• mosiacmango
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        This is a municipal course as well, so Seattle could literally do this. The city government doesn’t want to.

        This heavily neglected sidewalk, next to the fenced off golf course, alongside a high speed and very busy highway onramp just 2 blocks from a light rail stop, tells you just how much the city cares about the area.

        There is no excuse not to cleanup and widen this sidewalk except apathy and malaise from the city.

            • SatansMaggotyCumFart
              link
              fedilink
              English
              02 months ago

              There’s nothing generic about that lady in fact that’s a pretty cruel thing to say about someone.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                02 months ago

                I’m a fairly generic looking person, we are more than our looks. She has nice glasses and isn’t unattractive or anything it’s just there’s basically nothing there to tell you where the picture is taken. There aren’t even visible brands anywhere.

                Other than maybe being able to guess the pacific northwest based those maybe being barefoot shoes, which is still a reach, what else is there?

                Also damn, going after me for being “cruel” while reducing her to a stereotype of her city? On a post about sidewalks I mean fuck, who asked you anyway?

                • SatansMaggotyCumFart
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  0
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  Sorry, I didn’t mean any offense but it really feels like you’re trying to start a fight here and I don’t want any of that.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22 months ago

    or we could not sacrifice our very limited green space to property developers overlords?!

    i’m not saying don’t use green space better… but keep it green.

    ps: i live in a very high density area and love it… but build up not out.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 months ago

      I see a lot of people saying build up not out, but you still need a place without houses to build denser housing (parking oceans should be place #1). I would keep way more of the green space than they do (and add in some community gardens?), but this might be a good option depending on the surrounding (sub)urban context. Its certainly not a good option for every (or probably most) golf course, but its going to be the best option sometimes.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 months ago

        my suburb is build on old light industrial area. close to everything, great transport and bike paths.

        the main problem we have is land banking property developers just sit on land and wait for its value to go up so they can flip and make bank for doing nothing. also what gets built is to maximise profits not provide appropriate housing for all, so we get a lot of “executive suites” with italian tiles, european appliance and other wank shit that’s only there to drive up the price.

        the answer as always is good quality public housing available to all (see vienna and singapore).

  • Sʏʟᴇɴᴄᴇ
    link
    fedilink
    English
    102 months ago

    Not sure how it works in the US but here in Oz (where water scarcity is always present in our collective psyche) golf courses are usually placed on flood plains where it would be dangerous/too expensive to build housing. In addition most allow people to walk through them and many even allow dog walkers so they have quite a lot of public amenity.

    I would still prefer if they were just designated as public parks rather than having huge swathes of grass that needed frequent watering, but they’re not nearly as bad as most make them out to be.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 months ago

      Yeah, here in the US, golf courses can be extremely wasteful. There’s two golf courses on my drive into the city, one is on a river floodplain, the other is a HOA golf course full of sprinklers that could absolutely be more housing. If I go the other way, there’s another HOA golf course that could be housing too. So, to start with, there’s three golf courses in a 15km radius.

      One of the HOA ones is exclusive access to the surrounding retirement community, the other HOA one doesn’t have a fence or anything, but idk if they chase people off. The one on the floodplain you have to pay to access the grounds.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 months ago

      In Germany most courses only have a few public walkways and if you leave them security will escort you right out

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Public golf courses are one of the best things about Oz. They provide a forest island for birds and mammals among the suburbs. Many golf courses have large swathes of natural bushland around them. They are often run by the local council, and are hence not for profit, and generally they are very cheap to play.

      They make most of their money via selling beer and expensive golf clubs.

      Turn them over to property developers, and they’ll pave it with cheaply built single dwelling houses and flog them for way too much money resulting in just more urban desert and padded the obese wallets of billionaires.

      That’s if they are even build able. Some areas on floodplains and marshes that serve as a local soak for stormwater, hence the water hazards. Some are built on landfills that contain mu icipal waste or even asbestos, hence you can’t risk putting houses on them where someone might dig up the asbestos or waste. Turning them into a revenue-generating forest parkland is one of the few good things you can do with that land.

      The revenue earned by the golf course that is used to offset local parks and recs costs would otherwise be gained by taxing the local residents through land rates.

      I used to hate on them a lot before I learned that the economics of public courses is way different to that of private ones. There are still some private courses, and I wouldn’t be opposed to these being taken back into public hands and/or converted into affordable housing. To the gallows with the greedy exclusive fucktillionaires.

  • themeatbridge
    link
    fedilink
    English
    02 months ago

    Not for nothing, but this wouldn’t fly in the USA. You’d need to replace most of those trees with roads.

    Or better yet, reduce the number of housing units and keep the trees.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12 months ago

    housing

    no parking, all walkable BS

    You people just want to give a huge middle finger to every single person with mobility issues, don’t you?

    Fuck you.

    • drkt
      link
      fedilink
      English
      222 months ago

      I have mobility issues and car infrastructure does nothing for me and in many cases makes my life harder.

      Nobody said you couldn’t build paths between places.

