Row Houses in Queens

[george conklin]

The New York Times is writing about what appears to be a nice neighborhood
(visually) in Queens, near Kennedy Airport, Census Track No. 228.

It is a neighborhood of the type Smart Growth like to push because close
living, the theory goes, makes people know each other.

Here is what the article says,

Despite the tightness that comes from living side by side in mostly narrow
two-story homes, people largely keep to themselves. Few ever know for
certain that neighbors are at risk of losing their homes. Departures happen
quickly, mysteriously...."

Just like NYC in general, folks. You can't fool all the people all the time
about the so-called "benefits" of tight living quarters.

[Pat]

Post by george conklin
The New York Times is writing about what appears to be a nice neighborhood
(visually) in Queens, near Kennedy Airport, Census Track No. 228.
It is a neighborhood of the type Smart Growth like to push because close
living, the theory goes, makes people know each other.
Here is what the article says,
Despite the tightness that comes from living side by side in mostly narrow
two-story homes, people largely keep to themselves. Few ever know for
certain that neighbors are at risk of losing their homes. Departures happen
quickly, mysteriously...."
Just like NYC in general, folks.  You can't fool all the people all the time
about the so-called "benefits" of tight living quarters.

In the design of multi-family, that is taken into account. For
seniors you intentionally undersize units, put in common laundry, etc.
to pull people out of their units into common space for
socialization. For family projects we intentionally separate people
with separate entrances, little common space, laundry in the unit,
etc. because people don't want to see other people when they get home
from work -- they want to cocoon, eat dinner, and watch Wheel-of-
Fortune.

[george conklin]

Post by george conklin
The New York Times is writing about what appears to be a nice neighborhood
(visually) in Queens, near Kennedy Airport, Census Track No. 228.
It is a neighborhood of the type Smart Growth like to push because close
living, the theory goes, makes people know each other.
Here is what the article says,
Despite the tightness that comes from living side by side in mostly narrow
two-story homes, people largely keep to themselves. Few ever know for
certain that neighbors are at risk of losing their homes. Departures happen
quickly, mysteriously...."
Just like NYC in general, folks. You can't fool all the people all the
time
about the so-called "benefits" of tight living quarters.

In the design of multi-family, that is taken into account. For
seniors you intentionally undersize units, put in common laundry, etc.
to pull people out of their units into common space for
socialization. For family projects we intentionally separate people
with separate entrances, little common space, laundry in the unit,
etc. because people don't want to see other people when they get home
from work -- they want to cocoon, eat dinner, and watch Wheel-of-
Fortune.

---

Oh sure. My mother had the common laundry, etc. It changed nothing.
You still did not really know the person who lived next door. No reason.
The experiments done when Kitty Genovese was killed in NYC and many others
done after that showed that people in cities ignore each other to the
largest degree possible.

[drydem]

Post by george conklin
The New York Times is writing about what appears to be a nice neighborhood
(visually) in Queens, near Kennedy Airport, Census Track No. 228.
It is a neighborhood of the type Smart Growth like to push because close
living, the theory goes, makes people know each other.
Here is what the article says,
Despite the tightness that comes from living side by side in mostly narrow
two-story homes, people largely keep to themselves. Few ever know for
certain that neighbors are at risk of losing their homes. Departures happen
quickly, mysteriously...."
Just like NYC in general, folks.  You can't fool all the people all the time
about the so-called "benefits" of tight living quarters.

Just because people live very close together, i.e. an apartment
building
or townhome community, doesn't mean residents there will socialize.
The key to creating a community is to have relationship focal points
that draws residents together in some common interest - this can
be problematic in that numbers do count - there is a balancing
act that needs to be observe to avoid serving only a few or
without encourage new smaller relationships of which one that
may expand into a much large interest group withing the community.


