The Biggest Problem With American Suburbs: They Can't Grow

California has famously dysfunctional housing politics. It's no secret that housing across the state is extremely expensive. One of the biggest causes comes down to supply and demand-a lot of people want to live there, but there are many exclusionary cities and towns which make it next to impossible to build more housing.
When people argue against denser housing, they often say things like "We already have too much traffic! We're short on water! Our schools will become overcrowded!" In other words, they argue that their town, which they themselves were perfectly able to move into, is now "full".
But at the same time, California needs to grow-and that's what this video is ultimately about.
If you liked the video, please like and subscribe to support the channel!
Patreon: / realthomasy
IG: Real_Thomas_Y
TW: Real_Thomas_Y
Quick Notes/Corrections:
1. Wicker Park is a neighborhood, not a city.
2. As of 5/21/2023, there were actually 4 one bedroom apartments in Venice, CA that someone earning less than 100k could qualify for.
3. Changed the title from "There's no Such Thing as a Suburb That's Full" on May 27th, 2023.

[@TimEssDub]

A lot of these anti-affordable housing people can be summed up as "We want you to make our coffees, scan our groceries, and serve our food at the restaurants; but we don't want you as neighbors."

[@onetwothreeabc]

Well said. And that will always be the case.

[@ThailandEnthusiast]

​@@onetwothreeabc no one wants to live in a bad neighborhood. I'm all for dense housing but, you MUST vett the tenants. It defeats the whole purpose if you rent to bad apples.

[@evergreen6638]

@@ThailandEnthusiast are baristas, cashiers and waiters bad apples? Poorer working class people aren’t bad apples.

[@starventure]

@@evergreen6638Vett them and you can find out who is who.

[@gemain609]

@@starventure What exactly makes the working class folk people who must be "vetted" relative to the lucky people who already have access to housing. This isn't me saying their shouldn't be a process timing housing but the way your comment is worded makes me feel like you believe working people to be subhuman

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

I always say, “cities only feel full when you’re in a car”

[@microbehunter7584]

Disagree, I live in the country, grow my own food, and it is heaven. No overcrowded people invading my space. It's very peaceful and rewarding. You are not the only person with an opinion.

[@XDTape]

@@microbehunter7584 the operating term is "city". how is op's comment related to the countryside in any way?

[@stenyethanmathews945]

@@microbehunter7584 stay in the country then lol.

[@SirJimbo89]

@@microbehunter7584 that's the rural area. It's completely different from suburban areas.

[@discocycle]

​@@microbehunter7584 but that's fine! We love our rural friends. But idk that the topic of this video is really about rural spaces.

[@snowleopard9749]

These people want to be segregated from poor people - that's why they want housing to be so expensive and it's why they refuse to take public transport.

[@shraka]

And THAT'S the real reason. Everything else in an excuse.

[@TheEngineerd]

Someone is shocked to discover people don't like to be the victims of criminals.

[@rhinoryan120]

@@TheEngineerd nice job labeling poor people criminals

[@neverhungryagain2187]

@@TheEngineerd wow

[@jackjt5044]

@@onetwothreeabcyes

[@danmcclaren5436]

They don't understand that we don't want everything to be an apartment building, we just want that option, in addition to houses. Same with cars. Not everyone wants to move to a suburb after college at 22.

[@shraka]

You don't even need apartment buildings. With double story row houses - or triple story over a garage - could easily double the density without reducing usable interior and yard area. If you're happy to take a cut on yard and parking, make that three to five times. That's well within the density needed to make trams or a train line viable. All without needing a any apartment buildings - add those and you can start justifying metro lines.

[@NothingXemnas]

Suburbanites: "What if the people want to own 3 or 4 cars? What about the? What about freedom!?" Urbanists: "What if the people want to live near their work and leisure spaces? What if people want to live in denser housing? What about freedom?" Suburbanites: "Stealing my argument is NOT cool... also people wanting to live in dense housing don't exist"

[@HNRichard]

@@shraka nah, an apartment building is more efficient and can house more people in them. That would make housing more affordable and made it easier for people to travel to their work as well as leisure activities compared to row houses which takes much larger space than an apartment, though not as large as a suburban home. Also worth mentioning are people working in the downtown area where they have easy access and only a short travel away from their home to their work place, rather having to drive half an hour burning fuel every day for most often than not; a minimum wage job.

[@Bustermachine]

@@HNRichard It depends. Apartments cost more to build with each additional floor. And above around ten stories energy efficiency falls off a cliff. There's nothing wrong with suburbs per-se . . . when they acutally suburbs. i.e. 'a subsidiary of the regional urban area'. As a California, let me tell you, the entire LA basin is a massive suburban conurbation with an itty bitty Urban core in the dead center of LA.

[@HNRichard]

@@Bustermachine Yes, you're right. however, my perspective on apartments are the European ones; the affordable apartment which are usually only 10 floors and not a sky scraper type of building. Usually they're located near business, schools, etc. which made it ideal for living and not having to depend on cars like suburban areas. Though I liked having a house in the suburbia, but having another choice other than a suburb house is also a great idea. Also dang, I did not know that about the LA basin. wonder why they didn't expand the urban core further.

[@vianabdullah2837]

Reject modernity (suburbia and NIMBY), Return to tradition (mixed-use development)

[@shraka]

While mixed use can be good you don't even really need it. Double or triple story town houses with small double story shops with limited parking gives you enough density to have trams and regular train service.

[@Bustermachine]

@@shraka I think when a lot of people say 'mixed use' they just mean 'zoned to allow corner shops as such. You might commute to your job, but the necessities for living are all in easy walking distance once you return home. I live in a track suburb, and it has a fair few of the suburban sprawl problems. But one thing that's nice is that instead of having a giant parking tarmac mega mall complex, we instead have small clusters of retail zoned buildings at the intersections of every other block. So if not for the unpleasantly heavy traffic spewing noise and pollution, it would be semi viable to walk or bike to grocery stars, barbers, etc. Not perfect by far, but a lot better than a lot of other towns.

[@shraka]

@@Bustermachine Right right, mixed zoning, I see. We have that here. I'm less than a minute walk to my main street, which is made up of double story 'row house' style shops - though there is a modern supermarket with some parking around it down the end.

[@bl1zz4rd25]

My country has a lot of that !

[@lzh4950]

1 of my country's lawmakers meanwhile was bold enough to call her voters 'selfish' for being NIMBYs against a proposed old-folks home that is negatively associated with death, & thus could devalue nearby residential property

[@luket4319]

When people say that a neighborhood is full, it doesn’t mean that that neighborhood is full, but it actually means that the people in that neighborhood are no longer open to welcoming outsiders. Sad stuff

[@RuiCBGLima]

It means that, that "comunity" has reached its full potential. It cannot do anything else. If it'd abided by the "laws" of population and sustainability, it should also be segregated from the rest of people and selfsuficient. Yet that doesn´t happen. Most people who live in those neighborhoods still have to go out and extract resources, and exploit other people.

[@ThailandEnthusiast]

​@@RuiCBGLima Spot on however, let's translate how those people actually feel. I would love to see dense communities with easy access to amenities like Europe however, in America, people just don't behave. That is what people ACTUALLY like about the suburbs and gated communities, the false sense of safety. The problem is that they associate safe neighborhoods with single family homes and suburbs when in reality it has nothing to do with the structures and more to do with people who buy single family homes in newer suburbs are more likely to have better values and just overall well behaved citizens(except for the obvious over reactive Karen attitude lol). The problem is always people's character. Not the type of structures. If you pack a apartment complex with criminals, you'll get crime. If you pack a apartment complex with vetted, we'll mannered tenants you will get a nice place to live.

