logoalt Hacker News

paimapi • today at 7:36 PM • 12 replies • view on HN

Right, it was so much better during the Robert Moses era where urban planners bulldozed over predominantly Black communities and built interstate highways while locating all of the toxic pollution producing manufacturing to the remaining lower-income minority neighborhoods, obliterating walkability and pedestrian safety everywhere.

I think if you follow actual development stories, you'll see a lot of this continuing to hold true. Seeing NPUs as being actually effective at curbing development is very naive. NPUs rarely push back against development, and it takes a lot of organizing to even get something up for a vote at City Council. And even then, most councilmembers are taking campaign funds from private-equity backed developers.

A lot has been written about this. In my city, we call it the Atlanta Way (derogatroy). There's a recent book covering this that's a great read: https://www.ucpress.edu/books/red-hot-city/paper


Replies

hamdingers • today at 8:07 PM

The irony is our reaction to the Urban Renewal era was to introduce so many veto points and red tape to projects (both public infrastructure and private property) that we are nearly incapable of fixing the problems that era introduced.

When the NIMBYs of today work to protect and even double down on the bad decisions of that era it makes you wonder whether we've really moved on from it.

➕ show 1 reply
epistasis • today at 9:11 PM

There are many ways to stop what happened with urban renewal, and we've chosen pretty much the worst one.

Community process results in bad outcomes for the community, it is inherently undemocratic, yet it's been put on a pedestal as the goal of all planning.

Take for example this ridiculous article from a transit planner bemoaning how Amsterdam may have wonderful transit outcomes, far more fair and equitable than anything in the US, but dangit where's all the process??

https://mass.streetsblog.org/2022/08/10/guest-column-europes...

It's self-parody.

➕ show 1 reply
GaryBluto • today at 9:17 PM

Just because somebody suggests one extreme is a bad idea doesn't mean they are advocating for the other. The framing of this response, especially the "bulldozed over predominantly Black communities" line very much feels like an attempt at character assassination, as if you were trying to connect opposition to the status quo with racism.

➕ show 1 reply
hylaride • today at 8:57 PM

Robert Moses (ab)used eminent domain. If somebody buys a piece of land and can't build on it, that's not the same problem. Most rules now in place encourage far lower and less walkable development. Even a massive chunk of Manhattan has height restrictions that are lower than what's currently built and grandfathered in.

m1keil • today at 8:20 PM

Have you considered that not all places have the emotional baggage like your Atlanta?

➕ show 4 replies
flanz_10 • today at 8:11 PM

them: "hey this is a problem"

> Right, it was so much better during the Robert Moses era where urban planners bulldozed over predominantly Black communities and built interstate highways

you: "hey have you considered that actually you're a piece of shit?"

yes, these rules exist for a reason. some places (like Atlanta) are still guilty. i'm not saying we should plow down Chesterson's fence, but your hostile tone also sucks

➕ show 2 replies
tqi • today at 7:52 PM

but do you think restrictive zoning and onerous permitting requirements would have prevented that? It's not like laws against murder prevented lynchings, I think in most cases these rules would have just been ignored by municipalities because they largely exist to protect monied interests not vulnerable populations.

➕ show 3 replies
ETH_start • today at 10:26 PM

I've been to city hearings for a new condo development in an area with high levels of substance abuse and a lot of social spending generated by that, and it was dominated by NGOs who received a significant fraction of their operating income from the government and they almost unanimously opposed the development and the development eventually got rejected, so this dominance by private developers wasn't my experience.

lern_too_spel • today at 8:52 PM

These policies that allow locals to push back against state or federal government overreach were made with good intentions, but the reality on the ground is that the people who take advantage of these policies are not the poor and disenfranchised but the wealthy, and the way they wield their power is to slow down development that would help the masses. https://yimbyaction.org/chapters/peninsula-for-everyone/post...

➕ show 1 reply
HDThoreaun • today at 9:16 PM

Unironically yes Moses is a national hero who created some of the greatest public infrastructure in this country

Gibbon1 • today at 7:55 PM

Also worth mentioning architects have spent so long intentionally designing ugly modernist crap that the public reflexively assumes anything new will be an eyesore.

➕ show 1 reply