Urban planning try to express or support community relationship
focal points by creating physical places/areas/regions which foster
or positively reinforce community relationship. However, with an
existing community (with pre-existing residents) it is not as simple
as "build it and they will come." Urban planners need to understand
the needs of the community and understand what are the strongest
relationship focal points in the community before they can even
start to plan. A Master Plan (if it exist) can sometimes can
indicate possible relationships to examine.

[1100GS_rider]

Post by drydem
Urban planning try to express or support community relationship
focal points by creating physical places/areas/regions which foster
or positively reinforce community relationship. However, with an
existing community (with pre-existing residents) it is not as simple
as "build it and they will come." Urban planners need to understand
the needs of the community and understand what are the strongest
relationship focal points in the community before they can even
start to plan. A Master Plan (if it exist) can sometimes can
indicate possible relationships to examine.

This is maybe the vaguest paragraph I have read this year. If you have
any real idea of how to create a community where none exists, it doesn't
show up here.

[george conklin]

Post by 1100GS_rider

Post by drydem
Urban planning try to express or support community relationship
focal points by creating physical places/areas/regions which foster
or positively reinforce community relationship. However, with an
existing community (with pre-existing residents) it is not as simple
as "build it and they will come." Urban planners need to understand
the needs of the community and understand what are the strongest
relationship focal points in the community before they can even
start to plan. A Master Plan (if it exist) can sometimes can
indicate possible relationships to examine.

This is maybe the vaguest paragraph I have read this year. If you have
any real idea of how to create a community where none exists, it doesn't
show up here.

It goes beyond vague to empty.

[drydem]

Post by drydem
Urban planning try to express or support community relationship
focal points by creating physical places/areas/regions which foster
or positively reinforce community  relationship. However, with an
existing community (with pre-existing residents) it is not as simple
as "build it and they will come."  Urban planners need to understand
the needs of the community and understand what are the strongest
relationship focal points in the community before they can even
start to plan. A  Master Plan (if it exist)  can sometimes can
indicate possible relationships to examine.

This is maybe the vaguest paragraph I have read this year.  If you have
any real idea of how to create a community where none exists, it doesn't
show up here.

   It goes beyond vague to empty.

My local urban planner sometimes talks about
creating spaces which will fosters and creates a sense of
community.
However, I am incline to believe that it is
a sense of community that fosters and creates the space.

[george conklin]

Post by george conklin

Post by drydem
Urban planning try to express or support community relationship
focal points by creating physical places/areas/regions which foster
or positively reinforce community relationship. However, with an
existing community (with pre-existing residents) it is not as simple
as "build it and they will come." Urban planners need to understand
the needs of the community and understand what are the strongest
relationship focal points in the community before they can even
start to plan. A Master Plan (if it exist) can sometimes can
indicate possible relationships to examine.

This is maybe the vaguest paragraph I have read this year. If you have
any real idea of how to create a community where none exists, it doesn't
show up here.

It goes beyond vague to empty.

My local urban planner sometimes talks about
creating spaces which will fosters and creates a sense of
community.
However, I am incline to believe that it is
a sense of community that fosters and creates the space.

---

Yes, you are right. Planners have it backwards.

[Pat]

Post by drydem

Post by drydem
Urban planning try to express or support community relationship
focal points by creating physical places/areas/regions which foster
or positively reinforce community  relationship. However, with an
existing community (with pre-existing residents) it is not as simple
as "build it and they will come."  Urban planners need to understand
the needs of the community and understand what are the strongest
relationship focal points in the community before they can even
start to plan. A  Master Plan (if it exist)  can sometimes can
indicate possible relationships to examine.

This is maybe the vaguest paragraph I have read this year.  If you have
any real idea of how to create a community where none exists, it doesn't
show up here.

   It goes beyond vague to empty.

My local urban planner sometimes talks about
     creating spaces which will fosters and creates a sense of
community.

Yes you are exactly right. They try to create a "sense of community"
instead of actually creating "a community". The difference is Epcot
"Main Street" v a real main street.

Post by drydem
However, I am incline to believe that it is
     a sense of community that fosters and creates the space.