[@RuiCBGLima]

@@ThailandEnthusiast Completely. Possibly the best chance for changing minds would be extensive promotion of new values. But that doesn´t happen because it would have to come from political and university institutions, and as it happens those are diluted in the "mindset". Still, I believe that change could be possible by uniting higher education with people with a considerable "acting power".

[@tylerroberts1276]

Couldn't be more blatant when council member Todd Loewenstein straight-up said the quiet parts loud about low-income renters that they don't belong in Redondo Beach

[@ThailandEnthusiast]

@Tyler Roberts well yeah. They don't. Number one; low income units are subsidized. Anything subsidized by the tax payer or non-profit will obviously have to be responsible and affordable. We don't give people on food stamps $5000 gift cards for whole foods. No one is entitled to expensive beach front property. Common sense. Second; I have seen many brand new low income apartments trashed within a few years by bad tenants. Tenants are often not vetted. No one wants to live next to bad neighbors. Let's be real here. Atleast the man is honest, unlike all the liberal elites in Calabasas and other city's who would never open their front doors to immigrants or low income families. Virture signaling.

[@microproductions6]

I feel like an understanding of the Strong Towns principles should be a requirement of anyone in city government right now.

[@crassirus]

"What do you know about Strong Towns" is a pretty reasonable question to ask any given politician campaigning in your area.

[@secretyoutube7925]

City Government understands the strong town principle, more than you think. But if only people with grey hair shows up in meetings, there wish is the one that gets prioritized. In short, if you want your wish to be respected, show up!

[@jackmerrill8424]

@@secretyoutube7925 this is a great point! I have a feeling that people in these government positions are generally pretty interested in doing the right thing. But like you said, it’s the people with the time and resources to dedicate to these causes that win. And it’s usually old fucks.

[@falsificationism]

100%

[@chrispontani6059]

Forget car infrastructure. Where are the available building lots in those California locales that are refusing to add housing?

[@electricerger]

Man, I'm just reminded of 15 year old me asking my dad "If I wanted to go to grandma's (which was 2 towns over, easy enough to get to via bike if you made a day out of it), how would I?" And his response was "You can't, you need a car to cross the highway". It was honestly the most ridiculous thing I had ever heard, the idea of NEEDING a car to participate in society.

[@joestewart5406]

The most ridiculous thing I have heard was making an all day trip on bike just to see somone for a day. It’s not 1890 people have stuff to do and bills to pay. Maybe you’ll understand that one day.

[@anna-flora999]

​@@joestewart5406the most ridiculous thing I have heard is a supposedly adult person not understanding the context of dedicating even a single day to leasure activities

[@AudriusN]

@@joestewart5406 Typical amuridumbian

[@felixthecat2786]

@@joestewart5406 I have a seizure disorder. How am I supposed to drive without killing myself and others?? I have bills to pay and stuff to do as well. Your "low density" bullshit neighborhoods are not accessible for people like me. I want to work and be a productive citizen, but the NYMBs make it seem like an impossibility. I'd love to have kids one day, but how am I supposed to afford a two bedroom apartment? There are no real options for people to have a family anymore. The houses are too damn expensive and the rents go up and up and up because there's no place to build them.

[@joestewart5406]

@@felixthecat2786 that’s just how American life is. we are spread out like roots and we travel far distances regularly. It is cheaper to build or buy when the population is lower. People always look in the wrong places. Either to close in the middle of entertainment district or too far away 100 miles from the nearest hospital with no cell reception. If you look in the middle ground you find a much more affordable life style. (Aka 1 miles from the gas station and about 10-15 from the nearest hospital.

[@kevley26]

Its such a clear indicator of how car brained these people are when they equate more people with more car traffic.

[@crassirus]

I'm beginning to suspect that they are caged in on all sides by their own beliefs of a zero sum game where they have to constantly be figuring out who to screw over to keep their slice of the pie. This is exactly how you kill the nation you love; not believing in its growth potential.

[@nataliekhanyola5669]

💯💯💯

[@Demopans5990]

They take a look at NYC traffic even though half of the ~8mill city population itself just walks everywhere. The traffic is mainly caused by the ~21 million people metro area.

[@racecardriverrr4201]

@@Demopans5990 Also, the thing with cars is that even if just 5% (the very wealthy) of a dense population decides to drive, traffic congestion is major. This can be seen in many places in China, where a metro might move 10 million people a day (no joke, the Beijing metro does lol) but even if just 100k cars are on the road, that can mess things up badly and I'm sure that happens in NYC to an extent. Because who TF would want to drive in such gridlock 😂

[@schwarzwolfram7925]

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on him not understanding it.” ~ Upton Sinclair

[@scottjones9973]

It’s wild that they think congestion and pollution are caused by density when it’s literally vice versa.

[@spugelo359]

Only to a certain point. When density gets too high then the pollution gets really bad like in China.

[@davidboeger6766]

@@spugelo359 I don't think it's that simple, though admittedly, I'm not that knowledgeable about pollution. A lot of pollution is industrial, which is kind of a separate issue. There are dense areas where waste is managed quite well. Japan has a reputation for being exceptionally clean and well-maintained, even in very dense urban cores. A lot of urban pollution in China is the result of local culture as well as the processes in place for managing things like waste. To be fair, higher population will absolutely increase pollution in absolute terms, all else being equal, and higher density makes a lot more of it visible, but on a per capita basis, I really don't think higher density necessarily makes urban pollution any worse. Hotels are very dense, for example, but well-maintained hotels have minimal pollution. On the flip side, increasing car commute times is one of the most surefire ways of inflating a household's baseline pollution.

[@Cameronnp]

그 말은 사실이지만 너무 극단적인 의견입니다 적당한 레벨 등급까지는 문제 없습니다. 미국 주택 지역은 너무 저밀도라서 중간 밀도까지 올려도 괜찮아요. 각 주택 zoning 크기를 반으로 줄이세요. 주택 부지 및 집 크기가 크다 보니 집값이 비싸지고 가난한 사람은 먼곳으로 쫒겨 나고 있는게 불행한 현실입니다. 다른 나라처럼 주택 밀도를 더 높이길 권합니다.

[@SomeGuyWhoPlaysGames333]

@@spugelo359Pollution is only more concentrated in denser areas. The amount of pollution overall is still way higher in suburbs.

[@norterrible]

8:55 Landlords and banks are a big part of the problem. "Sixteen million homes currently sit vacant across the U.S. In every state across the country, many homes remain empty while hundreds of thousands of Americans face homelessness."

[@WindsorMason]

Plus short term rentals like Airbnb. (I've seen/heard from people renting multiple apartment units solely for use as Airbnbs 🤦‍♀️) All three of these groups have had an additional negative impact on Phoenix helping exasperate the issue. While it has car dependency, exclusionary mentalities, and single family zoning at the core. They shouldn't be brushed aside like they aren't a big part of why it's so bad.

[@JesusChrist5000]

But where are the owners of these properties going to get the money to renovate these vacant properties? I own a house that is vacant, but it won't be liveable for maybe a few years. Money doesn't grow on trees.

[@tonywalters7298]

A corrollary is that we treat housing as an investment instead of as a public good. Rising property values benefit existing home owners who want to sell starter homes for mansion prices.

[@onetwothreeabc]

And the home owners are the ones who vote for the politicians. So there is no solution.

[@xtreme242]

Housing IS an investment. Same ppl saying what are cry about ppl not owning their home and getting "generational wealth", which tbh you aren't attaining that with a standard single family home

[@vylbird8014]

@@xtreme242 If housing is an investment, then it must always go up in value over a long time. Which means the housing that you could afford twenty years ago would not be affordable today.

[@xtreme242]

@vylbird8014 real estate doesn't exist in a vacuum. Everything else goes up with it. Even incomes. And no it doesn't stand that it "must always go up in value over a long time". It CAN go up much the same as it CAN go down. There are spikes in value that can occur but those are singular events.

