.
There is no analogy here. This is literally how the markets work. Housing is no different.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2022, 7:31 PM
jd3189 jd3189 is offline
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 5,571
“In Search of Walkable L.A.” by CityNerd

Saw this video yesterday on my YouTube feed. I have been following a bunch of urbanism channels as of late. A lot of interesting stuff but this was particularly cool since I currently live in Southern California.

Video Link
__________________
Working towards making American cities walkable again!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jul 29, 2022, 11:19 PM
dktshb's Avatar
dktshb dktshb is offline
Environmental Sabotage
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco/ Los Angeles/ Tahoe
Posts: 5,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd3189 View Post
Saw this video yesterday on my YouTube feed. I have been following a bunch of urbanism channels as of late. A lot of interesting stuff but this was particularly cool since I currently live in Southern California.
Yeah, as the video described there are plenty of interesting walkable neighborhoods in Los Angeles including Downtown and all the surrounding separate inner city municipalities because of the streetcars of the 20th century. The city is also taking advantage of these areas when it comes to new development and (again as the video suggested) this is where the highest demand is as far as where people want to live and work.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
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 8:25 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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