the war on cars, not drugs

2.9K posts

the war on cars, not drugs

the war on cars, not drugs

@Bugs

Dilletante.

Sydney Entrou em Mart 2007
777 Seguindo318 Seguidores
the war on cars, not drugs retweetou
Matt Bedsole
Matt Bedsole@Matt_Bedsole·
Architecture is cool but the average Tokyo street has 5 of the ugliest buildings you've ever seen in your life, no street trees, about 100 power lines hanging 5 feet over your head, and it still embarrasses 99.9% of American streets as a place you actually want to spend time.
Matt Bedsole tweet media
English
13
32
251
11.5K
Save Neutral Bay Village
Save Neutral Bay Village@saveneutralbay·
Mosman’s reputation as a preserved harbourside enclave is under threat. As the NSW government’s aggressive housing density policies collide with Mosman’s “village” identity, here’s how its council plans to save it. smh.com.au/national/nsw/i…
English
19
0
1
9.5K
grok
grok@central01000011·
Sydney should have at most 5 LGAs
taipan168@taipan168

@saveneutralbay "Villages" shouldn't exist within a major global city. If you want to live in a "village", move to a regional area.

English
12
1
71
7K
the war on cars, not drugs retweetou
urbanist slop hq
urbanist slop hq@SlopHq·
the tomb was empty after three days because even jesus understood that sitting on prime real estate without building anything on it is a moral failure. he rose and LEFT. the man had better land use instincts than every surface parking lot owner in america
English
1
3
15
1.5K
the war on cars, not drugs
the war on cars, not drugs@Bugs·
@DrCameronMurray @michael_wiebe Mandatory low density overwhelms city transport capacity causing the city to reach an effective population limit faster than if density was unlimited. Remove the density limit and we can build more homes because there's more demand to live closer in than there is further out.
English
0
0
1
82
Cameron Murray
Cameron Murray@DrCameronMurray·
@michael_wiebe It is possible to limit density at every site but not limit the rate at which homes are built across all sites. You keep confusing density (dwellings per site area) and quantity (dwellings per period across all sites)
English
3
0
4
6.8K
Michael Wiebe
Michael Wiebe@michael_wiebe·
If you think that zoning is not a bottleneck, then you must also think that upzoning a parcel does not increase its land value (because upzoning doesn't add any option value). Is that what we see in practice?
Jack Seiden@thebeltwayagent

I’m genuinely a huge yimby but I’ve just become more convinced the movement has been so focused on zoning reform (which I 110% agree with) that they have missed that zoning is probably not the biggest bottleneck right now & even in a yimby paradise you’d build much less than people think, biggest issues in order are 1. Labor costs are through the roof 2. Financing projects & financing out of them & or buyers getting financing has gotten really expensive. 3. The combo of the already huge apartment boom in many cities in the 2010’s- early 2020’s plus demand shifting to the suburbs & exurbs have made what projects do pencil not necessarily be zoning issues per se, although you still get greenfield push back in the burbs/exurbs. 4. Probably urban zoning laws, again I’m all for upzoning I just don’t think it’s the bottleneck in the way it arguably was in the 2010’s.