[@ElJosher]

An that is the problem

[@BrokeredHeart]

That "Protect Scottsdale" thing was like a commercial you'd see on Parks and Rec. They have it completely backwards when they said new apartment infill would add to traffic congestion, stress infrastructure, and create water shortages. Acre for acre, it's suburban and exurban land plots that are wasteful and energy intensive. The further afield they get from the city's core, and the more amenities they demand, the more pressure and stress they put on the local council and the resource managers to accommodate their wants.

[@xtreme242]

You must have never been in Scottsdale. Adding hundreds of cars from a bunch of new apartments in a singular given area would most definitely add congestion. There's one, yes one, freeway and it's on the far edge of the city

[@evanoc]

@@xtreme242 Time to advocate for better public transit!

[@planefan082]

​@@xtreme242 Which is fixed by building those next to good transit (no cars). Hooray!

[@xtreme242]

@@planefan082 there is no transit in Scottsdale just valley metro bus

[@planefan082]

@@xtreme242 So... build it? You mention there is only one highway and that it's on the edge of the city. That's sort of the best case scenario for the construction of transit.

[@carlinthomas9482]

Excellent video. Most aren't aware how inefficient it is to plan cities around the private automobile, if more people were aware, they would demand more transit be built to move people.

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

Slowly but surely I think more people are coming around to this way of thinking. Or maybe I’m just trapped in a bubble of urbanist youtubers haha!

[@yungrichnbroke5199]

Some people don’t care simply want cars and space. That’s the butthurt people talking at the intro.

[@carlinthomas9482]

@@yungrichnbroke5199 Yes, some people prefer a more rural or car dependent suburban setting.

[@xtreme242]

​@@yungrichnbroke5199 one could also say the author is butthurt

[@Zalis116]

Almost as if people care more about their personal fears and prejudices than they do about city-scale "efficiency."

[@yungrichnbroke5199]

“California’s #1 issue is housing. And to fix housing you also must address the problem of car centric urban planning.” This isn’t a nicety. This is a must have.

[@bl1zz4rd25]

Should need to implement walkable lanes , bike lanes , & public transit like bus , train , tuktuk or any of them so the car centric infrastructure will decrease . I know that they are implementing it now but balance usage or using of these transports i mentioned can reduce traffic accident and laziness of people

[@boomgoesdynamite4177]

@@bl1zz4rd25 who wants to walk in crime-ridden urban areas ?

[@bl1zz4rd25]

@@boomgoesdynamite4177 No one except criminals & people who think they're strong to go in .

[@bl1zz4rd25]

@@boomgoesdynamite4177 Crime depends on the people not the place . A lot of things contribute to crime include mafia organizations , gangs , bad government , poverty & family problems . Not only parents but people should discipline and have responsibility to their children or people in the community to reduce crime and obnoxious activities .

[@Abel-Alvarez]

@@boomgoesdynamite4177 see how fast you like to assume things without seeing the change being made? It's because of mindsets like this they often forget cities like LA already have crime ridden locations they call "hoods", at the very least we can (at the bare minimum) try to fix that instead of separate ourselves with only single family homes.

[@mrmartinezvida6987]

Here in San Diego. government was letting properties that were near transit to build “Granny flats”. Same thing happened where the fear was over crowding and “integrity of the community ”. The irony is that many of the homes had build separate rooms in their garages with no government codes for renting.

[@lolololol7573]

Living in the Netherlands, it's absolutely extra fascinating to hear these kind of things. Especially the conspiracy theories. The same people who claim there is an 'attack' and they want people to live in shitty homes, visit the EU as if it's Disneyland and don't realize that Disneyland is how we LIVE. It's crazy to see and really put it in perspective how different the world view of someone can be living somewhere else. I learned a lot from this entire movement, definitely. So thank you, and every other creator who are trying to put in perspective how the suburban life is up to debate if it's really the best option for all citizens equally. We bought a house recently, and we made the decision not to go too far away. We could choose to live in the 'suburbs' so to speak, although we'd still have the basic needs like a local supermarket and a school. But I wanted a city center with cafe's and terraces, a train station, and any shop you can imagine accessible by bike. The train station brings me to Amsterdam in 1,5 hr and to Germany in 1 hr. It costed a bit more but it was worth every penny. TLDR We choose to rather live smaller but have everything we need for our convenience, social life and entertainment, than live in a big house in the middle of nowhere.

[@onetwothreeabc]

Will your city welcome immigrants who don't speak your language? Can I move in tomorrow and be assigned an affordable housing?

[@joshuakhaos4451]

In the conspiracy theorists defense, Some of those city council and urban planners are legit freaks and are power hungry. There was that one group in I think Oxford UK that was going to implement a 15 minute city trial run. And had hoped that if it went well. Theyd act on it and that to drive anywhere, you'd have to go way out of your way and it be a massive chore. And that you'd only have like 100 days out of a year to leave your district in a car, or you'd be fined or penalized. So yeah... While I dont think the majority of people who are into urbanism are power hungry control freaks, there are some who see it as a power trip and do want it to forcibly change peoples lives to meet their desires.

[@jacqueslee2592]

European countries are less populated. Netherland population is 17 million people. That is a fraction of Californian population.

[@brianog5267]

More people walk across California’s border in a month than move to the Netherlands in a year… you do the math…. Yeah I’ll continue to live where I want…. You live where you want…. I don’t mind not walking to the store every day to get some eggs…. I’m ok having some land and freedom-breathing room

[@lolololol7573]

@@jacqueslee2592 and?

[@ryanevans2655]

I remember growing up in suburban North Dallas, years before I knew one shred about urbanism or city planning, observing the geography of the burbs and the cycle of develop-> decay -> move further out->develop, and thinking “wait, doesn’t anyone see we can’t keep doing this forever? Why is no one else disturbed by our neighborhoods only lasting like 30 years before starting to fall apart? What do cities do that aren’t on the seemingly infinite prairies of Middle America?”

[@falxie_]

I'd love to live in a high density condo next to a mass transit station

[@ianhomerpura8937]

You'll love Singapore for sure.

[@mentonerodominicano]

Right? Don't threaten me with a good time.

[@Llikalek]

It's awful trust me, I live in that kind of neighborhood in Toronto and I dream of moving in a house in the suburbs, far from the crowd. This is all good talk but it's usually from people that don't live by what they preach.

[@grahamcampbell7424]

@@Llikalek I've been through similar experiences in Toronto over the last 23 years. There is a middle ground though with many nice leafy neighborhoods with duplexes and apartments and good access to transit. I personally couldn't live in a high rise condo, but places like High Park, The Beaches etc, do offer much nicer alternative and really a stone's throw from Downtown compared to the non Toronto suburbs! It's tough either way on the extreme.

[@falxie_]

@@Llikalek I've lived in an apartment complex (originally built as condos) next to a BART station and liked it quite a bit. Your preference is different than mine

[@neckenwiler]

Excellent stuff. Virtually every high-price California suburb whined to no end about how totally built-out their jurisdiction is when they had to update their housing elements this cycle. Like, have you ever seen a city, you stupid little muppets? No one gets to say their jurisdiction is "built-out" until it looks like Manhattan (and even Manhattan should build more housing!). To be fair, Prop 13 complicates funding for transit, but not *that* much, and new construction gets taxed at actual value and pretty close to actual value for a while.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

The worst one is Atherton. They blocked Caltrain electrification for decades and even demanded that their local Caltrain station be closed for good.

[@fatviscount6562]

@@ianhomerpura8937 Adding to the irony: As CalTrain faces a million-dollar budget gap, they are now paying Atherton $400,000 to build a railway museum that you can't reach via CalTrain--or any other public transit.

