A lot of urbanists living in suburban cities never leave their neighborhood (or parents' basement) and therefore don't appreciate what their city has to offer. They believe that if they move to Amsterdam or New York, they'll magically find all sorts of cool things to do just by existing. That doesn't happen and they end up cooped up in their apartments all day and ordering delivery. They're not magically going to start looking up things to do in a new city when they refused to do so in their old city. Cities aren't boring, people can be boring, and urbanists are usually very boring people.
Having lived in urban areas a few times in my life and being an introvert myself I have noticed a few things:
- The limiting factor is usually money in any and all cases. Once you have money there's a lot more options open to you and what you want to do.
- There's not much in an urban area that's unavailable in a smaller area. I do miss IKEA, Trader Joe's, and a few other stores, but those trips were relatively infrequent anyway. 90% of your day-to-day activities can be fulfilled anywhere.
- There's only a finite supply of "good" (i.e. rich) neighborhoods. Even if you have a bit of money enough to be debt-free and afford nicer things the "good" neighborhoods are effectively locked out.
- The middle class doesn't really exist in cities. The equivalent is a moderately safe and inexpensive but run-down part of town.
-
Nothing, save for a grocery store and a decent pizza place, will be particularly close.
- The novelty of mass transit wears off quickly, especially if you have to use it on a frequent basis.
- If you want to remain sane, you have to find a social group and that means outings. That is blisteringly hard to do when you're an introvert. I suspect that most of /r/fuckcars are introverts.
- Yes, you
can exist in any city using mass transit, ride sharing, and bumming off friends who own cars but your existence will be improved with a vehicle. No, it won't save money when you account for tickets, ridesharing, delivery, and time cost. (There's also no reward in choosing to be a poorfag).
I have lived in apartments that are about two parking spaces wide. All you get is a bed, dresser, and a bathroom so small that you can shower while you shit. The apartment depicted is a lot like the one I live in now and it wouldn't be considered "low income" where I am at (and I dont even have a full range stove/oven) and it certainly isn't the size of 2 parking spaces it is closer to 8 at least.
Also a bathtub? Shame on r/fuckcars for promoting the wasting of fresh water.
Yup. It made me think of a motel I was somewhat familiar with--passed it by every time I went to Houston. It was a Studio 6 (extended stay Motel 6) and was converted to apartments. You can compare the
photos of it as a motel to the
photos of it as an apartment complex and notice that some of the fixtures (particularly the cabinets) weren't touched.
These apartments are
not especially cheap nor are in a "walkable" location (it is, however, located directly off a freeway). It was clearly done on the cheap and I guarantee you that most of the infrastructure is still from thirty years old from its original construction.
However, it
is done on the cheap. That can't be said for trying to develop a bughive on parking lot spaces because all of the permits and whatnot required. Studio 6 already had electricity, water, and sewage connections. A new building does not.
In the case of Kowloon Walled City that was designed with ZERO permits and ZERO code whatsoever and its a goddamned miracle there wasn't a major disaster there. One bad fire, one structural failure, and you're looking at an easy 1,000+ death toll.
