i dropped red bull while on vacation and then cut the caffeine back.....Monday I thought wow I have a lot to do, had a red bull and couldnt sleep until 3am and woke up at 630....caffeine will do the trick unless you already drink a lot and your body is accustomed to it.
5 was my average since I started my career, now with the baby, it's 4 max. The body just has to learn to catch up, ain't got no time to wait!
Olaf, redbull and caffeine lost their effect midway through 3rd year. I still consume plenty of black coffee, but that's because it's like Sean Connery golden god juice and has the extra benefit of keeping my mouse hand warm.
Well there you go smart guys, Hillary just kicked off her campaign in Ohio and said….“We are going to put millions of Americans to work, we’re going to invest in infrastructure — our roads, our bridges, our tunnels, our ports, our airports, our water systems.”
Which one of those is anything vertical? Which one's do you work on?
She added: “a new electric grid” & high-speed broadband Internet”….well at least you’ll all have faster internet in mom’s basement.
The economy is built from the ground up. It doesn't trickle down if you give all the money to the people who already have all the money.
If the person working on building a road eats lunch at a restauratnt, an architect gets hired to design a reataurant. If the restaurateur is suscessful enough to go on vacation they might go buy a new swimsuit and go on vacation. An architect gets hired to design the retail establishment and the hotel. Lots of work for architects when we invest in infrastructure in a way that helps get money circulating through the economy instead of sitting in investents held by a few disinterested oligarchs.
My office gets lots of work from infrastructure investments. Lots of pedestrian bridges, light rail stations, hangers, depots and urban massing studies.
Development follows infrastructure. In my town, the Red Line BRT (for which I'm on the jury for the station design) is using architects to design the stations and then developers are hiring architects to build apartments and restaurants and stores along its route.
i tend to lean republican, but then something like this comes up and boggles my mind. I honestly cannot understand why people are against mass transit, esp . BRT systems
One would have thought that the firestorm of development in downtown detroit following the ground breaking for a light rail system would wake someone up, but apparently not.
For added context, about 3 months ago oakland county announced a 1 bill. highway expansion and repair project.
Ugh, shuellmi, that is very similar to what is happening here in Naptown. The Indianapolis City Council voted to approve the first phase of the Red Line and for voters to approve a tax increase to then fund expanding it into Phase 2 as well as adding two other BRT lines. But the donut counties' council aren't allowing the vote. Even the numbers are the same: about $100 a year extra for a huge upgrade to the system - currently Indy's transit is ranked 47 out of the top 50 cities, so it's not like there isn't room for improvement!
Economics 101? Charts direct from The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, hard to see so I put red lines on 2008, like Obama said we’re doing great….we are better off than we were 8 years ago, let’s keep it going.
I can't read those charts either but apparently they say if anyone spends any money improving one place then no one else will ever come along and spend any MORE money there because that's how economics works.
Lol Carrera. Let's just grab the bad looking charts (which are accurate as far as I can tell) and write off the rest as just a fluke. The whole numbers though can be found here:
what's changed for you since obama took office carrera? were you working back then? iirc you're retired, so you're part of the declining labor force participation rate? are you accepting government entitlements too?
It seems fairly easy to measure the amount of private or subsidized investment that occurs directly adjacent to new infrastructure projects, but would those investments have still been made in other parts of the city? Maybe the projects would occur around existing transit lines instead? Seems a lot more difficult to measure.
Said another way, if the investment dollars exist, does it take spending money on new transit to 'unlock' those dollars, or would they still be spent on other, less visible or geographically contained projects?
I realize incentivizing private investment isn't the only reason to build mass transit or not, just something I'm curious about. Maybe there has been a study on public transit driven private investment opportunity cost that someone knows about?
^^^ Forget the website...the charts were created by the Federal Reserve for God sake , used that site because they were the most legible....all over the web by numerous outlets albeit not liberal, which is my point, the liberals are covering up the facts and the facts are about to send you back to your mom’s basement in Cincinnati.
Yes, it's all just a big liberal conspiracy to hide the truth. Funny how that's literally the only scenario in which right-wing ideology ever makes any sense. Name any issue, and all the empirical evidence on the planet can be dismissed with some batshit conspiracy theory.
Andrew, it's a good question, but in our case it's that the existing transit system is SO bad, and that Millennials and older people are becoming more interested in transit rather than cars, so by giving the community a good transit system it is fairly guaranteed to be popular - so people will want to live along it, and developers will be able to profit from adding density.