[@xtreme242]

That's exactly what Tempe is doing downtown and it's horrid. I used to enjoy going around there. I go nowhere near it now. Too many people in too small of an area with too many buildings going too high

[@starventure]

Then be prepared for civilised people to move out when you move in. They will go and build a new suburb far away, causing more sprawl and you can live out your urban fantasy. Just not with any valuable people around you.

[@connorr605]

It's "built-out" in the sense that a higher density jurisdiction would change the lifestyle that the people there were seeking (i.e. a place that is quiet, with small crowds, good views, and more green spaces). If they wanted to live in a city, they could move to NYC or Philadelphia. There is plenty of warehouse and commercial space in downtown LA that could be converted to housing. Why not build the city where the city lifestyle already is?

[@cyclicmusings2661]

I find the "freedom" argument these NIMBYs bring up is so ridiculous. Freedom apparently means being forced to use a car and only being allowed a narrow scope what you can do to your own property - like single use zoning, parking minimums, setbacks, minimum house size, and other restrictions. I live in a suburb and do admit it's pleasant and wouldn't like large multistory buildings smack in the middle of my neighborhood, but I will support other measures like building pedestrain/cycling paths connecting neighborhoods that are otherwise disconnected, reducing setback requirements, allowing ADUs and even a separate building / garage conversion that is a home business, as long as such buildings compliment what's already there. Large mixed use apartment buildings should be built on commercial lots along the arterial roads, and let the market determine how much parking they really need instead of prescribing 50's era parking minimums.

[@JohnFromAccounting]

If you lived in a row of pretty 3-storey townhouses with wide sidewalks, would you find that offensive?

[@RickJaeger]

Their idea of "freedom" is "freedom (for people who can afford it, and you can get fucked if you can't afford it, lol lmao)."

[@Coffeepanda294]

I know, right? I had a long discussion with some angry individual recently who insisted the only two types of developments that should be allowed to exist were dense urban centres and deserts of single-family houses. When I advocated for more options, _he_ accused _me_ of trying to force others to live the way I wanted them to. It reminds me of 1984 by Orwell --freedom is slavery, war is peace, etc. Apparently having options is oppression, while having next to no choice and being forced to drive a car is freedom.

[@manueltheguitarstudent8441]

I started watching urbaníst videos like a year ago and I think now there are actually so much more videos about mobility and walkability than ever before

[@blabla-rg7ky]

there are...

[@maheehossain5481]

might just be the algorithm

[@yungrichnbroke5199]

I love the callout of the ripple effect into everywhere else. EPA doesn’t allow you to pollute your neighbor’s state so you shouldn’t be allowed to jack up your neighbor state’s costs either.

[@yungrichnbroke5199]

“We’re the second most populated city along the California coast” what? SF, SD, LA are all on the coast. Long Beach is several times bigger. Santa Monica is bigger too.

[@mauricehopes9105]

The wild thing is that there are tons of places with density that are doing just fine. Density doesn't ruin a neighborhood. In fact when done right it absolutely makes them thrive.

[@cinnanyan]

The fact that there are limits in California on how much property tax can increase means that people who own a house get all of the benefit of soaring property values with little downside... well, until it turns out that essential services like schools can't find workers

[@boomgoesdynamite4177]

Income doesnt increase w property values. And CA has obscenely high income tax.

[@cinnanyan]

@@boomgoesdynamite4177 you can get capital gain income from selling your property, and many banks will allow you to borrow against the value of your home, which is fairly cheap credit, allowing you to build even more wealth.

[@ZePopTart]

@@boomgoesdynamite4177 actually yeah it kind of does. The same job pays more in higher cost of living areas.

[@tr33c21]

Besides, the car also allows people to work further, making people travel more, causing more traffic. If you could live and work within safe walking distance or safe public transport would also help reduce traffic.

[@legatus_newt]

Part of the problem is many suburbs specifically disallow jobs. No dense commercial area that people can walk to, no factories, no industrial areas. That all belongs in the city but the people who work at those places can't afford to rent in the city, or in the closer suburbs, they have to drive in from 30 , 40 miles away. Spread out the jobs , spread out the traffic , densify suburbs to make them their own communities. Subrubs would be fine if they provided their citizens with what they need rather than just being endless housing development sprawl with the expectation that you drive into the city for everything you need. Denver metro has some crazy housing developments that accessible only by a highway ramp. Every single thing they need they have to get on the highway and drive. Why doesn't that housing development have a commercial area with restaurants, grocery stores, maybe a doctors office to serve the 1500+ homes rather than them clogging up the highway or having to come into city neighborhoods for their every need. I'm not saying suburbanites can't come to the city, but maybe build your suburb in a way that doesn't create unnecessary traffic where other people live to alleviate traffic where you live.

[@FlyingOverTr0ut]

I wish Americans took more trips to other countries to see how much better urban planning can be. I know most people can't afford that, but if there was government funding for it, like making international trips part of public education (I know the idea that America would properly fund schools is laughable), I think we'd quickly get a generation of people demanding more urbanism in America.

[@gromnir]

Everyone can actually afford that, IT is the most economical thing to do do. The simplest solution is both The most economical AND social thing to do...

[@cleny217]

How many schools in the UK or France can afford to send all their kids across the world for free? Like the fuck?

[@heteroerectus]

Okay well maybe you should just take a one way trip to one of those superior countries instead of advocating for foisting your admittedly unamerican values on people who do not share them

[@gromnir]

@@heteroerectus No need I live in Europe and have never in my life NEEDED to own a car. And with the money north america wastes on bad infrastructure and corporate walfare they could have improved the world, not to mention their own countries many times over and still had money over. Also your "Values" is whats bankrupting all of you cites.

[@timharbert7145]

Google maps. I take tours of Paris regularly.

[@collectivelyimprovingtrans2460]

What these people don’t understand is that higher density housing will decrease traffic because mixed use development has people walking and taking transit. But Californians want what they were promised. This is happening all over the state.

[@onetwothreeabc]

Unless those "mixed use development" do not have parking lots, I won't buy the argument "higher density housing will decrease traffic".

[@timharbert7145]

Yes. Mixed use also increases the likelihood folks can walk to their jobs. The county I live in did a study to find out where people live vs where they work. A very small fraction of folks work in the same area they live. Yet most towns had net traffic inflows of workers from other areas. I tend to think ever increasing property costs keep people from moving closer to work.

[@collectivelyimprovingtrans2460]

@@onetwothreeabc because the parking is car infrastructure that will induce traffic?

[@onetwothreeabc]

@@collectivelyimprovingtrans2460 Exactly. Do you see a "mixed development" without parking structures?

[@collectivelyimprovingtrans2460]

@@onetwothreeabc there are some, they’re just not very common outside very old developments. And even some very old developments, have car parking.

[@fedexpress14]

You can rinse and repeat this same issue in so many exclusive wealthy communities across California and the US. Happy to call out my crappy reactionary mayor Richard Bailey in Coronado, CA. I’m lucky to be able to live here, but only because I have parents who invested in land while I was growing up. So many NIMBYs where I live concerned with the traffic and the value of their homes who could care less about the low and middle income workers who keep this city afloat.

[@onetwothreeabc]

Why should NIMBYs care about low and middle income workers?

[@fedexpress14]

@@onetwothreeabc Why shouldn’t they?

[@XDTape]

@@onetwothreeabc they complain all the time about crime and homelessness, you'd expect even a little bit of interest in fixing the issue from them

[@onetwothreeabc]

@@XDTape They will propose to let the low income live elsewhere, far from where they live.

