Rural Urban Divide, Millennial Lifestyles & City of the Future

User Forum Topic
Submitted by FlyerInHi on February 8, 2017 - 1:43pm

Aren't we lucky to live in a desirable top 10 city that is growing in population and diversity? It must suck to live stagnant or dying towns.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016...

How will millennials drive the future of real estate?
I find it interesting that the Internet (by spreading information so fast and wide) is causing people to want to live in "cool" places causing more demand for the largest metros.

It's the reverse of "live in a small village and work remotely" prediction. Sure, some people are doing that; even digital nomads cluster in certain areas of the world (Bogota, Chiang Mai, Prague, etc.)
https://nomadlist.com/

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 5, 2019 - 10:03am.

It also makes perfect sense to require that parking spaces be sold separately from condo units. So the city finally wised up. People are so slow to change.... we would be so much farther along and well ahead of other metros, if only people had wised up 30 years ago. I believe it’s always better to change sooner than later.

Submitted by The-Shoveler on March 5, 2019 - 10:16am.

To be honest I would not buy into something like this

Seems more low income project's type housing.

But maybe I am wrong.

Most people in SoCal at least want to have a car IMO.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 5, 2019 - 4:58pm.

The-Shoveler wrote:
To be honest I would not buy into something like this

Seems more low income project's type housing.

But maybe I am wrong.

Most people in SoCal at least want to have a car IMO.

Ok. More for people like me. I’m glad that people like me can now what we want. You can have your suburb and people like me can have our city. I don’t like government forcing urban planning on people.

Submitted by Myriad on March 7, 2019 - 11:00am.

FlyerInHi wrote:
Finally, the city of San Diego is allowing development without parking. About time.

This policy might work for downtown and areas near DT where people can get to everything without driving. However, for neighborhoods in the suburbs, this will be a shitshow for a few years. Most people will still have to have a car to get around within the neighborhoods, or if they work at a location with poor transit (most of SD).

I'm all for more public transit and higher density at the right locations, but SD's public transit infrastructure is weak, especially going East/West and within neighborhoods.

I live along the 56 corridor. The 56 is severely congested every day. Meanwhile, the city continues to plan to add thousands of units of housing along the corridor, with no plan for better transit. More lanes on the 56, that's planned for after 2030. Express lanes - nope, express buses to UTC/Torrey Pines/Sorrento Mesa - nope.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 7, 2019 - 12:37pm.

The 56 is not severely congested.

It’s a chicken and egg issue. But financial wise, you need density first and transit later. Because without density, there is no revenue stream for public transit.

Submitted by The-Shoveler on March 7, 2019 - 12:52pm.

You can get an uber/lyft in the burbs too,

I think the main thing is they need more public transit.

They wasted so much money on the CA-HSR project, but does any funding go to getting more trains to the burbs LOL.

The politicians up north etc.. are way out of wack with how the real people with real jobs and real families really live.

Give me a break.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 7, 2019 - 1:45pm.

I think we should privatize the highways and use the funds for public transit.
Private corporations will run the highways better than caltrans

Submitted by The-Shoveler on March 7, 2019 - 4:23pm.

Just make sure everywhere you have a suburb that has a new or existing freeway, it gets a rail line.

No "just the city" thing.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 8, 2019 - 10:08am.

No. The American transit model is all wrong. Everywhere else in the world is in the city only.

People think SF has good transit. But it’s shit compared to world class cities.

Maybe let the invisible hand work its magic. Privatize all infrastructure and the investments will naturally flow to where there is density and economies of scale.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on June 17, 2019 - 1:52pm.

Here’s a NYT piece arguing that Americans need more neighbors.
The least we could so is upzone lots and allow merging of lots for multi family housing. Also mix commercial and residential.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes...

Submitted by FlyerInHi on August 12, 2019 - 1:14pm.

FutureFuture

So a developer is planning a city of the future in Vegas, the first in USA.
It's not going to happen. In America, we will have nothing but incremental urban gentrification and more suburban sprawl. We will see.

https://news3lv.com/news/local/company-p...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.