      Fuck you.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        02 months ago

        For people with no assistance that just have to walk, it’s ableist and hateful. And if you really had mobility issues, you’d be against these dystopian car-hating people, too.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            02 months ago

            I’m happy you’re disabled enough and/or rich enough to get fancy-ass fucking disabled bikes for yourself. Privileged shitlords. The rest of us are fucked.

            • drkt
              link
              fedilink
              English
              9
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              What the fuck? I’m in the poorest 5% 4% bracket of my country

            • DrWorm
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Because public services and transportation hasn’t and can’t provide services to disabled people? You really think that? Fuck man, these systems can work and provide for you easily. Japan and the Netherlands have a lot of handicap support and you can get around without needing to be privileged. I hope you get the help you need.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 months ago

                I can’t use public transportation. They make a nice show of how they’re “accessible” but they’re really fucking not. Fuck public transportation. Cars are so much easier and go RIGHT TO AND FROM WHERE YOU WANT TO GO.

                You’re just being ableist and parroting the same anti-car bullshit.

                • DrWorm
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  22 months ago

                  I’m not. But you’re unwilling to have a productive conversation. With unproductive language. So it’s pointless to really continue this.

                  Both countries still have cars. You can still get around with a car. The idea is to reduce car usage so that people that have a need for a car can and with less traffic. You’ll get to point a and b quicker without people that don’t need a car clogging the street. But hey I’m apparently being ableist. When you’re willing to be productive in conversation we can continue with this. But if you’re gonna be thick about it. I’m not interested in continuing this.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 months ago

            Why do you love dystopian societies where people aren’t able to get around freely unless they are privileged?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 months ago

      Why wouldn’t it make more sense to provide mobility assistance like motorized chairs for the 1% of users who need such to get them to and from transit options including parking even if its not house side.

    • erin (she/her)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      82 months ago

      What. Effective public transport and less car centric infrastructure is far and away better for those with mobility issues. Walkable areas does not mean the abolishment of cars, it means more effective use of space and transport. Try visiting Austria or the Netherlands. Getting around is far, FAR easier than any city in the US. I have mobility issues, and require a cane to get around if I’m standing for significant periods, and yet the easiest time I had getting around was the time I spent in Vienna after living in different parts of the US for my whole life.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 months ago

        How do you have an easier time with a cane walking around everywhere than riding in a fucking car? I think you’re lying.

        • erin (she/her)
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          Bus. Tram. Subway. Train. And yes, I do drive if necessary. Walkable does not mean walking is mandatory, and a huge part of the push for a decrease in car only infrastructure is the increase in public transportation. The idea isn’t to remove the ability for cars to exist, but to make other forms of transportation accessible and possible, and make reliance on cars a thing of the past. I don’t know why you’ve got it so wrapped up in your head that cars are going to vanish and we will only be walking, as if there aren’t dozens of other forms of transportation accessible for those of us with disabilities. The time I’ve spent living in places with good public transportation is the most independence and self determination I’ve experienced. I’m not lying, you’re just disingenuous, stupid, or misinformed.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 months ago

            YOU HAVE TO FUCKING WALK TO AND FROM THE BUS, THE TRAM, THE SUBWAY, AND THE TRAIN. THOSE ARE NOT POOR MOBILITY FRIENDLY OPTIONS.

            HOW FUCKING HARD IS THIS FOR YOU TO FUCKING UNDERSTAND, YOU HATEFUL SHIT?

            • erin (she/her)
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              I’m not hateful. The bus stop is never more than a short walk away. If you need a car to go 100 feet, then you shouldn’t be living alone. Do you think every disabled person is stupid? I’m not going to choose an apartment up 3 flights of stairs on the other end of the block from the bus stop. I’m going to use the ADA apartment on the ground floor that is a shorter walk to the bus stop than half the parking lot. If I need to get somewhere that I can’t access with public transportation without excessive walking, I’ll drive or get my fiancee to drive me. I’m sorry you think I’m hateful for sharing my own lived experience. That’s on you for lack of comprehension, not me.

              Edit: And again, I USE CARS. I will continue to use cars when necessary. An increase in walkable cities and good public transportation means the roads will be more free for those that need them! It’s just an all around win, even if you absolutely need a car for any form of transport for some odd reason (even those that require a wheelchair use public transport over cars in most cities that have good transportation, because the infrastructure is built with us in mind).

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                You seem to think having mobility issues is an all or nothing, can’t-move-at-all or you can run around at will thing. I swear to fuck, people like you are the goddamn problem.

                Grow up and figure out the reality of the world. Then get back to me. I am not going to live somewhere where I have to walk a path, pull myself onto a bus with tons of other people, cram myself into a seat, ride where I need to go, get what I need, CARRY THOSE THINGS BACK DOWN TO THE BUS AND GET ON THE BUS WITH THOSE THINGS, AND THEN GET OFF AND WALK BACK HOME ALSO WITH THOSE THINGS. Hell, even if I was healthy, that’s a pain in the ass.

                Do you not understand such fucking simple things? Maybe you need to take the time to think about them. Don’t reply to me for a couple of days. Look at people who have mobility issues that don’t look that bad. See people getting out of their cars in the mobility parking that just snap up right out of their cars and walk seemingly without issue to the place they’re going? Hint: most people who do that are not faking a disability. Disability can manifest itself in many ways, and it doesn’t take much beyond simply walking down the street or living alone and being able to do enough basic tasks to get by safely to run into their actual problems.

