Private Cities

[wum]

* PRIVATE CITIES: Tired of bad roads, dismal service from city employees, and skyrocketing local taxes? Move to a private city instead.

According to the Wall Street Journal, 10 million Americans -- 100,000 in Irvine Ranch, California, alone -- now live in so-called "master-planned communities" (MPC), which are privately developed and privately operated towns.

What's the appeal? Strict covenant and deed restrictions (which are the free market alternative to zoning laws); resident-friendly planning; generous parks, jogging trails, and wooded areas; tight security; and community associations that allow all property owners to share in decision-making, say residents.

"Within their enclaves these associations perform all the functions of a small government," reports The Economist, and "work to assure that the communities' amenities, public facilities and other areas are supported and maintained."

Planned communities are so popular that they account for 30% of all the new-home sales around Houston, Texas.

http://www.lp.org/lpn/9901-triumph.html

============

edit*

Basically it's like a country club, or a gated community, but on a much bigger scale. You get to choose your neighbours.

Just think, you could keep out bums and other undesirables =)

[crackjoy]

hell no. i mean, it sounds all well and good, but you'd be giving a lot of power to someone who may or may not be elected. what if, in the interests of the community, smoking was no longer allowed outside? or if marijuana was decreed a dangerous substance, at which point offenders could be levvied a hefty fine, or even jail term in the local penitentiary. speeding is now considered attempted murder, you know shit like that.

maybe i'm exaggerating, but stuff like this always gets out of hand.

[wum]

Originally Posted by crackjoy

hell no. i mean, it sounds all well and good, but you'd be giving a lot of power to someone who may or may not be elected. what if, in the interests of the community, smoking was no longer allowed outside? or if marijuana was decreed a dangerous substance, at which point offenders could be levvied a hefty fine, or even jail term in the local penitentiary. speeding is now considered attempted murder, you know shit like that.

maybe i'm exaggerating, but stuff like this always gets out of hand.

What you’re describing would probably be something senior citizens would want.

The key is to do this with a bunch of friends or likeminded individuals.

You on the other hand could start a raver community *shudder* with no ordinance on loud music, drug use, etc. These cities will be run by committees, who are elected or are the major shareholders.

[crackjoy]

i wouldnt want to live in a raver community. raving is a once-every-couple-months kinda thing. who'd want to live with bunch of smelly ravers?

ok, what kind of ppl would live in a planned community? ppl who dont feel very secure about the world around them. ppl who dont want to worry about their neighbors. ppl with a lot of money and belongings who want to feel safe about them. which in turn makes them suceptible to any crap their council spews out. the council, on the other hand, will have to answer to its shareholders/constituents and do whatever they want. which means, you have to follow the majority, or risk becoming a pariah. or worse, a scapegoat for whatever current crisis thats going on.

now, getting a bunch of your buddies together and buying a several-acre property, that sounds a bit more interesting.

[sidekick]

hello 1984, nice to meet you.

[miss.myra]

Originally Posted by wum

What you’re describing would probably be something senior citizens would want.

They already have that, they're called 'retirement communities' and they are SCARY. I think that's just the old people though.

[wum]

Originally Posted by crackjoy

ok, what kind of ppl would live in a planned community? ppl who dont feel very secure about the world around them. ppl who dont want to worry about their neighbors.

A lot of people living in major cities actually, according to the statistics. What’s wrong with living in a community based on your own values?

Originally Posted by crackjoy

ppl with a lot of money and belongings who want to feel safe about them. which in turn makes them suceptible to any crap their council spews out. the council, on the other hand, will have to answer to its shareholders/constituents and do whatever they want. which means, you have to follow the majority, or risk becoming a pariah. or worse, a scapegoat for whatever current crisis thats going on.

Well like I said, pick the communities that you like. As well, don’t you think people who are living in the communities they control are much more accountable form of government versus Lower Mainland politicians living in British properties who come up with schemes for everyone else?

As well, shareholders in corporations tend to create “constitutions” or a list of shareholder rights since a pure democracy wouldn’t be the greatest thing. You could shop around for the ones you like best.

Originally Posted by crackjoy

now, getting a bunch of your buddies together and buying a several-acre property, that sounds a bit more interesting.

I admit it seems ambitious, but the advantage of having a larger community or even city is because with a larger budget you could give contracts to people to do street cleaning, creating parks, woodlands, rec centers, or even stadiums, without any of the bullshit zoning laws.