Of course the other thing that's hard to measure is how much is happening behind the scenes to allow these specific projects - both public and private investment - to happen. We definitely have TIF fund uses here that are sometimes questionable...
I'm not as familiar with Indianapolis, though I saw the 47/50 ranking, so I can imagine...I definitely see the benefits when a transit system is that bad. Maybe it does take the density around a transit line to make new private development profitable, thereby 'unlocking' the development dollars. When I lived in LA a couple of the lines (above grade Gold and subway Purple) had been extended within the previous 10 years and the amount of development surrounding each stop was ridiculous. Little islands of density in a sea of single-family homes.
Maybe it's less about whether a similar amount of development occurs with or without public transit investment and more about the type/quality of development tied to transit vs. tied to freeway system. I'm guessing the development dollars would have been spent in LA either way, but the type of development was probably better when tied to transit. And by better I mean not actually a better building, but denser.
I'm seeing it first-hand here in Seattle. Multifamily development is booming, and it's happening near transit. (It also helps that the Seattle area has a regional growth boundary, and much of the land where sprawl would normally occur is either protected wilderness, owned by the timber companies, or otherwise off-limits due to other geographical constraints.) There's a big transit expansion initiative on the November ballot this year, and assuming it passes, far more sites for high-density development will be unlocked over the coming decades.
a small part of the answer to andrews question may be that there is a lot of money chasing returns, and real estate is a strong proponent of the bigger fool theory.
btw - I've been listening to lectures on Nova University's masters in real estate development youtube channel, it's a great resource and recommend it to everyone.
David, based on the geographic limitations, economic prosperity, and popularity, Seattle seems like a good example of a city that already has urgent reasons to build multifamily development regardless of the transit expenditure. A lot of those developments might occur near transit because it's there and a great amenity, but I'm thinking because of land costs, those developments of increasing density would still occur. So transit might not drive private investment, it just drives where the investment occurs and maybe less so at what density. Same could be said for your former home base of Cincinnati - money was being spent, but now it's being spent along the new rail line.
Mostly I'm curious if large public investments in transit could drive private development in cities that don't currently have a lot going on.
Nova University? Shuellmi, where is that? Searched youtube and couldn't find good results.
AC: True, to a certain point. The big advantage of transit is the reduced need for parking, assuming that zoning requirements are updated to reduce or eliminate minimum parking requirements near transit hubs. Each parking spot in a garage adds about $18,000 to a project's construction budget, and monthly parking fees will only recoup a portion of that. Reduce parking, and more housing units can be built at a lower cost to all, in addition to the social and environmental benefits of transit-oriented development.
I can’t even believe this is a real conversation. Infrastructure plays a huge role in development and developable property. Would you buy a house without power, water or sewer off some gravel road you and your neighbors have to maintain?
Or make it not as bad except the commute takes an hour to go 10 miles because the roads are narrow and poorly maintained… how long you going to tolerate that before you eyeball an area where that isn’t a problem and the schools are better and the shops are newer, etc. Are you going to relocate your major company to an area with lead pipes, clay sewer lines next to a superfund contaminated site, and the power grid is known to have rolling blackouts? Or isn’t it more likely you will go where it feels safe, new, up to date, etc.
i wonder if all the multifamily housing going up is part of the reason carerra's 9 graphs show home ownership is going down. most of what's getting built is apartments rather than condos right? i wonder if the graph considers a condo ownership anyway, or if you need to own dirt?
a lot of old houses aren't getting fixed up or maintained, so they end up being abandoned. i know that doesn't happen in denver, but out in the plains it can just cost way too much to get a house up to livable standards, so when people do need to fix siding or a roof, they have to take shortcuts to cut the cost, or move out.
Almost everything being built in Seattle is rental. Younger people don't want the maintenance hassles and long commutes of single-family houses, and developers and contractors don't want the liability of condos.
Renting is also a byproduct of the recession and fallout of the mortgage industry. So many jacked up credits out there that renting is the only choice because there is no way you can get a loan. And... well... people learned a house can be a major liability instead of the assumed asset. Lots and lots are soured by the mortgage industry and Wall Street and prefer to be a lot more fluid and less tied down to a location.
Mass Transit – its failure is in the word “mass”, smacks of socialism by too many, along with images of Greyhound Stations & billowing smoke from underutilized buses (bad memories), requiring complex thought to comprehend the benefits from a voting populous where 25% think the sun revolves around the earth..…America will give up the personal automobile after they give up sex….the autonomous car & shared automobiles will short circuit any hope for extensive development of mass transit.
