Planning: general 🌇 Random Planning Thoughts (and Photos) Deserving No Thread Of Their Own

[Dan]

I asked another question to ChatGPT: "Write a pretentious progressive rock song about urban planning."

Verse 1:
In the concrete jungle where the skyscrapers grow
A symphony of steel, glass, and stone
But beneath the surface, a tale untold
Of a city in need, of a plan to unfold

Chorus:
We're the urban planners, the architects of dreams
With a vision for a better city, or so it seems
We'll sculpt the cityscape, a work of art
And bring to life, a brand new start

Verse 2:
The city that never sleeps, pulsing with life
Yet shadows lurk, in the alleys at night
Where the weary roam, lost in their strife
And the buildings reach, blocking the light

Chorus:
We're the urban planners, the architects of dreams
With a vision for a better city, or so it seems
We'll sculpt the cityscape, a work of art
And bring to life, a brand new start

Bridge:
With a measured touch, and a mindful eye
We'll design the streets, that reach up to the sky
Where the future meets, the past and the now
And the city will thrive, from the downtown to the outskirts

Chorus:
We're the urban planners, the architects of dreams
With a vision for a better city, or so it seems
We'll sculpt the cityscape, a work of art
And bring to life, a brand new start

Outro:
So listen to the city, as it whispers in the night
The stories of its people, in the shadows, out of sight
And in the morning light, as the sun begins to rise
A new city awaits, with a brighter future in its eyes.

Also, "Tell me a dad joke about Robert Moses."

Why did Robert Moses cross the road? To build a bridge, of course!

 

[Dan]

More ChatGPT, translating some arcane code text I found online into plain English.

"Translate the following into plain English at an 8th grade reading level: "Wireless telecommunications facilities that include towers are not permitted in residential districts with the exception of placement on any property with an institutional use (e.g., church, park, library, municipal/government, hospital, school, utility) located in these districts, or within a multi-family dwelling district. However, antennae attached to existing buildings or structures are permitted, as set forth herein. In applying for a permit in any residential district, the applicant must present substantial evidence as to why it is not technically feasible to locate in a more appropriate nonresidential zone. Once those efforts have been exhausted, a wireless telecommunications facility may be located in a residential district subject to the following purposes, requirements or conditions.""

"Wireless communication towers can't be built in residential areas unless they are on land used for things like churches, schools, hospitals, or government buildings. Antennas attached to existing buildings are allowed. If someone wants to build a tower in a residential area, they need to show that it can't be built somewhere else and meet some requirements if it is allowed."

 

[Planit]

Plain English.

 

[Dan]

More ChatGPT:

Translate the following into obtuse legalese: "Minimum front setback: 25 feet"

"The minimum frontal setback requirement shall be established at a distance of twenty-five linear feet."

 

[Maister]

More ChatGPT, translating some arcane code text I found online into plain English.

"Translate the following into plain English at an 8th grade reading level: "Wireless telecommunications facilities that include towers are not permitted in residential districts with the exception of placement on any property with an institutional use (e.g., church, park, library, municipal/government, hospital, school, utility) located in these districts, or within a multi-family dwelling district. However, antennae attached to existing buildings or structures are permitted, as set forth herein. In applying for a permit in any residential district, the applicant must present substantial evidence as to why it is not technically feasible to locate in a more appropriate nonresidential zone. Once those efforts have been exhausted, a wireless telecommunications facility may be located in a residential district subject to the following purposes, requirements or conditions.""

"Wireless communication towers can't be built in residential areas unless they are on land used for things like churches, schools, hospitals, or government buildings. Antennas attached to existing buildings are allowed. If someone wants to build a tower in a residential area, they need to show that it can't be built somewhere else and meet some requirements if it is allowed."

"some" requirements? Now I see why it was in legalese to begin with

 

[Dan]

I don't know if anyplace else is experiencing this, but downtown here, there's been an explosion in the number of barber shops specializing in fades. If there's an empty storefront, odds are it'll soon be filled by either a smoke shop (which I understand is a thing throughout the US) or a fade shop.

Here's two new fade shops that opened next door to each other.

Fade shops are innocuous uses, but it seems unusual that there's suddenly so many of them.

I've been reading that hipster and upscale "barbering" and "grooming" shops have been a growing trend in the US, but that's not what I've been seeing here.

 

[bribribike]

Fade shops are innocuous uses, but it seems unusual that there's suddenly so many of them.

I've been reading that hipster and upscale "barbering" and "grooming" shops have been a growing trend in the US, but that's not what I've been seeing here.

