Appetite for Destruction

Humans are not green, therefore, humans lose & green prevails.

The “worship” of green [currency] is the downfall, as perceived by losers & elite.

Building Views, a video

Cities can usually look fairly good. What goes on behind? Well, that’s not indicated here, but there are hints at real intention, the hidden agendas. Where will this behavior modification go? What’s behind it? Agenda 21, set up by the UN, mostly in the name of globalism, control, redistribution. This “method” or the people are  Watermelons–Green Outside, Red Inside. Many “faithful followers”, like an immoral religion, are really useful idiots, being duped.

Read more of this post

Central hubs for TODs

This is a photograph I took in Ballston in Arl...

More: people, vehicles, cost, etc.

Benefits are very questionable for coercing people into transit station areas.
Economic Development—while improving some areas, it can take capital and resources away from other areas; in other words redistribution. Areas that became “cheap” become more affordable to offer opportunity for investment. TIFs can take away future government revenue from normal services. Additional retail sales or similar in one area will mean less spending elsewhere. Read more of this post

Density aspects

Beyond land use and urbanization, density needs to be more closely examined to put things in perspective.  In addition to the higher efficiency for and availability of transit, high density has other advantages, which can basically be summed up by big cities have “more stuff.” Living in high density is a choice, and not for everyone though. The HDC (high-density coalition) seems to want to force that on everyone. Many people don’t want that crowdedness. The 2 charts below show urban areas, categorized by density & total size of the urban area. Data is from the 2000 Census, when national population was 281M. It should be noted that there is an apparent gap in the figures below for non-urban & earlier figures for rural. Those names do not mean the same thing. And the classifications are neither always used nor consistent. Between populations of 10,000 & 50,000 those areas are considered urban clusters, rather than being an urban area. Both are still urbanized. As for what constitutes an urban area, the core needs to have a minimum density of 1,000, counted by Census block, and nearby blocks of at least 500 density are included. For the charts, the number in (_) is the number of urban areas within that population range. Read more of this post

Density Comparisons

An aerial view of housing developments near Ma...

Crowded Boring

This title could instead have the word “versus,” but it’s not a contest, despite what some people think. There is a growing movement, claiming that suburbia is bad and wasteful. Peoples’ choices of lifestyle should not be at odds with one another. Central cities actually gain taxes and other revenue from those living in outlying areas, from those who go to central cities for employment and visitation. A push in urbanism these days is for higher densities, to be like the central cities, but with even better, user-friendly forms. A big problem with increasing density is that traffic increases, without improvement (more lanes) to roads. You cannot double density and expect people to drive half as much. There certainly are not enough people transferring to public transit. Read more of this post

Density Perspectives

Greater Tokyo Area, the world's most populous ...

What beauty w/many?

There are various types of thinking that are at odds with one another. Well, actually, one type is not at odds; they are not just concerning themselves with other people’s personal choices. Many people want to live a certain lifestyle. Other people think that lifestyle should be a certain way, even though the claim is to have many choices, supposedly available all of the time. In making choices, there are trade-offs. This paper examines the various trade-offs, with the pros & cons of the concentration of living. The foci for one point of view are analyzed, and what that entails. The importances of those foci are examined, acknowledging that people have different tastes, desires and priorities. The ramifications of certain choices are analyzed Read more of this post

Development is bad? No growth?

San Jose, CA freeway interchange 280 and 87

Want nature, while in cities? Dingbat!

New development finances itself. Just last year, a developer wanted to build in the Evergreen Section of San Jose, and was going to supply $200 million for new infrastructure. The city denied it, wanting to save the land for industry. There is plenty of land for industry. Part of the want for the potential Coyote Valley development is for there to be businesses first. For that to be the case, where would people live? Residences and workplaces can be simultaneous developments. Either can lead or follow. It is actually hard for an individual to get both at the same time. For there to be jobs in a new area, people will commute there. For there to be housing in a new area, people will commute from there, to their existing jobs. People don’t always realize how economies tend towards equilibrium. Distortions do occur, many times with government intervention. There are many studies on that. People in power don’t read them or think that the source is biased. Those in power also have selfish motives for their property to increase in value. Read more of this post

Environmental Greenism, Redism, Stupidism

The Earth flag is not an official flag, since ...