Infrastructure – the new money won’t go to most the things you wish for, it will be wasted on more roads (impending roundabout frenzy) because it’s stupid easy to make that happen quickly, resulting in more sprawl…our government spending is built around engineering not architecture and unless you’re a Walmart architect you won’t be a part of that growth you speak of. Infrastructure is about things, cars, engineers & all things horizontal….things that are mostly vertical are about people & architects. The waste, unfortunately, will be epic.
BTW – Whoever suggested that infrastructure will create jobs & those employed will buy food nearby and architects will prosper as a result by getting hired to design the food establishments makes me yearn to design a Dairy Queen.
Housing – All recession recoveries were led by housing, mostly home ownership of single family…its rental mostly by necessity signaling a fundamental defect in the recovery.
Carrera I'm with you on the roundabouts but otherwise disagree with pretty much everything you've said up there.
On another topic, Angus downloaded Pokemon Go today and it totally invigorated how we walk the dog. He went into the courtyard of a historic church that he never would have been interested in before.
Thread Central
Ah the memories. Sadly I don't get to make models any more.
What was that thread about originally? Something about wearing leather daddy outfits to court?
Anyways, meme material for years to come.
my fingers are tingling
Gonna collapse, 25 hours of sleep since Monday and same last week. Fuck you blue chip client.
thats pretty standard for me architwut. thats 6 hours a night. dont you mean 25 hours in 7 days?
well its averaging 5-6 hours a night. My body can't function.
i dropped red bull while on vacation and then cut the caffeine back.....Monday I thought wow I have a lot to do, had a red bull and couldnt sleep until 3am and woke up at 630....caffeine will do the trick unless you already drink a lot and your body is accustomed to it.
5 was my average since I started my career, now with the baby, it's 4 max. The body just has to learn to catch up, ain't got no time to wait!
Olaf, redbull and caffeine lost their effect midway through 3rd year. I still consume plenty of black coffee, but that's because it's like Sean Connery golden god juice and has the extra benefit of keeping my mouse hand warm.
Sean Connery Golden God Juice (brilliant!)
I try... I try.
the Untappd folks might recognize the Zardoz flavour in my praising of the true lord Sir Connery (pbuh)
FYI you guys I skip over FRaC's comments so if he's being nasty to me on that political thread I don't know.
Donna, You ordered up your " Flyin' Miata", with the v8 engine? I'm thinking it might be a great replacement car!
Donna we still don't have photos of your Miata yet!
It is slow day in the Media World: http://www.curbed.com/2016/7/20/12241010/melania-trump-plagiarism-architecture-school-donald
Well there you go smart guys, Hillary just kicked off her campaign in Ohio and said….“We are going to put millions of Americans to work, we’re going to invest in infrastructure — our roads, our bridges, our tunnels, our ports, our airports, our water systems.”
Which one of those is anything vertical? Which one's do you work on?
She added: “a new electric grid” & high-speed broadband Internet”….well at least you’ll all have faster internet in mom’s basement.
The economy is built from the ground up. It doesn't trickle down if you give all the money to the people who already have all the money.
If the person working on building a road eats lunch at a restauratnt, an architect gets hired to design a reataurant. If the restaurateur is suscessful enough to go on vacation they might go buy a new swimsuit and go on vacation. An architect gets hired to design the retail establishment and the hotel. Lots of work for architects when we invest in infrastructure in a way that helps get money circulating through the economy instead of sitting in investents held by a few disinterested oligarchs.
My office gets lots of work from infrastructure investments. Lots of pedestrian bridges, light rail stations, hangers, depots and urban massing studies.
i've done some airport and transit work, can be pretty interesting.
Have also done architectural work related to water infrastructure, made me want to punch myself in the face
who's at fault for an architect only knowing how to detail a handrail and not able to even comment on a road design? the road?
If we had nationwide broadband, it would help revitalize a lot of rural areas where architects could help renovate old structures and build new ones.
But yeah, "infrastructure". Those kids in Flint who all have lead poisoning, who cares? Clean water? geez, you bratty entitled kids. Get your own.
Development follows infrastructure. In my town, the Red Line BRT (for which I'm on the jury for the station design) is using architects to design the stations and then developers are hiring architects to build apartments and restaurants and stores along its route.