[@teddyvalenzuela3888]

Excellent video! I grew up in Phoenix and it’s sad to see AZ NIMBYs start to repeat all the same talking points and mistakes around housing/urban planning that California already has

[@xtreme242]

There's nothing wrong with phoenix aside from too many ppl. I avoid downtown. Too many people. Too many hipsters among them. Too many apartments going thirty floors up

[@teddyvalenzuela3888]

@@xtreme242 if you don’t like being around lots of people, you should probably leave the 5th biggest city in the US

[@xtreme242]

@Teddy Valenzuela I'm quite ok where I am thanks Phoenix is an awful large place with areas that aren't a nightmare like downtown. By the by Phoenix proper is the fifth largest but Phoenix metro is only the twelfth largest. Surrounding cities also are not buildings and ppl crammed in like sardines,I have plenty of space to breathe and stretch outside of the densified area

[@legatus_newt]

@@xtreme242 Would you support upzoning neighborhoods around Phoenix to help spread the density out from the core to surrounding areas to reduce the "choking" density of the urban core.

[@xtreme242]

@kennethlamarca7477 not particularly. I'm not a fan of people so I surely don't want to be in a thick crowd of them. Maybe the young hipsters that are gravitating to there would like to live in a high rise, i would prefer a garage and a yard. They could certainly increase the amount and frequency of busses though

[@ickster23]

Their NIMBYism is one of the key drivers of too-expensive housing. You see this in Canada a lot.

[@janetkim2392]

If only the government would remove there crazily high taxes on developments and there ridiculous zoning laws we'd have affordable beautiful cities

[@ickster23]

@@janetkim2392 Ah, a statist with the view that unless we have absolute government control of everything, then it will be anarchy. A question for you: how is that Canada has the same amount of timber, natural resources for every aspect of building, vast tracts of land, and the same potential for human capital to build houses, yet supply of housing has lagged, year after year and for two decades, behind demand?

[@Peaceloveharmonyroads]

I love how they say “They are anti-automobile” and then about a second later complain about the congestion it’s going to cause. So… they’re not anti-automobile? I don’t understand lol

[@ptolemy36]

Glad you mentioned the fact that not "greedy landlords" or real estate investors but gov zoning restrictions on new, denser housing are chiefly responsible for rising housing costs. Great video 👍

[@JaredJonesAZ]

I lived most of my life in Northeast Phoenix and Scottsdale. I moved to Philadelphia because of the ongoing unaffordable housing crisis in AZ. I love Arizona but I will never ever move back. The exclusionary nature and denial of Scottsdale in particular is legendary. They criticize California while taking the exact same political moves to preserve their way of life, but only for the very fortunate, and they see no irony. I now live with a higher standard of living in a fascinating and tight knit community that embraces me more than any Phoenix metro neighborhood. I live somewhere where my car is completely optional and all flavors of fun is a very short walk. I have gone from resenting Scottsdale-brain to just feeling pity that they refuse to see how they live somewhere that has all the worst qualities of a suburb and very little of the benefits of living in a city. As a whole, the overpriced and car obsessed Phoenix metro area is downplaying just how risky the future is, and it really can't afford to be stuck in the past.

[@quercus4965]

Great move, it sounds. I lived in Scottsdale and next to it in Phoenix 4 years ago, and what you say is true there and many other areas to a different degree. I wonder if it's a critical mass issue where you are, as opposed to SW cities only providing one option, "car-centric freedom on big lots far away" or "you can always move". Trouble is, most every dense area that's new or redeveloped, especially near light rail or near your range of amenities, mostly becomes boutique and more expensive than low-median incomes. Clearly there's a densification gravy train for property tax coffers and developers, moreso than the mantra given more supply = lower prices. (or price increases won't be as much if we just build more)

[@Collin857]

With a lot of crime which not many people want

[@whatwebuilt]

Great video. Funny enough, Redondo Beach is getting an expensive light rail line that will cost billions of dollars and is demanding a different route that would add hundreds of millions in costs and years of extra construction for NIMBY reasons. And they could easily meet their housing requirements building big next to the train and not touching the other neighborhoods, but they don’t even want that.

[@quercus4965]

Ugh, you're right. Sounds like more big money with limited foresight..."Merica"!

[@AtlasNovack]

This is one of the many reasons Robert Moses is on my kill-as-a-baby-when-I-go-back-in-time list

[@rpvitiello]

People know the town isn’t “full” they want to jack up their property values as much as possible. Housing can be a necessity or an investment. It can’t be both.

[@AR-gj1qt]

It can be both but the government is greedy as they get paid off by oil companies to implement harsh zoning laws on developers and high taxes on developers which gets transfered down in the House price

[@ParisCycling]

I screamed internally throughout, I hope these LA nimbys can feel my hatred from the other side of the planet.

[@97nelsn]

The governor of NY tried to pass affordable housing expansion in the suburbs but Long Island politicians United and defeated that proposal using nothing but ol’ fashioned racism & fear. It’s a shame b/c Long Island has some of the best rail connections to Manhattan & Brooklyn but most of the stations on the Island are parking lots which could be used to build more housing. Meanwhile in NJ, land near train stations have or are being redeveloped into housing. Maybe over time the racists on the Island move away and more sane people end up living there changing the demographics.

[@joshuakhaos4451]

Having grown up in a rather sketchy city and grew up in the nice outer rim suburbs. I can tell you for a fact that "Affordable Housing" is new speak for Sect 8 and giving people who are well below the poverty line a hand out/voucher to buy a home in a an area outside of their income isnt good. Part of my town/suburb went from being fairly nice to not nice at all and my grandmas neighborhood went from very quiet and safe to noticeably much less safe than it was for the first 18 years of my life. There are in fact people in society that you do not want living near you. I'm sorry but unless you experience this first hand, you wont understand. Though the shitty part of "Affordable housing" is that when they do build it in nice areas. Its not for people like me who make 50k a year and will keep the community nice. Its for people who are still poor and lower class. I'm refused housing even though I cant afford a damn house and even rent is close to being an issue. No handouts to the lower class over people who make a solid living but cant afford housing due to our fucked up housing situation.

[@tonythat_tiger]

THIS IS ANYTHJNG AND EVERYTHING I HAVE BEEN SHARING WITH PEOPLE. they really don’t understand what they’re advocating for when it comes to deterring new urban development. I’m really glad this is my go to video now for urban planning discussions. All the past years factual information boiled into 12 minutes for smaller attention spans. THANK YOU🎉

[@DimaRakesah]

It amazes me how many people like this, who already own houses and have a stable place to live, absolutely do not give a shit about anyone else having access to housing. All they care about is protecting their housing at the expense of hundreds of thousands of people across the US who are at risk of losing access to ANY housing due to a lack of availability. There simple isn't enough of it for average working class Americans and the prices are skyrocketing. Then when there are inevitably homeless people they will complain and want them to just disappear. They are not in touch with reality. They're living the American dream all right, and they do not want to wake the fuck up.

[@davidbarts6144]

Yup, I live in a city (and neighborhood) over twice as dense as Redondo Beach and my street is still leafy, green, and quiet. And I’m a couple blocks to a bus that runs so frequently I don’t need to check the schedule.

[@massvt3821]

Looking forward to the Chicago video. Great city, with scores of pre-war streetcar suburbs and city neighborhoods, with a very extensive mass transit system that's one of America's finest..

[@97nelsn]

I’m surprised you’re the only one who’s called out that weird “Protect Scottsdale” group. If Alan Fisher, NJB, and/or Adam Something found out about that group; I think they would form a supergroup and create one hell of a rebuttal against “Protect Scottsdale”

[@ianhomerpura8937]

Hassan Minhaj also did a few years back, since these people from Scottsdale and Gilbert were funded by the Koch Brothers to block every transit expansion project. Good thing that Phoenix Light Rail advocates won.