Could COVID-19 creating vacant commercial spaces be reducing the financial barrier to entry, and fade shops are able to enter neighborhoods where the demand is enough to warrant it, but couldn't financially operate previously?

 

[Dan]

Could COVID-19 creating vacant commercial spaces be reducing the financial barrier to entry, and fade shops are able to enter neighborhoods where the demand is enough to warrant it, but couldn't financially operate previously?

I don't even see where the demand would warrant so many shops, given the region's demographics.

I know the dropped rents are somewhat responsible for the smoke shop boom. Some of the smoke shops cater to the vaping crowd, but for the rest, it's 4:20 all the time. Weed is legal in New York, but there's only a couple of legal dispensaries open in the state; both in NYC. Supposedly the owners of the smoke and sticker shops have a pipe dream to roll up some sales before the legal dispensaries open, and the city and/or state becomes a buzz kill and cracks down on the unlicensed joints.

 

[Faust_Motel]

Wicked article about housing in my fair state is making its rounds through the planner world today:

https://lppapers.substack.com/p/lp44-how-vermonts-housing-crisis?r=1m9ob&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email (LP#44: How Vermont’s Housing Crisis Got So Bad)

 

[DVD]

Wicked article about housing in my fair state is making its rounds through the planner world today:

https://lppapers.substack.com/p/lp44-how-vermonts-housing-crisis?r=1m9ob&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email (LP#44: How Vermont’s Housing Crisis Got So Bad)

We're getting the same thing here. It's not so much an affordable housing problem (yes we have that too), but more of the fact we need 200,000 houses to handle all the people moving here. Of course it's all the fault of zoning taking too much time and no hard multi-family zoning so everyone has to go through the zoning process. I'll agree we have to reform our zoning process, but how about you deal with the finance problems that kill a lot of projects or the labor and supply chain issues. That and maybe don't put out total zoning preemption bills that make me question if there would be anything for me to do when the bill passes.

 

[Faust_Motel]

We're getting the same thing here. It's not so much an affordable housing problem (yes we have that too), but more of the fact we need 200,000 houses to handle all the people moving here. Of course it's all the fault of zoning taking too much time and no hard multi-family zoning so everyone has to go through the zoning process. I'll agree we have to reform our zoning process, but how about you deal with the finance problems that kill a lot of projects or the labor and supply chain issues. That and maybe don't put out total zoning preemption bills that make me question if there would be anything for me to do when the bill passes.

I think we'd have a lot to do if our preemption bill passed- most communities, with higher densities mandated and parking requirements severely limited would probably have to take a hard look at developing design standards that would achieve their goals- something that's long overdue in many of our communities. My state's been on that for a bit now as well: https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2023/02/07/vermont-zoning-great-neighborhoods (Vermont Is zoning For great neighborhoods)

 

[DVD]

I think we'd have a lot to do if our preemption bill passed- most communities, with higher densities mandated and parking requirements severely limited would probably have to take a hard look at developing design standards that would achieve their goals- something that's long overdue in many of our communities. My state's been on that for a bit now as well: https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2023/02/07/vermont-zoning-great-neighborhoods (Vermont Is zoning For great neighborhoods)

Gonna one up you. Our preemption bill removes design standards as well. You know, not part of public safety. Because zoning isn't about public safety.

 

[Faust_Motel]

Gonna one up you. Our preemption bill removes design standards as well. You know, not part of public safety. Because zoning isn't about public safety.

Oof. Ours removes "character of the area" appeals from designated downtowns and village centers (a good thing) but nobody's attacking objective design standards so far.

If zoning was only about public safety why have it at all? Just have engineering standards and building codes.

 

[DVD]

I try to remind people, you know that community next door that looks really nice. It's not because of money, it's because of design standards.

 

[Dan]

Our new PD is awesome! Just sayin'.

 

[mendelman]

Our new PD is awesome! Just sayin'.

 

[bureaucrat#3]

Oof. Ours removes "character of the area" appeals from designated downtowns and village centers (a good thing) but nobody's attacking objective design standards so far.

If zoning was only about public safety why have it at all? Just have engineering standards and building codes.

Does it affect Historic Districts or change existing standards for PUDS or other similar zones?

 

[Faust_Motel]

Does it affect Historic Districts or change existing standards for PUDS or other similar zones?

No. You can have all the design standards you want including historic preservation stds, you can have design review overlay districts, and all of that. But you can't reject multifamily in a predominantly single-family areas based on "character of the area"

 

[mendelman]

Be careful of the 'survivorship bias' trap.