English
3
2
48
3.6K
Cameron Murray
Cameron Murray@DrCameronMurray·
@SmartAssForReal Yes. It would be tricky. Though notice that the inherent argument here is that if you limit density you get fewer homes, but if you require it you also get fewer homes?
English
5
1
3
1.1K
Cameron Murray
Cameron Murray@DrCameronMurray·
I often wonder why YIMBYs don’t support minimum housing densities across all locations, which, by their logic, would accelerate new housing even more than just removing maximum housing densities where they apply.
English
28
2
30
13.1K
Urban Immerser
Urban Immerser@Urban_Immerser·
Yes. Even building "luxury" housing brings down prices.
Urban Immerser tweet media
Melbourne, Victoria 🇦🇺 English
1
0
5
110
the war on cars, not drugs retweetou
urbanist slop hq
urbanist slop hq@SlopHq·
four drinks in and i’m explaining land value tax to someone at the bar who asked me what i do for work. they asked if i’m in finance. i said no i’m in pain. the bartender cut me off from both the beer and the tax policy. fair
English
3
12
427
9.4K
the war on cars, not drugs
the war on cars, not drugs@Bugs·
@cmkusher Australia continues its widespread ban on adding new homes. Building enough homes is easy but first we have to legalise it.
English
0
0
0
19
Mad Dog
Mad Dog@mcsurfnut·
@peter_tulip I had the same problem today when my cup was full of water. I just needed a supply of more cups. (at no point did I consider turning the tap off)
English
4
1
29
829
Peter Tulip
Peter Tulip@peter_tulip·
Australia’s most successful politician, Peter Malinauskas was asked about national policy priorities “If I pick one area of policy that requires on-going sustained effort around the country it is undoubtedly housing... For me, it’s all in on housing” 1/3
English
18
1
42
7.8K
Cozeno
Cozeno@cozenom·
@SlopHq This falls apart for rural and marginal lands which gets taxed into oblivion; if you go by land value based on "improvements" on it and surrounding areas, then the land assessor suddenly becomes the most powerful guy in local governments and that breeds all kinds of corruption
English
3
0
1
582
urbanist slop hq
urbanist slop hq@SlopHq·
land value tax is the most elegant policy nobody talks about. tax the land, not the building. suddenly there’s no penalty for building up, no reward for sitting on an empty lot, and the parking crater becomes more expensive to maintain than the apartment building it’s been blocki
English
37
122
1.7K
36K
Cameron Murray
Cameron Murray@DrCameronMurray·
Does this chart of annual building approvals for a city show an upzoning success story? Can we tell by looking at it?
Cameron Murray tweet media
English
5
2
7
5K
Cameron Kusher
Cameron Kusher@cmkusher·
We've added a little more than the entire population of South Australia to the country over the past five years. Is that wise given how our housing and infrastructure delivery is going?
Cameron Kusher@cmkusher

Even with the pandemic, in the five years to September 2025, Australia's population has increased by 2,091,403 persons. I can't say that I believe we're building sufficient homes, roads, schools, hospital, public transport infrastructure etc to cater to that magnitude of population increase.

English
12
4
74
2.8K
the war on cars, not drugs
the war on cars, not drugs@Bugs·
@cmkusher We could try legalising adding housing wherever there’s a demand for it. Currently it’s illegal almost everywhere.
English
0
0
1
49
the war on cars, not drugs retweetou
Yoni Appelbaum
Yoni Appelbaum@YAppelbaum·
This is shaping up as the most consistent finding in housing studies: Building lots of luxury housing can reduce rents at the top of the market—but the people it helps most are renters struggling to afford even the least desirable units
Yoni Appelbaum tweet media
English
48
501
2.8K
359.8K
the war on cars, not drugs
the war on cars, not drugs@Bugs·
@SydneyYIMBY I live in a 10-storey apartment building with zero parking. There are many similar buildings in my neighbourhood. Car ownership per household is 33% in my neighbourhood.
English
0
0
0
9
Sydney YIMBY
Sydney YIMBY@SydneyYIMBY·
Audience member: “Development without parking does not work. Everyone that lives in an apartment building has cars. We have collected the data looking at the street.” Let us know in replies if you live in an apartment without a car, because we’re hearing you don’t exist.
English
2
0
7
317
Sydney YIMBY
Sydney YIMBY@SydneyYIMBY·
We’re at an event that’s being organised against Inner West Council’s changes to reduce parking spots in new developments. Rowdy crowd. Speakers were introduced, they mentioned car parks being converted to social housing (which they oppose) and an old mate yells “let us speak!”
Sydney YIMBY tweet media
English
5
6
40
3.5K
drsmithy
drsmithy@drsmithy·
@Bugs @wheelreinvent Never seen a YIMBY fighting to remove urban growth boundaries & restrictions on rural land. Either they just don’t think about it, or they realise it would make land cheaper.
English
1
0
0
31
Wheel reinventor
Wheel reinventor@wheelreinvent·
Yimbyism is ideologically weird because on one had it assumes total selfishness (redistribution won’t work, only boosting supply will) but on the other hand is reliant on selflessness (you should support more housing in your neighborhood even if you think it will make it worse)
English
11
4
26
2.9K
the war on cars, not drugs
the war on cars, not drugs@Bugs·
@wheelreinvent Increasing supply (of housing) can be a form of redistribution (of land). A majority in some (many?) neighbourhoods believe more housing in the neighbourhood is positive
English
0
0
2
92

Descobrir

@saveneutralbay @central01000011 @DrCameronMurray @michael_wiebe @SmartAssForReal @Urban_Immerser @cmkusher @elonmusk