[@xtreme242]

Guys like Alan Fisher can afford to talk like they do when they have no wife, no kids, live alone and only themselves to feed and clothe, with no job to commute to.

[@davidboeger6766]

That group is hardly unique. I'm in CA, and just about every NIMBY wannabe suburb near the main job centers has something like that group. I've heard similar things on local radio and news stations.

[@nanoc.2103]

As a person who was born and raised and still lives in CA, thank you for pointing this out. I’ve always appreciated non-car centric cities.

[@emptyspace3715]

Duplexes & triplexes = "soviet style condo buildings" got it!

[@Bustermachine]

The hilarious thing is that, while 'Commie Blocks' were poorly made, poorly designed, and hypocritically spartan compared to the opulence reserved for the party elites. The Soviets could slam'm up fast in a country that had been devastated by a recent war and which had a far weaker civil economy and much more poorly functioning economic system than the United States. Let me be clear, I'm no fan of the soviets. They were all the incompetence and brutality of the Russian Empire with a red coat of paint. But credit where it's due, the Soviets Built something that basically got the job done. Not well. And not gracefully. But it basically worked. Which is better than can be said for people today actively sabotaging new construction/densification. :-(

[@janetkim2392]

They truly r moronic. They are against government control yet want the government to ban denser development and only only allow single family homes.

[@john.dough.]

yes! I can empathize with the pain of liking something the way it is, but it's important to recognize when things need to change to benefit society. It's okay to enjoy the inefficient design in these suburbs, but it's so selfish to insist that there shouldn't be improvements to efficiency in city planning. I think ego is also a big part of it. When it's difficult to get housing somewhere, people fight back because they feel proud of overcoming barriers to get where they are. Making things better for others is viewed as an attack on them, because they have built their identity on feeling superior.

[@Cyrus992]

I spoke to the Scottsdale activists on the phone. They actually agreed with me that the post 1920s urban planning is flawed. We can come up with a compromise the remove parking minimums, stroads/arterials, setbacks, and other regulations. We will do an interview soon. You speak about capacity issues. Transit projects need to compete with cars and can’t be so over budget like the CA HSR. Start with personal rapid transit.

[@NightspeakerR]

Could I find this information somewhere so that I can read on this more?

[@Cyrus992]

@@NightspeakerR Which info?

[@houndofculann1793]

What does "personal rapid transit" mean? Also highway projects go over budget all the time but they're all subsidised without anyone raising an eyebrow

[@Cyrus992]

@@houndofculann1793 I agree which is which traffic keeps flowing to stroads/arterials. Regarding transit lookups SkyTran and SNAAP

[@houndofculann1793]

@@Cyrus992 Okay. SkyTran and SNAAP both are rather interesting, I'd have just a couple of changes to make them better. First, let's build the tracks on the ground instead of suspending them in the air like that so that in the event of any problems evacuation and maintenance is easy and possible crashes won't involve falling on the ground. Building the network would also be a lot cheaper that way so more could be built faster. This would also avoid possible hindrance from people complaining about ruining their view with pillars and suspended tracks. Second, lots of people will always be travelling in the same general direction so to avoid making people wait so long for another pod to arrive and to also reduce the required storage space for the pods, let's join a few of them together so a bunch of people can get on at the same time without the extra wait. This will also make their operation costs a lot cheaper since we can use only one engine for the whole getup. Third, to make it even better we could expand the size of the stations to offer more destination points from any one station and at the same time avoid having to build so many separate stations to keep the building and land costs lower, so the network could be built a lot more expansive with a lot less money, so faster. Oops, we now have a tram or a train. Where do we need your fantasy projects again? All they're doing is spending a ridiculous amount of money and effort to get people out of the way of cars in an extremely inefficient and dangerous way. We already have better alternatives that do the exact same thing but better: walkability, cycleability, and public transit.

[@Aeyekay0]

Yeah the cities are full… full cars with a single passenger. There’s plenty of space just not for cars. Really good video

[@basedcarson5285]

Great video! I appreciated the graphics as well, keep up the good work 🙏

[@StLouis-yu9iz]

Loved this video, very true. Thanks for sharing! :]

[@lelandunruh7896]

The idea that government should intervene and keep property owners and markets from acting as they do for every other market and product is just wild to me. I'll never understand where people get that level of entitlement. Abolish or substantially reform zoning and land use regulations.

[@legatus_newt]

Single family homes are designed to subsidize the middle class and keep them away from the working class. If middle class people lived near the working class people they'd realize they have much more in common than they were lead to believe.

[@lilylute1248]

This was really great, I enjoyed this a lot. I appreciate these channels doing more and more of this kind of stuff.

[@Pavel_osonin]

We've missed you 🤠

[@Kodeb8]

What I don't understand is why these people don't just... move? America has like a million of tiny random low-density small towns scattered across the board. Why do they have to be so stubborn that they want car-dependent, low-density living, on the 2nd biggest city in the US?

[@OhTheUrbanity]

So many people in North America want small town or even rural densities paired with big city amenities (jobs, schools, sports, concerts, restaurants, airports, etc.)

[@Kodeb8]

@@OhTheUrbanity That's where suburbs come in I guess. Problem is, suburbs aren't meant to be unchanging. As the city grows, the suburbs are supposed to densify.

[@grahamturner2640]

Part of the problem is that smaller towns don’t always have much in the way of jobs.

[@Drmcclung]

Because driving 2 hours 1 way to work, that thing where the money is, from that tiny little unpopulated exurb where the money isn't but the rent is cheap, fuckin SUCKS. It's called commuting. That's why they don't move. And here's a flash, they were there first

[@Kodeb8]

@@Drmcclung There are multiple ways to solve this problem. Since you hate driving 2 hours to work (and trust me, I hate driving more than anyone else), that's where public transport comes in. And if you absolutely NEED a car, guess what? Viable public transport will get most cars off the road, meaning your commute will be less cluttered. The second thing to consider is if suburbs become denser and get incorporated into the city, the jobs will also come to the suburbs, so there won't be as many people trying to fight their way into the city center every morning.

[@DMSR76]

Great video. You really presented the facts in a concise way.

[@ynerrad9291]

Great as always Thomas! 🫶🏽

[@lukashandanos5040]

Let’s go! Been looking forward to your next upload

[@cccycling5835]

You know I’m a pretty right leaning person: Suburbs are boring and insane and a responsible for a lot of the social rot we see today. What if I DON’T want to waste money on a massive house and three cars? It’s insane because the left leaning people here in California suburbs say EXACTLY THE SAME THING. NIMBY is not a partisan feature.

[@TheNobleFive]

This is true. As widespread as urban videos on KZbin are right now, I'd say most Americans in general engage in NIMBY

[@davidboeger6766]

Yes, I'm also in CA, and NIMBY is easily one of the most bipartisan ideas.

[@jonathanshaffer6757]

i don’t think i could ever be convinced to give up my house and go back to an apartment complex. The quality of life difference between the two is extreme

[@racool911]

It would be more convincing if you literally could not afford your house lol

[@quercus4965]

@@racool911 Except the reality since the 2008-10 recession. @jonathanshaffer6757 , me, or many others can barely afford rent on that smaller apartment today, for the price we're paying on a mortgage for a larger home purchased 5+ years ago and the amenities it provides. There must be balance for a variety of people *and* retrofitting old or new development for density, quality of life for all incomes, and more mass transit regularly throughout our cities. The either-or approach has stifled that and has helped get us where we are. Back to watching this video >

[@ZePopTart]

Exactly. You do not have control over your environment in an apartment. Pretty much everything your neighbor does can intimately affect your life.

[@pedrob3953]

Do you know what's even worse? To be homeless. That's the choice you're given. Have enough money to buy a house, or live in your car.