[drydem]

Post by drydem
Urban planning try to express or support community relationship
focal points by creating physical places/areas/regions which foster
or positively reinforce community  relationship. However, with an
existing community (with pre-existing residents) it is not as simple
as "build it and they will come."  Urban planners need to understand
the needs of the community and understand what are the strongest
relationship focal points in the community before they can even
start to plan. A  Master Plan (if it exist)  can sometimes can
indicate possible relationships to examine.

This is maybe the vaguest paragraph I have read this year.  If you have
any real idea of how to create a community where none exists, it doesn't
show up here.

Yes.
It does beg the question doesn't it?

Sorry about that.
Maybe I'll try this again...

One thing I find is that minority/small special interest groups
within a community may lobby government planner that
they represent a larger community interest than they are
( politicks as usual?) . A special interest group might be
a local soccor club that wants more soccor fields or
a local skateboard group that wants a skateboard rink.
Both lobby the the government to build it - should the
government/planners say yes this is desireable?
Usually - there is a mandate in the Master plan indicate
things that the community could or should get, e.g.
a public library, and how land should be used, e.g.
group retirement homes or medical professional
buildings.

Other times transportation and urban planner are
influenced developer or landowners with special
financial and political connections to develop or zone land
a particular way ( even more politicks as usual?) even
though the surrounding community would be against
such an action. For example, the path of a highway
is re-routed to avoid destroying a strip mall owned
by a local politician.

Existing residents of a community may have multiple
diverse interest with no significant common community
relationship for a urban planner start from. so one
might see local communities against one another
during a re-zoning hearing.

Local government planners normally do have a mandate
to promote economic development ( more development
= higher property tax = more government revenue)
which doesn't alway put them on the side of the
existing residents. In some extreme cases,
politicians, developers, and planners conspire
to use eminent domain to force existing residents
off their lands . That is to say --there is always this
risk of a principal-agent problem with regards
to government/local urban planners in that they may
not alway represent or protect local residential
property owner's interest.

[1100GS_rider]

Post by drydem

Post by 1100GS_rider

Post by drydem
Urban planning try to express or support community relationship
focal points by creating physical places/areas/regions which foster
or positively reinforce community relationship. However, with an
existing community (with pre-existing residents) it is not as simple
as "build it and they will come." Urban planners need to understand
the needs of the community and understand what are the strongest
relationship focal points in the community before they can even
start to plan. A Master Plan (if it exist) can sometimes can
indicate possible relationships to examine.

This is maybe the vaguest paragraph I have read this year. If you have
any real idea of how to create a community where none exists, it doesn't
show up here.

Yes.
It does beg the question doesn't it?
Sorry about that.
Maybe I'll try this again...
One thing I find is that minority/small special interest groups
within a community may lobby government planner that
they represent a larger community interest than they are
( politicks as usual?) . A special interest group might be
a local soccor club that wants more soccor fields or
a local skateboard group that wants a skateboard rink.
Both lobby the the government to build it - should the
government/planners say yes this is desireable?
Usually - there is a mandate in the Master plan indicate
things that the community could or should get, e.g.
a public library, and how land should be used, e.g.
group retirement homes or medical professional
buildings.
Other times transportation and urban planner are
influenced developer or landowners with special
financial and political connections to develop or zone land
a particular way ( even more politicks as usual?) even
though the surrounding community would be against
such an action. For example, the path of a highway
is re-routed to avoid destroying a strip mall owned
by a local politician.
Existing residents of a community may have multiple
diverse interest with no significant common community
relationship for a urban planner start from. so one
might see local communities against one another
during a re-zoning hearing.
Local government planners normally do have a mandate
to promote economic development ( more development
= higher property tax = more government revenue)
which doesn't alway put them on the side of the
existing residents. In some extreme cases,
politicians, developers, and planners conspire
to use eminent domain to force existing residents
off their lands . That is to say --there is always this
risk of a principal-agent problem with regards
to government/local urban planners in that they may
not alway represent or protect local residential
property owner's interest.