Architecture and construction: Just as new buildings are being built every day and older structures are constantly torn down, the story of most civil and urban architecture involves a process of constant renewal, renovation, and revolution. Only the most (subjectively, but popularly determined) beautiful, most useful, and most structurally sound buildings survive from one generation to the next. This creates another selection effect where the ugliest and weakest buildings of history have long been eradicated from existence and thus the public view, and so it leaves the visible impression, seemingly correct but factually flawed, that all buildings in the past were both more beautiful and better built.

 

[michaelskis]

Our new PD is awesome! Just sayin'.

What makes him awesome? (I am looking to learn to be better)

 

[bureaucrat#3]

No. You can have all the design standards you want including historic preservation stds, you can have design review overlay districts, and all of that. But you can't reject multifamily in a predominantly single-family areas based on "character of the area"

Be careful of the 'survivorship bias' trap.

Architecture and construction: Just as new buildings are being built every day and older structures are constantly torn down, the story of most civil and urban architecture involves a process of constant renewal, renovation, and revolution. Only the most (subjectively, but popularly determined) beautiful, most useful, and most structurally sound buildings survive from one generation to the next. This creates another selection effect where the ugliest and weakest buildings of history have long been eradicated from existence and thus the public view, and so it leaves the visible impression, seemingly correct but factually flawed, that all buildings in the past were both more beautiful and better built.

I think about this quite a bit. I know that many of the buildings we approve right now are designed for a 30 -50 year life based on materials. I sometimes wonder if we'll have any good building stock from the last 20 years to survive into the future or if it'll be replaced with another 30 year building.

 

[mendelman]

...or if it'll be replaced with another 30 year building.

It will.

I've been in the profession for 20 years (so far) and have often joked with my longtime Dirs or PC chairs (in my last job the PC chair was the longtime PD before being the PC chair after retirement) that we're seeing the 20 year building design life cycle occurring right in front of us.

I take the position that if a building/site has been redeveloped/rehabbed/renovated at least 2-3 times with active new uses/businesses, then that is a direct indication of the ongoing strength of your overall 'market', particularly in our auto-oriented settings.

How many of us see a greenfield built chain business/land use go dark after about 15-20 years after construction and then sit vacant and undesired for another 15-20? I have and still do and it's either a weak/failing market or someone purposefully keeping it empty for personal and/or tax purposes.

 

[Faust_Motel]

It will.

I've been in the profession for 20 years (so far) and have often joked with my longtime Dirs or PC chairs (in my last job the PC chair was the longtime PD before being the PC chair after retirement) that we're seeing the 20 year building design life cycle occurring right in front of us.

I take the position that if a building/site has been redeveloped/rehabbed/renovated at least 2-3 times with active new uses/businesses, then that is a direct indication of the ongoing strength of your overall 'market', particularly in our auto-oriented settings.

How many of us see a greenfield built chain business/land use go dark after about 15-20 years after construction and then sit vacant and undesired for another 15-20? I have and still do and it's either a weak/failing market or someone purposefully keeping it empty for personal and/or tax purposes.

Cruddy old buildings seem to stick around for a long time (40-50 years, maybe more?) in my community- only recently has land on water/sewer become scarce enough to encourage recycling.

 

[DVD]

What makes him awesome? (I am looking to learn to be better)

I'm betting he buys everyone ice cream. You would be awesome if you bought me ice cream.

 

[78rpm]

What makes him awesome? (I am looking to learn to be better)

I'm betting he buys everyone ice cream.

In Western New York's weather?

 

[Doohickie]

Be careful of the 'survivorship bias' trap.

Architecture and construction: Just as new buildings are being built every day and older structures are constantly torn down, the story of most civil and urban architecture involves a process of constant renewal, renovation, and revolution. Only the most (subjectively, but popularly determined) beautiful, most useful, and most structurally sound buildings survive from one generation to the next. This creates another selection effect where the ugliest and weakest buildings of history have long been eradicated from existence and thus the public view, and so it leaves the visible impression, seemingly correct but factually flawed, that all buildings in the past were both more beautiful and better built.

Same thing applies to music, btw. Whether you're talking about classical or classic rock, only the best examples remain popular to future generations.

 

[Doohickie]

In Western New York's weather?

 

[Doohickie]

I....... I don't think that's to code.

 

[michaelskis]

I'm betting he buys everyone ice cream. You would be awesome if you bought me ice cream.

Ok. Check...