You could live right next to work :)

[wum]

Originally Posted by Sidekick

hello 1984, nice to meet you.

explain

[wum]

Perhaps the most important function of the community association is enforcing deed restrictions. Deed restrictions are a form of private "zoning," in which developers establish certain rules to prevent undesirable buildings and land use. Like zoning, deed restrictions provide continuity within a given area; unlike zoning, deed restrictions are governed by market considerations.

"When you are developing a master-planned community you are essentially trying to make it so the [homeowner] doesn't have to leave the area to get what he wants," explains Dennis Guerra, a project manager for the First Colony master-planned community near Houston. This requires a careful marketing study to determine the amenities homeowners want. Retail shops, grocery and convenience stores, doctors, dentists, animal clinics, and other frequently visited businesses are often located within the community.

Most PUD's consist of a number of villages -- subdivisions within the PUD -- separated by the community's major roads. Business areas are located along these thoroughfares, which helps "keep cars essentially out of the residential areas," says Guerra. In planning a community, the developer must work closely with the business community to construct a plan which benefits businesses and future homeowners.

This does not mean that businesses dictate a community's plan. For many years, Guerra says, First Colony resisted attempts by various fast-food chains to build restaurants in the community. The locations sought by the chains would have drawn excessive traffic and disrupted the developer's master plan. Because developers must be concerned with the long-term economic success of their projects, such considerations are essential. Conversely, zoning boards are generally motivated by short-term political expediency. More significantly, deed restrictions eliminate zoning bureaucrats and the accompanying taxes.


http://www.theadvocates.org/freeman/8903phil.html


==========


it keeps out shitty businesses and it creates a pedestrian atmosphere, what more could you want?

[lou_belle]

^^that smiley is scary;P

I'd also like to live with owners only...none of those "renter type" that work paycheck to paycheck and waste their money on fast food and going out every weekend*

HahA. Bite that*

[sidekick]

Originally Posted by wum

explain

hehe. it was a sort of joke comment. i know a private community wouldn't be like 1984. but i don't really like the idea of everything where i live being privatized and paid for by companies and stuff. i like the public city life.

[wum]

Originally Posted by Sidekick

hehe. it was a sort of joke comment. i know a private community wouldn't be like 1984. but i don't really like the idea of everything where i live being privatized and paid for by companies and stuff. i like the public city life.

but you could get in on one of those rich gay communities like they have in the Hamptons, and you could set up all kinds of parades and stuff, and zoning codes where you can paint everything rainbow colors. It's about living with people who are like us, and being intolerant of anyone else.




"Kingwood, a community near Houston also called The Livable Forest, has more than 30 miles of wooded trails for walking, jogging, and bike riding."

"Multiple villages make up the community of Kingwood, a master-planned community located 25 miles north of downtown Houston. Kingwood offers a daily retreat for its residents by offering a family environment with lakes, parks and over 50 miles of paved running and biking trails connecting the entire community."

http://www.gokingwood.com/index.asp

[sidekick]

Originally Posted by wum

but you could get in on one of those rich gay communities like they have in the Hamptons, and you could set up all kinds of parades and stuff, and zoning codes where you can paint everything rainbow colors. It's about living with people who are like us, and being intolerant of anyone else.

wummy, have you learned nothing from me?!

i may be gay, but i certainly am not a flag waving, leather booty shorts wearing, prideful faggy bastard. i detest most of that stuff. i've never been to a pride parade as i don't think people should identify themselves only by their sexuality. being gay is not the only thing in my life, it's just who i sleep with.

i would probably murder everyone in a gay town.

[wum]

Originally Posted by Sidekick

wummy, have you learned nothing from me?!

i may be gay, but i certainly am not a flag waving, leather booty shorts wearing, prideful faggy bastard. i detest most of that stuff. i've never been to a pride parade as i don't think people should identify themselves only by their sexuality. being gay is not the only thing in my life, it's just who i sleep with.

i would probably murder everyone in a gay town.

okay, wrong angle.

basically i'm just saying you get more control over the place you live in.

I like the fact that you can keep out the Walmarts and cars, or make it party zone. :):)

[pillowstealer]

I actually just finished reading a book that was based compleatly in one of these little cities... I hope the world dosent start turning to them.
really weird idea

[wum]

Wow, check out First Colony in Texas.