This is Econ 101, Carerra, don't you think?
i tend to lean republican, but then something like this comes up and boggles my mind. I honestly cannot understand why people are against mass transit, esp . BRT systems
One would have thought that the firestorm of development in downtown detroit following the ground breaking for a light rail system would wake someone up, but apparently not.
For added context, about 3 months ago oakland county announced a 1 bill. highway expansion and repair project.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/2016/07/28/rta-board-cant-muster-votes-ok-46b-transit-plan/87659216/
shuellmi, think oil companies and car companies, the more you share the less they make.
Ugh, shuellmi, that is very similar to what is happening here in Naptown. The Indianapolis City Council voted to approve the first phase of the Red Line and for voters to approve a tax increase to then fund expanding it into Phase 2 as well as adding two other BRT lines. But the donut counties' council aren't allowing the vote. Even the numbers are the same: about $100 a year extra for a huge upgrade to the system - currently Indy's transit is ranked 47 out of the top 50 cities, so it's not like there isn't room for improvement!
Economics 101? Charts direct from The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, hard to see so I put red lines on 2008, like Obama said we’re doing great….we are better off than we were 8 years ago, let’s keep it going.
Red crayon scrawled across some illegible charts? Looks legit.
I can't read those charts either but apparently they say if anyone spends any money improving one place then no one else will ever come along and spend any MORE money there because that's how economics works.
For a closer look at the charts:
http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/30/obamas-economy-in-9-charts/
Lol Carrera. Let's just grab the bad looking charts (which are accurate as far as I can tell) and write off the rest as just a fluke. The whole numbers though can be found here:
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/04/obamas-numbers-april-2016-update/
Ah yes, the Daily Caller. A right-wing "news" blog founded by Tucker Carlson. Lots of credibility there.
what's changed for you since obama took office carrera? were you working back then? iirc you're retired, so you're part of the declining labor force participation rate? are you accepting government entitlements too?
It seems fairly easy to measure the amount of private or subsidized investment that occurs directly adjacent to new infrastructure projects, but would those investments have still been made in other parts of the city? Maybe the projects would occur around existing transit lines instead? Seems a lot more difficult to measure.
Said another way, if the investment dollars exist, does it take spending money on new transit to 'unlock' those dollars, or would they still be spent on other, less visible or geographically contained projects?
I realize incentivizing private investment isn't the only reason to build mass transit or not, just something I'm curious about. Maybe there has been a study on public transit driven private investment opportunity cost that someone knows about?
^^^ Forget the website...the charts were created by the Federal Reserve for God sake , used that site because they were the most legible....all over the web by numerous outlets albeit not liberal, which is my point, the liberals are covering up the facts and the facts are about to send you back to your mom’s basement in Cincinnati.
Sorry I brought it up, let’s get back to recipes.
Yes, it's all just a big liberal conspiracy to hide the truth. Funny how that's literally the only scenario in which right-wing ideology ever makes any sense. Name any issue, and all the empirical evidence on the planet can be dismissed with some batshit conspiracy theory.
the image is from zero hedge. it's not the same list as the one on daily caller.
Andrew, it's a good question, but in our case it's that the existing transit system is SO bad, and that Millennials and older people are becoming more interested in transit rather than cars, so by giving the community a good transit system it is fairly guaranteed to be popular - so people will want to live along it, and developers will be able to profit from adding density.
Of course the other thing that's hard to measure is how much is happening behind the scenes to allow these specific projects - both public and private investment - to happen. We definitely have TIF fund uses here that are sometimes questionable...
"... back to recipes" made me chuckle at my desk....
some of that data has improved with more recent updates, but it's still hard to reconcile the volumn of money spent with the apparent results.
I'm not as familiar with Indianapolis, though I saw the 47/50 ranking, so I can imagine...I definitely see the benefits when a transit system is that bad. Maybe it does take the density around a transit line to make new private development profitable, thereby 'unlocking' the development dollars. When I lived in LA a couple of the lines (above grade Gold and subway Purple) had been extended within the previous 10 years and the amount of development surrounding each stop was ridiculous. Little islands of density in a sea of single-family homes.
Maybe it's less about whether a similar amount of development occurs with or without public transit investment and more about the type/quality of development tied to transit vs. tied to freeway system. I'm guessing the development dollars would have been spent in LA either way, but the type of development was probably better when tied to transit. And by better I mean not actually a better building, but denser.