Last year there were a couple of times that I bought a few boxes of ice cream sandwiches with enough that all staff in City Hall could have a couple. It was hot and humid out and everyone was working their tails off, so I wanted to do something to let them know that I appreciated their efforts.

 

[Doohickie]

Ok. Check...

Last year there were a couple of times that I bought a few boxes of ice cream sandwiches with enough that all staff in City Hall could have a couple. It was hot and humid out and everyone was working their tails off, so I wanted to do something to let them know that I appreciated their efforts.

But did you provide a lactose intolerant/vegan option? Did you?

 

[michaelskis]

But did you provide a lactose intolerant/vegan option? Did you?

As a matter of fact I did. I bought an assortment of flavors and options knowing that everyone likes the original. I also had a sugar free option too.

 

[Doohickie]

Damn dawg.

 

[bureaucrat#3]

As a matter of fact I did. I bought an assortment of flavors and options knowing that everyone likes the original. I also had a sugar free option too.

Seems "woke" to me to offer anything beyond full sugar/full fat standard size chocolate with vanilla (artificial flavor) whole milk (cow) dairy ice cream sandwiches. But I applaud you on the effort.

 

[michaelskis]

Seems "woke" to me to offer anything beyond full sugar/full fat standard size chocolate with vanilla (artificial flavor) whole milk (cow) dairy ice cream sandwiches. But I applaud you on the effort.

Part of it was selfish, I don't eat much in the way of process sugar.

 

[Dan]

What makes him awesome? (I am looking to learn to be better)

Her. Our planning philosophies are very similar, she's supportive and collaborative, and I feel like we're going to make more progress on our comp plan's to-do list.

 

[Dan]

I think about this quite a bit. I know that many of the buildings we approve right now are designed for a 30 -50 year life based on materials. I sometimes wonder if we'll have any good building stock from the last 20 years to survive into the future or if it'll be replaced with another 30 year building.

Folks said the same thing in the 1950s and 1960s. "Little houses made of ticky tacky", "built to last only 25 years", and so on. Outside of situations where those houses are subject to severe neglect (ex: post-WWII neighborhoods in the City of Detroit), or areas experiencing gentrification and teardown activity (ex: southeast and northwest Denver, some northwest suburbs of Chicago, north Toronto, etc.), almost all of those post-war Capes, ranches, and Minimal Traditional houses are still standing 50 to 75 years after they were built.

Today, leaders in some inner ring suburbs in the Rust Belt where the housing stock is comprised almost entirely of post-war starter houses are asking themselves "what are we going to do with all of these old houses?" They're still structurally sound, and not going anywhere anytime soon, but they're increasingly functionally obsolete by today's standards -- closed floor plans, tiny closets, only one bathroom, basement laundry, and the like. They're also too cheap to modernize without running into credit gap issues.

 

[mendelman]

Folks said the same thing in the 1950s and 1960s. "Little houses made of ticky tacky", "built to last only 25 years", and so on. Outside of situations where those houses are subject to severe neglect (ex: post-WWII neighborhoods in the City of Detroit), or areas experiencing gentrification and teardown activity (ex: southeast and northwest Denver, some northwest suburbs of Chicago, north Toronto, etc.), almost all of those post-war Capes, ranches, and Minimal Traditional houses are still standing 50 to 75 years after they were built.

View attachment 59674

Today, some inner ring suburbs in the Rust Belt, where the housing stock is made up almost entirely of post-war starter houses, are asking themselves "what are we going to do with all of these old houses?" They're they're still structurally sound, and not going anywhere anytime soon, but too cheap to modernize without running into credit gap issues.

This can also be said for the 1900-1930 houses also still extant in many of the similar places. They are equally 'ticky-tacky' but 'easy' to repair and are generally sufficient for most households' uses, especially if you have partial or completely finished basements.

Many Chicago neighborhoods and first ring suburbs (Berwyn, Oak Park, Cicero, Evanston, etc) come to mind for me.