=============

Lake Pointe Town Center is located in First Colony at the northwest corner of US 59 & Hwy 6 in Sugar Land, Texas. Construction has begun on this 186 acre mixed-use development which will include:

• Lake Pointe Village Shopping Center ( 250,000 s.f.)
• Upscale restaurants (approx. 11 sites)
• Class A Office & Medical space (approx. 1.0 million s.f.)
• Residential (patio homes, villas, brownstones and midrise condominiums)

This pedestrian friendly development has the luxury of walkways along Oyster Creek. Many of the restaurants and residential lots will have waterviews. Upscale shopping at Lake Pointe Village is within walking distance for the residents of this area. There is also an extensive amount of office and medical spaces in this all inclusive mixed use center.

Planned Community Developers, Ltd. is the developer of First Colony, Lake Pointe Town Center, Sugar Land Town Square, River’s Edge and Waterside Estates developments.

Sugar Land Town Square

http://www.firstcolonytexas.com/LPVillage.htm

[sidekick]

talk about the separation of rich and poor people. it's bad enough the way we treat the homeless people now...but then they build whole cities where they're not allowed.

that place looks like fuckin' disney land.

[wum]

Originally Posted by Sidekick

talk about the separation of rich and poor people. it's bad enough the way we treat the homeless people now...but then they build whole cities where they're not allowed.

that place looks like fuckin' disney land.

doesn't it?

[sidekick]

i'm pretty shocked that 7 people have already said they would live in these cities.

they're going to want to keep their private cities nice and perfect and that means imposing weird bans on things and more restrictions on personal freedoms than you would get in public cities. this is just a guess, but i could totally see it happening if they're going to want to keep their city pretty and disneyland like.

it's also a complete divison of the classes like i said before. somewhere Marx is rolling in his grave.

[Draven GD]

this is disturbing

[sidekick]

it would be like living inside a giant mall. there would be no public space...that would be a huge thing. there would be nowhere that people could go that wasn't owned by someone.

[dj_soo]

as if there wasn't enough social stratification in this society already.

what's next a nice little "no blacks" city? Oh wait, those already exist.

[rawb]

Originally Posted by Sidekick

talk about the separation of rich and poor people. it's bad enough the way we treat the homeless people now...but then they build whole cities where they're not allowed.

that place looks like fuckin' disney land.

funnily enough, walt disney was one of the forerunners of building perfect, self run cities. he wanted to completely change the idea of a city and how it ran. disneyland tested a lot of his ideas, where disneyworld was supposed to be a theme park, hotels, as well as a prototype experimental community.

"EPCOT" is an acronym for experimental prototype community of tomorrow. he would make weekly trips to florida to help plan things like foot traffic flow and municipal laws. when he died, his brother roy nixed the idea and instead they built the new EPCOT as an attraction/fair and more park/hotels around it.

dream died with walt, but more people seem to be taking the isea and running with it.

[sidekick]

^yeah, i read about that in Fast Food Nation.

there is a disneyland village now though, where people can live. i'm pretty sure, anyway.

[SEAN!]

yeah i would, but i dont really see the need too, generally in canada services are superb and i dont really need gates to reaffirm my social/economic status because even high status areas such as the british properties, university endownment lands and shaughnessy all lack gates. however their are gated communities in more suburban areas like the giant mass of shit south of the fraser river known collectively as the fraser valley. but those gates exist to affirm status in areas of relatively low property values and relatively higher crime. its essentially trashy middle and lower middle class people trying to differentiate themselves from the rest of the surrey trash through their own housing selection.

I argued that this phenomen results from the combined rise of neo-liberialism
and risk society and essentially mother fuckers are seeking these type's of living arrangements not only because they seek to make outward displays of/reaffirm their social/economic status but they also aim to seek a sense of security which has been eroded through the rise of a sense of generalized social anxiety with no known source(defined by ulrick beck within his writing on risk society) and this generalized fear stems from late modern social and economic arrangements which demand often unwanted social and economic flexibility(ex unemployment, globalization, blurring gender roles, an shit)

i wrote a bunch of term papers on this shit, got A's on em too even tho i felt it was garbage, my prof just really hates neo-liberialism i guess....

you should read Fortress America by Edward J Blakely, Mary G Snyder, i had a bunch of other articles too but threw em out.