Just one. Your Kidding? Dumbass

People share a fundamental concern and appreciation for the beauty of our natural environment.  At what cost thought? All products come from the Earth. Sustainable Development’s populist ‘anti thesis’ was designed and delegated to left wing state collectivists. These collectivists rally rank and file liberals around the concepts of social justice and environmental protection. The “battle” between the left wing and the right wing moves society downward. The moves are left – right, step by step toward the new world order of Sustainable Development. Read more of this post

Externalities, + or -, Ignored or Unknown

In residential development, there are stakeholder actors:

Existing residents, owners§ Many of their goals and interests are to limit the amount of additional residents and to increase the price of their own housing. Both of those goals have been achieved to some extent. The Bay Area has the highest housing prices in the nation. The internal domestic migration from the Bay Area to other states and regions has been greater than the natural growth rate (births – deaths), since 2000, based upon Census data. There has been population growth due to immigrants. That high housing cost has increased some workers’ pay (albeit less than housing) and thus the cost of goods and services, including government. Higher housing cost also increases the cost to move to another Bay location, due to higher property tax costs (Prop 13). Also if a homeowner wants a house of higher value, it has now become proportionally more expensive.  Read more of this post

Farming in Rural; Living in Urban

Seal of Santa Clara County, California

Was an 'Ag' Valley, Delightful in Heart

As for farming in California, that’s not in jeopardy, at least from urbanization. Water is a different story. By the way, the people moving to the Central Valley are really competing with the farms for water. That’s not much of a future problem along the coasts, if changes are made. San Diego has already started desalination. More coastal cities can develop that, especially when combined with a power plant (nuclear). Desalination at its best price can cost between 3-4 times normal. That’s not too bad when the price is averaged out with other the other water sources, it would be a lot less. Example: 20% of water from the ocean, at triple pricing, results in costs only 40% higher (=3×20%+80%). That would be pricey for industry, but many people don’t want heavy manufacturing here, despite some resistance to China and other importers. Water-use heavy industry can go back to the Rust BeltRead more of this post

Health Aspects of Living Areas

Silhouettes and waist circumferences represent...

Daily actions or exercise?

To really remedy obesity, rather than this complicated expensive restructuring or urbanism: For the statists to control behavior and appearance, how about a physical/health test to get a driver’s license? Actually, if health deform passes, there will be many more controls on eating and such. Looking at avg weight is insufficient for any conclusions. Analyzing deciles can reveal more. But it needs to be compared with many other variables. Bodyfat data is better.
If gov takes over more health payments, then it will pass more laws on behavior to increase health in order to reduce expenses. Read more of this post

Land Use

Skyline Boulevard stretches through the Santa ...

Great Place for 'Stuff'

Urbanized areas take up less than 5% of the land nationally. The map, to the right, gives a rough approximation of that. The metropolitan areas occupy more land area than urbanized land, because whole counties are included. Those counties that are considered to have urban population usually have a total population above 60,000. That figure is used because those counties are included for the annual ACS (American Community Survey). This is not an accurate account for people who live in an urbanized area, but does give an idea of the spatial distribution of people. Of all the counties (3,077) only ¼ of them have populations above 60,000, as shown in the chart, below-right. All of those counties hold over ¾ of the people, as shown in the chart, below-left. Read more of this post

Planning ‘Whole’ Changes

An aerial view of a human ecosystem. Pictured ...

Formed by Choice & Templates

One aspect of planning is trying to change newer areas to be like the past. That involves oversights of there being less wealth & many fewer cars in the past.  Older urbanized areas are based on a core central city (sometimes multiple) of high density, having surrounding cities of lesser density. The high concentration of jobs in the CBD, with clustered concentrations along commuter hubs (stops) makes public transit more efficient. Read more of this post

Price increases (Housing)

An out-ward or right-ward shift in supply redu...

Demand seen as driver. Supply is trivialized, but important.

The national housing price is partially due to interest rates and the speculation, which increased the buying frenzy frequency. Another main culprit is the more widespread anti-growth/inward-growth emphasis, due to the HDC (high-density coalition) frame of reference. That has not been fully established yet by the “experts,” but it will be in a few years. Further study will show how the restriction of housing supplies has had a lot to do with causing the rapid housing price increase over the last few years. The market is in an adjustment period now, and may take years to be corrected. People were foolish to buy such highly price property. The rental market has not risen nearly as much. For new ownership, renting is a much better deal, even accounting for the equity. That should have been considered without even the inclusion of a potential drop. Of course, much of the equity is meaningless now or non-existent. It used to be that rent would be more than a mortgage, for the same property. That has been reversed for years now, in many markets. That should have been an indication not to buy. Read more of this post