 

[Riverotterr]

I got inspired by the chatgpt stuff earlier in this thread and asked it to make a rap song about urban planning:

Verse 1: Yo, listen up, I got something to say
It's all about planning our cities in a better way
We need to think about how we use our space And make sure that we're doing it in a sustainable way

Chorus: Urban planning, yeah it's the key
To creating cities that are healthy and free
We gotta think about the people and the environment
And make sure that our planning is intelligent

Verse 2: We need to think about transportation And make sure that we've got a good foundation With bike lanes and public transit We'll reduce our carbon footprint

Chorus: Urban planning, yeah it's the key
To creating cities that are healthy and free
We gotta think about the people and the environment
And make sure that our planning is intelligent

Verse 3: We need to think about green space
And make sure that there's a good amount of space
For parks and trees and gardens too
We'll create a city that's beautiful and new

Chorus: Urban planning, yeah it's the key
To creating cities that are healthy and free
We gotta think about the people and the environment And make sure that our planning is intelligent

Verse 4: We need to think about the community
And make sure that everyone has an opportunity To live in a city that's fair and just
Where everyone's included, no one's left in the dust

Chorus: Urban planning, yeah it's the key
To creating cities that are healthy and free
We gotta think about the people and the environment
And make sure that our planning is intelligent

Outro: So let's get to work and make a plan
For a city that's sustainable and grand
With urban planning, we can make it right And create a city that's shining bright!

 

[Faust_Motel]

 

[mendelman]

View attachment 59695

Nice modified meme.

 

[Faust_Motel]

Nice modified meme.

Not mine, there's a pretty spicy Instagram account out there called "memes and master plans" and I think it came from there.

But, having dealt with my share of housing demand truthers lately I'm feeling pretty salty myself.

 

[Faust_Motel]

I mean...

 

[Faust_Motel]

When street View renames a subdivision and makes you feel like you might be having a stroke:

I do love those mountaiuntain views up there..

 

[michaelskis]

You know its bad when you are driving around and the non-planner spouse says "Hang on a second... how is that going to work?" And you turn around to see this:

The driveway that they did pour is bad enough, but what about the other house? How the hell is that going to be manageable?

 

[Faust_Motel]

You know its bad when you are driving around and the non-planner spouse says "Hang on a second... how is that going to work?" And you turn around to see this:

The driveway that they did pour is bad enough, but what about the other house? How the hell is that going to be manageable?

That's wild! Looks like somebody needs some driveway slope standards. And steep slope development restrictions.

 

[Bubba]

When street View renames a subdivision and makes you feel like you might be having a stroke:
View attachment 59700

I do love those mountaiuntain views up there..

East Eastview > West Eastview

 

[mendelman]

You know its bad when you are driving around and the non-planner spouse says "Hang on a second... how is that going to work?" And you turn around to see this:

The driveway that they did pour is bad enough, but what about the other house? How the hell is that going to be manageable?

Is the public ROW right on top of the front property line? No area for setback, then house built into the slope?

Stupid people?

 

[Doohickie]

Folks said the same thing in the 1950s and 1960s. "Little houses made of ticky tacky", "built to last only 25 years", and so on. Outside of situations where those houses are subject to severe neglect (ex: post-WWII neighborhoods in the City of Detroit), or areas experiencing gentrification and teardown activity (ex: southeast and northwest Denver, some northwest suburbs of Chicago, north Toronto, etc.), almost all of those post-war Capes, ranches, and Minimal Traditional houses are still standing 50 to 75 years after they were built.

View attachment 59674

Today, leaders in some inner ring suburbs in the Rust Belt where the housing stock is comprised almost entirely of post-war starter houses are asking themselves "what are we going to do with all of these old houses?" They're still structurally sound, and not going anywhere anytime soon, but they're increasingly functionally obsolete by today's standards -- closed floor plans, tiny closets, only one bathroom, basement laundry, and the like. They're also too cheap to modernize without running into credit gap issues.

We have some pre- and postwar housing stock in Fort Worth. In neighborhoods that haven't dipped too much in prestige, the older homes are being bought, leveled, and rebuilt with McMansion Hell homes. It's a single family home being replaced with a (much larger) single family home, and the areas are not historically designated, so there isn't much the city can do.

You end up with cute 1920-30s bungalos with 4000 sq ft modern homes randomly dropped in.

 

[dw914er]

You know its bad when you are driving around and the non-planner spouse says "Hang on a second... how is that going to work?" And you turn around to see this:

The driveway that they did pour is bad enough, but what about the other house? How the hell is that going to be manageable?

"The neighboring city doesn't make me prepare a grading plan for a new house."

 

[jsk1983]

We have some pre- and postwar housing stock in Fort Worth. In neighborhoods that haven't dipped too much in prestige, the older homes are being bought, leveled, and rebuilt with McMansion Hell homes. It's a single family home being replaced with a (much larger) single family home, and the areas are not historically designated, so there isn't much the city can do.

You end up with cute 1920-30s bungalos with 4000 sq ft modern homes randomly dropped in.
View attachment 59727

Is that new home taking up two lots?