Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Liberalizing Cities
From The Ground Up
Whoever is putting together this petition, please let Market Urbanism readers know how to sign the petition. Gowanus Lounge: Carroll Gardens Rumor Mill: “Pro-Development” Petition?
Somebody tell the mob, there’s a new prohibition in town: From the New York Sun: 4 A.M. Last Calls Could Be Headed The Way of Smoky Bars Although they have no authority to mandate hours, Community Boards have tightened their grip on late night establishments. Of course, they claim to be protecting the neighbors: “In our neighborhoods, most people don’t want to live next to a nightlife establishment.” Yet, why did those people choose to live in the noisy, trendy areas of Manhattan? If this trend continues, could we expect underground speakeasies to open midnights; driving business away from the legitimate establishments? I would have no reservations about patronizing such a place. There’s quite a discussion here: Curbed: Drying of NYC
I favor Bob Poole’s solution: “The longer-term solution is to scrap the 20th-century tax-and-grant system in favor of universal tolling, managed by each state’s Department of Transportation and private toll companies.” Furthermore, get the federal government out of the business of subsidizing highways altogether and allow the states to privatize them. It would shift the cost closer to home and drastically reduce pork. More: Greg Mankiw’s Blog: Bad News for the Pigou Club
An interesting post discussing the economics of why people decide to pay high rents to live in dense urban places. The High Cost of Trendy Living
Congestion pricing links: portfolio.com: Why Congestion Pricing Died wsj poll suggests “clearway”, “freeflow”, and others: Why Not ‘FreeFlow’? A Buzzwatch Makeover for NYC’s Failed Traffic Plan Trendczar: Congested Thinking knowledgeproblem.com: EZ-Zone? FreeFlow? Would congestion pricing by another name, smell sweeter? streetsblog Take the poll.
The Antiplanner discusses how well-intentioned agencies become wasteful government-planning bureaucracies. The mal-investment in our socialist highway system and the resulting congestion, pollution, disrepair, and sprawl come to mind. Using smart growth, modern day planners are trying to correct the lack of foresight of the planners and politicians of past generations who brought us the sprawl and congestion in the first place. However, with the lack of signals the market give us, it took several generations to recognize we had been going the wrong direction. We won’t know for another generation or two which wrong road modern planners are sending us down. Even if it’s unlikely we can privatize everything overnight, by introducing market solutions to our highway/transit systems, we can begin to make better decisions for the long run. Politicians need to welcome the ideas of tolling and privatization and stop pandering to the automobile-reliant voters.
Not directly speaking about urbanism, but the same ideas can be applied to green developers, and even developers in general. ‘“You serve people by making things people want.” And if people want pollution-free power, the free-market can deliver it.’ Watch here.
Nearby residents want to stall Columbus Village from being their Upper West Side neighbor. The myth that dense development is bad for the environment continues… Maybe high-priced attorneys help propagate these myths at the expense of the environment and supply of housing for the sake of their clients’ Legal Plunder. GlobeSt: Resident Files Suit Seeking Environmental Review
Socialized transportation and government land planning of the past generations have put an unintended burden on future generations. Trendczar, Jonathan Miller explains how the lifestyle of sprawl is becoming less economical for individuals and government: Ending the Free Ride
Wall Street Journal Blog: Are McMansions Making Some Americans Unhappy?