I guess my original point was that I didn't expect to see any practical
way to create a community where none exists. There is no way to *make*
it happen - the old analogy to pushing on a string seems applicable.

[george conklin]

Post by 1100GS_rider

Post by drydem

Post by 1100GS_rider

Post by drydem
Urban planning try to express or support community relationship
focal points by creating physical places/areas/regions which foster
or positively reinforce community relationship. However, with an
existing community (with pre-existing residents) it is not as simple
as "build it and they will come." Urban planners need to understand
the needs of the community and understand what are the strongest
relationship focal points in the community before they can even
start to plan. A Master Plan (if it exist) can sometimes can
indicate possible relationships to examine.

This is maybe the vaguest paragraph I have read this year. If you have
any real idea of how to create a community where none exists, it doesn't
show up here.

Yes.
It does beg the question doesn't it?
Sorry about that.
Maybe I'll try this again...
One thing I find is that minority/small special interest groups
within a community may lobby government planner that
they represent a larger community interest than they are
( politicks as usual?) . A special interest group might be
a local soccor club that wants more soccor fields or
a local skateboard group that wants a skateboard rink.
Both lobby the the government to build it - should the
government/planners say yes this is desireable?
Usually - there is a mandate in the Master plan indicate
things that the community could or should get, e.g.
a public library, and how land should be used, e.g.
group retirement homes or medical professional
buildings.
Other times transportation and urban planner are
influenced developer or landowners with special
financial and political connections to develop or zone land
a particular way ( even more politicks as usual?) even
though the surrounding community would be against
such an action. For example, the path of a highway
is re-routed to avoid destroying a strip mall owned
by a local politician.
Existing residents of a community may have multiple
diverse interest with no significant common community
relationship for a urban planner start from. so one
might see local communities against one another
during a re-zoning hearing.
Local government planners normally do have a mandate
to promote economic development ( more development
= higher property tax = more government revenue)
which doesn't alway put them on the side of the
existing residents. In some extreme cases,
politicians, developers, and planners conspire
to use eminent domain to force existing residents
off their lands . That is to say --there is always this
risk of a principal-agent problem with regards
to government/local urban planners in that they may
not alway represent or protect local residential
property owner's interest.

I guess my original point was that I didn't expect to see any practical
way to create a community where none exists. There is no way to *make*
it happen - the old analogy to pushing on a string seems applicable.

The residents in the Bronx have the type of housing pushed by planners
today because it is supposed to support community. Row houses. Near your
neighbor. Density. Yet it fails to work. I might add some of the pictures
with that story make the housing appear to be quite nice even today. I
wonder why people are not buying it up.

[george conklin]

Post by george conklin
The New York Times is writing about what appears to be a nice neighborhood
(visually) in Queens, near Kennedy Airport, Census Track No. 228.
It is a neighborhood of the type Smart Growth like to push because close
living, the theory goes, makes people know each other.
Here is what the article says,
Despite the tightness that comes from living side by side in mostly narrow
two-story homes, people largely keep to themselves. Few ever know for
certain that neighbors are at risk of losing their homes. Departures happen
quickly, mysteriously...."
Just like NYC in general, folks. You can't fool all the people all the
time
about the so-called "benefits" of tight living quarters.

Just because people live very close together, i.e. an apartment
building
or townhome community, doesn't mean residents there will socialize.
The key to creating a community is to have relationship focal points
that draws residents together in some common interest - this can
be problematic in that numbers do count - there is a balancing
act that needs to be observe to avoid serving only a few or
without encourage new smaller relationships of which one that
may expand into a much large interest group withing the community.


Urban planning try to express or support community relationship
focal points by creating physical places/areas/regions which foster
or positively reinforce community relationship.

-----

Yah sure. Planners create nothing that has ever been shown to work
outside their own publicity tanks. Density, the main variable, always works
against social interaction.