[@jonathanshaffer6757]

@TackyBunny I couldn’t disagree more. Don’t have to hear my neighbors tv in a house, don’t have to watch my own noise, full yard, privacy. The list goes on.

[@edbrewington3]

I live in S Korea and living in a densely populated city like Seoul is AMAZING! For one, the transportation system is incredible. They have these small green buses that go into neighborhoods that are hard to reach and then these buses bring you to the main street to connect to bigger green buses that go longer distances within the city, or to the subway system that connects you to the whole city....I mean the furthest reaches that would be an hour or more by car. On top of that, they have high-speed rail that connects you to the whole country. They have KTX and SRT and basically, these two options can get you to Busan from Seoul in less than 2 hours (5-6 hour drive). The best part when you live in a densely populated city with apartment buildings is everything you need is a 2-5 minute walk. I mean groceries, street markets, hair shops, electronics, hardware stores, department stores, mechanics, interior design, coffee, Korean restaurants, and several other types of restaurants....it is so convenient. I feel the US is a poorer country. When I go back I realize how annoying it is to get in your car for anything you need, but S Korea has really become more technology advanced and the US has stood still. I've been in S Korea for over 20 years now and I really like it.

[@diegoflores9237]

Apples to oranges. South Korea doesn't have the crime problem we do.....

[@edbrewington3]

@@diegoflores9237 I have replied twice and both times, my response was deleted. Why? I did not cuss or use any bad words.....all I said was that if the US provided healthcare, quality education, constant infrastructure, and enforce or regulate big business to protect the public, then crime would not be as bad. Can you tell me why that is being deleted, KZbin? I have traveled to 37 countries and I will tell you one thing......the US does NOT take care of its people. It's all about profits over the welfare of the public and these wealthy donors, corporations, and Wall Street own the govt. They distract us on cultural issues, making us fight, when in fact, they are creating policies that heavily favor them. The public is left to fight for survival and that is the reality of the United States.

[@housekeepah]

Very good video. You have a way of really hitting the point, keep up the good work!

[@MarshallSteeves]

i live in Nob Hill in portland and walk the streets you showed every day. i get so much joy from getting to see all the different types is architecture daily and it saddens me that we don’t have more of this in the us available

[@mikelherrasti2697]

I’m never going to live in a suburb in the United States, those are so isolating, and they don’t have transit connection or bars/restaurants/shops within walking distance

[@nataliekhanyola5669]

Same.

[@RinoaL]

I really enjoyed this video.

[@scottfrazer4669]

Redando beach has a density of 10,000 people per square mile which is a little more than the city I live in. That level of density is indeed hard to maintain with car dependent lifestyles. We really need to come to terms with the fact that people need to start changing their transportation habits and the built environment needs to support that! Great video keep it up!!!

[@TimothyCHenderson]

The weird reality is that as suburban sprawl continues, these "low density" areas become more and more busy as traffic increases to the point of congestion. Then they start building more transit oriented infrastructure to help deal with the traffic which then brings in the odd apartment or condo which increases the need for better transit and the cycle continues. Building density from the beginning along with the transit infrastructure to go with it makes way more sense and would be much cheaper than retrofitting it later. It's very costly and disruptive to solve these transit issues after they've been baked into their communities.

[@Demopans5990]

Seen it with Flushing. 2010s: fair amount of people, technically driveable but even back then, you're better off not. 2020s: loads more people from the new apartment construction going on. The city decided it would be a better idea to widen the sidewalks because Flushing, NY was pretty walkable to begin with, and the existing sidewalks weren't going to fit that many people in a mini NYC. Since the roads are now narrower, the main arterials got turned into bus and truck only roads. Now Flushing has more life than most of Manhattan

[@dl6059]

100% agree with you Thomas.

[@norwegianblue2017]

I love living in my suburb in southern California. Most of the houses are 50-100 years old and it has a ton of character. There is a small main drag with bars, restaurants and such and nearby small-scale grocery stores. All my life I lived in condos and townhomes. Having elbow room and a real back yard is infinitely better. I also know and appreciate my neighbors better. Yes, there are terrible, soulless suburbs out there, but the same is true of urban living.

[@yoqiu_]

Cities, like Portland, used to have electric trolley lines that ran through neighborhoods

[@forpdrop3793]

Amazing video. The begging part with the save Scottsdale actually made me mad. Those people have no idea what they are sayings its so infuriating

[@DaltonHBrown]

Ironically, building vertically would allow for many new homes AND 50% parkland/green space.

[@cs0345]

They attract poor people from the hoods who will increase the crime rates

[@StardustMonkey]

Still, we need to address the elephant in the room and that is that housing cost way more to build than it used to because we don’t have enough skilled labor if we were to suddenly try to build a bunch of projects, we would still be looking at $400-$500 per square foot with very expensive land costs. Also, we are looking at very expensive cost of financing that does not need to exist. We don’t need private mortgage companies we could totally do public construction credit unions that fund the desired types of projects. Or like Jains and have nearest zero interest rates for people who actually live in their home and are not investors

[@Bustermachine]

The thing is, if you go on a housing boom, you create demand for more people to enter the labor market to do these jobs. There are certainly specialized tasks that require skilled craftsmen and carpenters, but there are methods to plan around those labor shortages to make sure you get the best value per man hour. Also, the limited units are what's driving the exorbitant land prices. Satisfying demand will help to depress real estate values. Which is the real thing that's got people fighting densification as they view the real estate their home sits on as money already in the bank. Thus government policies that might reduce that value are perceived as 'stealing'.

[@StardustMonkey]

@@Bustermachine but there is a catch… in order for those affordable projects to be feasible developers need to spend 3-7 years attaining entitlements… so you need to spend a lot of capital committed to projects that currently won’t pencil out to make profit hoping for future drops in cost… so instead a small amount of luxury gets made and labor and materials remains geared toward luxury prices… we need public involvement the market won’t give us what we need on this issue

[@Novusod]

The reason Venice Beach lost population in the period between 1960 to 2020 is because back in the day the famous "Red car" streetcar used to run all the way to Venice beach. They ripped that out in the early 1960s. After it was ripped out the city could no longer support its' previous density that existed in 1960. Working class people who used the streetcar to get to work had to move away.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

That was exactly what the rich NIMBYs want: drive our working class people and keep the land all to themselves.

[@matko000]

Amazing dive and explanation. Well done.

[@MidnightBreezey]

Suburbanists: Our suburbs are full! Also suburbanists: Son, you're 20 years old. Why haven't you moved out yet?

[@grahamturner2640]

I wonder what road diet projects are even in the works for the valley.

[@adamsrankings8860]

thank you for making these videos

[@jkbc]

That's why WFH is still a good idea so that people wont have to be huddle around in a city and living in a crowded densely populated city. There are so much empty lands in the US.

[@shraka]

I mean, density is great and all but you really need to build the PT first.

[@pavld335]

Great video! I can't believe that video from Scottsdale is real. Wtf.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

Wait until you read about the nutjobs from nearby Gilbert.

[@gyropp]

You sound like Chubbyemu in a good way. Great video, going through the actual map and street view of the area helps explain the issue a lot

[@stephenpowstinger733]

I’m in Florida but we share many of the same issues and noisy NIMBY groups. Many of these people only recently moved in and now want to close communities down to new arrivals.

[@nicholasthompson7690]

it's disgusting. same thing happening to my area in NY. Why I left in March 22. I'll NEVER move back.

[@Peaceloveharmonyroads]

I’m 50 seconds in and my brain has melted completely Edit: At 2:10 I can’t tell if NBC is siding with this politician or revealing his stupidity, I’m a leftist who watches MSNBC and if they’re actually supporting this dude I’m quite dissapointed in them

[@dreadhead5719]

dont watch NBC regardless, theyre all funded by blackrock and vanguard

[@pavld335]

NBC News is different from MSNBC. But sadly, lots of leftist are also NIMBY's.

