It’s more complicated than just diversifying the businesses. It’s upper middle class vs everyone below them. Families can’t live in a one bedroom, one bath. People who cook the affordable, cultural food can’t afford to keep a restaurant in the city. Right now in Seattle, it’s even too expensive to live 45 minutes out for the service industry. We have to rethink who the city is for. Vibrancy comes with all types of people, do the techy people even really want to live there after the initial shininess since it’s so sterile? Not sure, would love to see some studies on it. If you want a quiet, boring, rich place where it’s “hard to find good help,” go the techy city route. It’s like trying to have fun and go drinking on a Microsoft campus.
That is a result of cities deciding to only build large family dwellings in the suburbs and keeping urban apartments small. That really does need to change.
I think that’s one piece of the puzzle, but affordable areas is another. You have to also have great infrastructure to back it up like trains, light rail, etc. if you’re going to have it be crazy expensive. Greedy developers and short-sighted politicians that are bought by the greedy developers have messed up quite a few cities.
As families leave city population goes down, which in turn means less people in the cities, which mean “less need” to develop transit. It’s a vicious cycle that we need to break.
So you meet new people? Are there different types of bars and do you ship people in? I can’t even imagine the type of bubble that would be. Not my thing but you do you.
Absolutely it’s almost next to impossible to find a 3-4 bedroom unit in the city. Somehow cities and developers have forgotten that cities need families.
Instead urban sprawl is kicking in amd families are leaving cities.
It’s more complicated than just diversifying the businesses. It’s upper middle class vs everyone below them. Families can’t live in a one bedroom, one bath. People who cook the affordable, cultural food can’t afford to keep a restaurant in the city. Right now in Seattle, it’s even too expensive to live 45 minutes out for the service industry. We have to rethink who the city is for. Vibrancy comes with all types of people, do the techy people even really want to live there after the initial shininess since it’s so sterile? Not sure, would love to see some studies on it. If you want a quiet, boring, rich place where it’s “hard to find good help,” go the techy city route. It’s like trying to have fun and go drinking on a Microsoft campus.
That is a result of cities deciding to only build large family dwellings in the suburbs and keeping urban apartments small. That really does need to change.
I think that’s one piece of the puzzle, but affordable areas is another. You have to also have great infrastructure to back it up like trains, light rail, etc. if you’re going to have it be crazy expensive. Greedy developers and short-sighted politicians that are bought by the greedy developers have messed up quite a few cities.
As families leave city population goes down, which in turn means less people in the cities, which mean “less need” to develop transit. It’s a vicious cycle that we need to break.
Buddy, you can definitely have fun and go drinking on a Microsoft campus, trust me.
So you meet new people? Are there different types of bars and do you ship people in? I can’t even imagine the type of bubble that would be. Not my thing but you do you.
Absolutely it’s almost next to impossible to find a 3-4 bedroom unit in the city. Somehow cities and developers have forgotten that cities need families.
Instead urban sprawl is kicking in amd families are leaving cities.