                Grow up, shut up, think, and get back to me. If this was any other goddamn condition, you’d be ostracized from society for being so goddamn hateful, but for some reason, ableism isn’t a real enough thing to people for them to be angry, and it absolutely should be as someone who does have some serious mobility issues.

                • erin (she/her)
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  22 months ago

                  You. Don’t. Have. To. Use your car! It’s not being taken away! You will have EASIER access to the roads with less people on them. I’m genuinely dumbfounded by your inability to understand this, or your apparent belief that disabled people either don’t live in or don’t use public transportation in places that have great transport. Seriously. You’re fighting ghosts here with how off the mark you are.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      92 months ago

      Fun fact: massive parking lots also cause problems for those with mobility issues. So do really wide roads. Dense and therefore walkable city infrastructure is also the most disability-friendly city infrastructure, full stop.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 months ago

        God, I don’t want to imagine how awful it must be for a person with mobility problems to cross those wide ass roads they have in the US…

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12 months ago

    What if we just altered zoning laws so they don’t restrict high-density residential buildings?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    But that runs counter to my need as a developer to bulldoze the entire area, build mcmansions 6 inches apart from eachother and at the barest mimimum of code (and perhaps even lower with a $$friendly$$ inspector), and then plant like a grand total of 5 trees that wont survive the first year.

    Oh, and also pave everything over. Gotta pave everything over. No one wants green space! /s

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      102 months ago

      When I was first committing to my no automobile lifestyle, one of the first things that struck me was the pavement. Fucking everywhere.

      Next time your about town , take a mental picture. Then subtract the parking lots. The huge road. Put the buildings closer together. Make a nice bikelane, something just wide enough to get a fire engine down. Plant some trees. Pretty nice right?

      Instead we have salted earth. It really is just rude to the earth. Fuck your car!

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        72 months ago

        All I want is the infrastructure to be more convenient. I cant walk anywhere unless I want to spend an hour+ walking, which is just impractical when i need to run and grab some fucking garlic powder real quick in the middle of dinner.

        Neighborhoods should have special commercial zoning inside of them to allow small shops, cafes, bakeries, etc

        • Singletona082
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          Agreed. A corner store, bakery, and a few other odds and ends as a cluster would be pretty solid.

          I hate not being able to just… walk to what I need.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          They do exist, even in the US. In general, look for a place that was built out before cars were everywhere

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Yeah, special commercial zoning, if we can’t eliminate restrictions on small businesses in neighborhoods entirely, which should be the end goal. But yeah we desperately need anything we can get.

        • Count Regal Inkwell
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I feel like neighborhoods not having local small-scale stores is a uniquely American problem.

          Here in Brazil every neighborhood is expected to have at least one grocery store, one convenience store, one pharmacy, one bakery, and one gas station. And most of them have a lot more than that, and a dozen other businesses.

          Like sure, you have to drive to the city center to get to the big shops and you’ll generally have more options if you do, but still.

          The exception is like. Specific developments built by and for wealthy people who want to Live Away From The Poors ™️ in a tropical imitation of American Suburbia. But THOSE people are there by choice.

      • Singletona082
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 months ago

        Welcome to why the sim city games don’t have visible parking. They consciously removed parking spaces because it spread everything out too far.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 months ago

      My local public golf course was closed and sold to developers a few years back.

      Promises were made to the community of keeping all the trees and lots of green space, as there was vicious community opposition.

      The developers have of course instead done what you suggest, and every house is crammed in next to each other just like every other new suburb. Its still in progress but it looks like once they’re done you wouldn’t even know it used to be a golf course.

      This meme is so stupid because it doesn’t present an even remotely possible outcome. A far better option is to keep the public golf courses for people to spend time outdoors and to provide homes for wildlife - and then remove regulations limiting building heights to encourage multi-storey development.

      Build up, not out - because once green space becomes houses it never changes back.

  • don
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12 months ago

    Yeah but then rich fucks wouldn’t have a place all to themselves to be rich fucks, so that’s a fuck you, poors, just be rich like us, thanks.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12 months ago

    I work at a golf course and I’d rather be doing something meaningful like building homes so this post speaks to me directly.

    Unfortunately the big thing lately is we’ve been dropping a bunch of trees.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    02 months ago

    That area should hold about 400 people, not 40,000. The trees won’t survive unless they can see the sky.

    • Polygondenimland
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 months ago

      In the United States of America, the average lot size for a single-family home is 0.19 acres (which is equivalent to 8,176 square feet). This math means that around 5 average-sized single-family homes can fit into one acre of land.

      (Source)

      So even if we’re talking regular single-family homes you can already build 800.

      Many trees do very well in the shade, as long as their crowns get sun part of the day. Leave some room between buildings and you can easily build 4-6 stories tall and still have trees in between. You can easily fit 20 apartments per acre that way. That’s about 3200 apartments. With 3 people per household that’s close to 10k people.

      I agree 40k is optimistic, but 400 is way pessimistic