[@Peaceloveharmonyroads]

@@pavld335 I feel like NIMBY’s exist in both parties in large quantities. No party is perfect unfortunately

[@jackmerrill8424]

That’s their main tech reporter doing the interview, he’s a smart guy, I very much don’t think he’d personally believe that shit the guy is saying

[@Peaceloveharmonyroads]

@@jackmerrill8424 Ah thank goodness

[@josepheridu3322]

It is extremely convenient to be able to go to work at any time you want in your car, instead waiting when the public bus comes. Spending 1-2 hours in public transport for a 30 minute ride in a normal private car is a real advantage. It also is a kind of a piece of your house, you can store and carry stuff, etc. So cars have a huge price in cities, but the reason people choose them is that they are very convenient. Seeing transport as just a number of people to move is kind of dishonest because the places trains can go to are limited to fewer places you need to go. I do agree that California needs more high density housing, but cars are not going away because how convenient and comfortable and useful they are for most people.

[@randgrithr7387]

That's our american public transport, not the world round. Your perception is that a 30-minute car ride is convenient. Meanwhile a 20-minute bike ride in the Netherlands is considered "a bit out of the way." A train that's 10 seconds late in Japan is wholely unacceptable. Our system based solely around cars has left no room for alternatives. Literally. Mandatory parking minimums space things far apart. Highways form an impassable barrier. Zoning separates people's homes from the the businesses they need to survive. You don't have any perspective other than America, so of course the car is the best option when no alternatives are allowed to be viable.

[@williamchristy9463]

@@randgrithr7387 The Netherlands, conveniently, is 23,000% smaller than the US.

[@josepheridu3322]

@@randgrithr7387 Netherlands outside of a few historical cities is very car centric, so is Germany. Only advantage of those countries is widespread public transport, but most people over 50k / yr just own a car. I do agree zoning is a problem, but observe that people who hate cars also want zoning for walkable cities and stuff. So they don't want the problem of zoning to go away, they want full control of the zone... it is like giving more money to a government that uses the money bad.

[@vitas_samulev]

I don't understand what you are saying 😀 car centric only north America. That's it. Europe is not car centric. You can t live in N America without car. It's that simple

[@josepheridu3322]

@@vitas_samulev It seems Europeans that earn over 50k love to use private cars: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_vehicles_per_capita Europe does have better public transport, but people who travel to work simply choose to use cars if they can afford them in Europe.

[@MassiveChetBakerFan]

Great video.

[@paniclogic5109]

I love your videos. Keep it up!

[@interstellarphred]

A metro, is not "heavy rail" it is a high capacity light rail. the only thing that is "heavy" is the national railway network and the rolling stock compatible to run on it.

[@shawng8613]

Not true in the US, but it is a common misunderstanding of terminology.

[@interstellarphred]

@@shawng8613 "light rail" was a branding for tram or trolley that stuck in their craw to state. The Cleveland rail transit lines demonstrate how awkward it is.

[@GoneZombie]

Oh my god, thank you for talking about flow rates in lanes instead of just how many people can physically fit at a single point in time like the meme. Those two things are obviously related, but the meme is a strawman, since space for cars can still be more efficient, even though cars are less dense, as long as cars can move faster than bikes (which they can). The real point that should be made is that they are less efficient *anyway.* I just really hate seeing that meme everywhere lol

[@yungrichnbroke5199]

It’s huge and just metropilled me. I wish we could have Yamanote Line style crisscrossing everywhere.

[@jamesphillips2285]

Actually cars get less dense as speeds increase. That is why some motorways in the UK lower the speed limit during peak times. Not included in this video was the troughput of a 3.5m bike lane: about 12,000people/direction.hour. A single cycle track can move as may people as a 6 lane freeway.

[@forrest8482]

Great video!

[@user-vo9wd6tx6c]

Good work. Only thing I'd add is something about zoning. I live in a tiny town, but since almost all of it is pre-WWII, I can access most of what I need in a 4 block, walkable radius.

[@duanerackham9567]

See how this guy immediatly went tot the "Bootstrap" narrative. Then said "Everyone deserves a place to live, the question is WHERE". That is all you need to hear who he is against moving to his area. NIMBY's are all dreaming of the 50's and its obvious why.

[@shraka]

"Let me just put this red mark on the map. Now NEW people can live on the other side of this line I've drawn."

[@williamchristy9463]

The question really is "But where" though. Obviously, people can't all live in one space-- and it's incredibly difficult to just continuously build onto buildings to allow people to live atop each other.

[@maumor2]

LOL that guy from Redondo Beach "low and middle income people deserve a place to live but keep them far away" (but not hat far away, we need them as cheap labor) We are at a point were NIMBYs have combined with SOPMHAIMs (Stop other people moving here after I moved) 😐

[@ryanevans2655]

Your point on traffic being much worse & inconvenient in low-density suburba than in Downtown PHX resonates with me too. I notice it in Tulsa: the traffic in core, older neighborhoods (while still SFH- and auto-dominated) feels drastically less congested and impairing than the sprawl zone and suburbs.

[@blifx]

man i think about chinese cities and how the small cities are like 2 million and how they're not "full" at all. so the soviet apartment complex mindset is just totally wrong

[@davidboeger6766]

I always find it odd when people use Soviet apartment complexes as a bad example. I feel like a lot of that is the result of WWII sentiment, and to some extent propaganda. I feel like the apartment blocks themselves aren't that bad as structures. Most of the negatives people think of are symptoms of other societal and governmental issues. Functionally, those apartment blocks aren't all that different from what you see in places like Singapore, and those don't have the same negative association.

[@alexanderboulton2123]

"It's already full" means "it's already full...of the types of houses (and people) that we want here."

[@GurHaenouasHazourem]

Excellent, Thomas! This is URGENT

[@brianh9358]

Most suburbs start having issues after the maintenance costs of the infrastructure start to kick in and they find that their tax revenues can't cover what needs to be maintained. They are too spread out and have far too much parking and pavement. The area where sewer, water, and electric infrastructure needs to be maintained is also spread out.

[@davidboeger6766]

Ironically, building codes also seem to become a problem within a few years of building suburbs. We bought a small 1970s home on a small lot in 2020. It was listed as an "attached SFH", basically half of a duplex registered as 2 separate lots. When we decided to install HVAC, it was literally impossible to meet the latest building codes because our lot size simply isn't big enough for all the reliefs and well depths required. The city ended up approving it anyway because nobody else in our area applies for permits anyway, precisely because the permitting requirements are so onerous. If they keep updating the building codes to require less density, then the old suburbs just keep becoming obsolete like cell phones. Their claim is always that the building codes are updated for safety, and in some cases that is very true, but some of the things were ridiculous, like needing a 5x5x5 cubic foot dry well with 5 feet of relief on each side for condensate disposal, which on our modern mini-split is like a few drops after hours of heavy usage. Our back yard where we would dig it is only like 5 feet deep and we use that area for gardening and seating and such.

[@fatviscount6562]

Would it be nice if Redondo Beach has heavy rail? Actually heavy rail has served the city since 1995--28 years before you published this video. Too bad that (1) the C Line station lacks a network of feeder buses to local jobs and residences, and (2) the station sits a mile from a mall, rather than combining the two, as countries all over the world have done to develop transit hubs. Redondo Beach also has a bus to LAX Airport and Downtown Long Beach that runs every 20 minutes. It is especially disingenuous of the politician on your video to use the congestion red herring while ignoring billion-dollar transit infrastructure that's been running almost as long as he's been alive. NIMBYs are usually not just entitled selfish people, but ignorant.