Welcome! This channel is focused on the field of urban planning. As a planner myself, I often find many individuals asking me what this field of study is. The purpose of this channel is to answer those questions about planning, as well as explore topics related to planning.
I was listening to this with my left headphone thing off so I could only hear the right side. You could imagine how confused I was, waiting for someone to talk. I had to replay the video lol.
What is Causing this is Euclidean Zoning and the 1922 Standard State Zoning Enabling Act (SZEA). This was put in place by the US chambers of Commerce Secretary at the time . The current Secretary Gina M. Raimondo and her committee is the ones we must advocate for changing the single family centric zoning nationally
@@junito2899 so people that look like you and me don’t create world changing technologies,build wealth,and save other people of color from the clutches of Anglo American bigotry & tyranny.
Honestly, I was messing around with sound settings previous to watching this and had just one ear in to listen to the room around at the same time, and got confused as hell, like bro, you're not the beatles, stop panning ur sound lol
👍. Thought your Vid was a Good Beginning on a Really Interesting Social/ Economic And Cultural Discussion On City Planning. But.... “ Room “ in between EXISTING CITIES? For Better Planned Ones? ZERO. AND NEWER planned areas to be developed?- seems same old Human Frailties And Ignorance will always fallow. But watching your follow up vids- then will decide to Share or Sob. God Bless.
First, I really believe that "comfortable distance" is extremely short...distance to a storefront in a driving rain, for example. Second, when I arrive at the "Stop" for my mass transit vehicle and leg of the journey, I'm once again left to the elements in too many cases. I suggest the mass transit pickup points need to be as comfortable and useful as waiting inside a large convenience store, coffee shop, retail mall, etc, with seats or browsing(shopping) options. The last mile vehicle should pickup and drop off at or extremely near the end of my driveway, which would truly demand a fixed route with predictable pickup times, 24/7. Make my ride truly a possession...something I can count on, like my car being just a short sprint in that driving rain, and my only inconvenience was dropping my keys before entering my vehicles protective cabin. Why would you expect me to give up this convenience to wait in the sun, rain, snow, splashing of passing vehicles, long waits, inconvenient route times, etc., etc., etc. ? Why? To save the planet? I'm not that generous, or needy. I worked to make sure I would never be that needy. Now, build a system that makes me think I have my own personal driver. Then I'll gladly get on board, and pay a healthy sum to do so.
I'm an urban planner too and totally agree that there is often limited appreciation for the enormous scope and responsibility of planners. It's not an easy job - great video! 👌
Urban sprawl isn't fine. Up until the invention of the car cities were dense, walkable, and relied heavily on public transportation. Back then if you wanted space you would go live out in the country, for some reason developers began building country-style single family homes within major urban areas and they are a very bad use of space. They are also less efficient with energy, water, and money. Urban sprawl costs the US economy 1 trillion dollars every year because the land is being used so inefficiently. We don't have to live like sardines, building denser doesn't mean everywhere is going to be like Tokyo or Mumbai, we could simply build similar to how we did before cars became a thing, where town homes and apartment complexes near street car lines and bus routes were the more common way of living, and where everything you needed was within a 5 minute walk from your house. It's a much better use of space and much better for the economy and environment.
@@Calikid331 Urban sprawl is good up to a certain point. The problem is overpopulation. People have the right to have space in urban areas and have a private garden. I don’t care about your typical talking points. Oh and just because things where this way or that way doesn’t mean it should still be like this. It’s called evolution and progress. We’re not going back to the 19th century.
@@Calikid331 What is Causing this is Euclidean Zoning and the 1922 Standard State Zoning Enabling Act (SZEA). This was put in place by the US chambers of Commerce Secretary at the time . The current Secretary Gina M. Raimondo and her committee is the ones we must advocate for changing the single family centric zoning nationally
Planning is important to provide the right balance of land uses. This needs to be accomplished with citizen participation and robust public education. That said, the one essential but almost everywhere ignored is the most efficient and equitable approaches to raising revenue to pay for public goods and services. Economic theory tells us that in theory all taxation of property improvements ought to be eliminated. Our buildings are depreciating assets. The imposition of an annual property tax on the depreciated value of a building equates to a sales tax imposed year after year after year. If this is rational, then communities ought to tax the depreciated value of all other forms of tangible assets (e.g., our automobiles, our computers, our telephones, our lawn mowers, our refrigerators, etc. etc. etc.). This is clearly irrational. A very different argument exists regarding the parcels of land on which our buildings are constructed. Land parcels are not a depreciating asset. Moreover, the value of a location has everything to do with the quality of public goods and services brought to the location and nothing to do with what the individual owner does or does not do to improve the location. The optimum public charge (or tax) to the owner is the potential annual rental value of the location as determined by market forces. By making the above change in how property is taxed, land in our cities would be brought to its highest, best use. Land prices would fall to levels that encourage the construction of residential, commercial and other buildings and discourages the hoarding of locations and speculation in land that causes development to sprawl outward in search of less costly locations. For more insight into the role of tax policy on the health of cities, search on: site value taxation, land value taxation, land value capture, or land value return
@@urbanistgod Okay but a couple or small family doesn’t need that much space. Sprawl creates a major issue of transportation to essential locations for us non- drivers.
@@urbanistgod Well that depends on what you’re idea of a modest family home looks like. To some people that’s living in a 2000+ sqft home with multiple acres of land. I’m not saying cram 3-4 people in a shoe box apartment but these suburban houses keep getting bigger and bigger every decade and it’s kinda getting out of control. There needs to be some kind of limit.