I'm seeing it first-hand here in Seattle. Multifamily development is booming, and it's happening near transit. (It also helps that the Seattle area has a regional growth boundary, and much of the land where sprawl would normally occur is either protected wilderness, owned by the timber companies, or otherwise off-limits due to other geographical constraints.) There's a big transit expansion initiative on the November ballot this year, and assuming it passes, far more sites for high-density development will be unlocked over the coming decades.
a small part of the answer to andrews question may be that there is a lot of money chasing returns, and real estate is a strong proponent of the bigger fool theory.
btw - I've been listening to lectures on Nova University's masters in real estate development youtube channel, it's a great resource and recommend it to everyone.
David, based on the geographic limitations, economic prosperity, and popularity, Seattle seems like a good example of a city that already has urgent reasons to build multifamily development regardless of the transit expenditure. A lot of those developments might occur near transit because it's there and a great amenity, but I'm thinking because of land costs, those developments of increasing density would still occur. So transit might not drive private investment, it just drives where the investment occurs and maybe less so at what density. Same could be said for your former home base of Cincinnati - money was being spent, but now it's being spent along the new rail line.
Mostly I'm curious if large public investments in transit could drive private development in cities that don't currently have a lot going on.
Nova University? Shuellmi, where is that? Searched youtube and couldn't find good results.
located in florida, i had never heard of it before either
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgbj1r4Bs10oGDWuZT8XDAg
I've started with the january 2016 lectures and have been slowly moving up from there.
AC: True, to a certain point. The big advantage of transit is the reduced need for parking, assuming that zoning requirements are updated to reduce or eliminate minimum parking requirements near transit hubs. Each parking spot in a garage adds about $18,000 to a project's construction budget, and monthly parking fees will only recoup a portion of that. Reduce parking, and more housing units can be built at a lower cost to all, in addition to the social and environmental benefits of transit-oriented development.
I can’t even believe this is a real conversation. Infrastructure plays a huge role in development and developable property. Would you buy a house without power, water or sewer off some gravel road you and your neighbors have to maintain?
Or make it not as bad except the commute takes an hour to go 10 miles because the roads are narrow and poorly maintained… how long you going to tolerate that before you eyeball an area where that isn’t a problem and the schools are better and the shops are newer, etc. Are you going to relocate your major company to an area with lead pipes, clay sewer lines next to a superfund contaminated site, and the power grid is known to have rolling blackouts? Or isn’t it more likely you will go where it feels safe, new, up to date, etc.
i wonder if all the multifamily housing going up is part of the reason carerra's 9 graphs show home ownership is going down. most of what's getting built is apartments rather than condos right? i wonder if the graph considers a condo ownership anyway, or if you need to own dirt?
a lot of old houses aren't getting fixed up or maintained, so they end up being abandoned. i know that doesn't happen in denver, but out in the plains it can just cost way too much to get a house up to livable standards, so when people do need to fix siding or a roof, they have to take shortcuts to cut the cost, or move out.
Almost everything being built in Seattle is rental. Younger people don't want the maintenance hassles and long commutes of single-family houses, and developers and contractors don't want the liability of condos.
Renting is also a byproduct of the recession and fallout of the mortgage industry. So many jacked up credits out there that renting is the only choice because there is no way you can get a loan. And... well... people learned a house can be a major liability instead of the assumed asset. Lots and lots are soured by the mortgage industry and Wall Street and prefer to be a lot more fluid and less tied down to a location.
I’m offering a great Tuna Noodle Casserole recipe as a peace offering:
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/444449056946770030/
Mass Transit – its failure is in the word “mass”, smacks of socialism by too many, along with images of Greyhound Stations & billowing smoke from underutilized buses (bad memories), requiring complex thought to comprehend the benefits from a voting populous where 25% think the sun revolves around the earth..…America will give up the personal automobile after they give up sex….the autonomous car & shared automobiles will short circuit any hope for extensive development of mass transit.
Infrastructure – the new money won’t go to most the things you wish for, it will be wasted on more roads (impending roundabout frenzy) because it’s stupid easy to make that happen quickly, resulting in more sprawl…our government spending is built around engineering not architecture and unless you’re a Walmart architect you won’t be a part of that growth you speak of. Infrastructure is about things, cars, engineers & all things horizontal….things that are mostly vertical are about people & architects. The waste, unfortunately, will be epic.
BTW – Whoever suggested that infrastructure will create jobs & those employed will buy food nearby and architects will prosper as a result by getting hired to design the food establishments makes me yearn to design a Dairy Queen.
Housing – All recession recoveries were led by housing, mostly home ownership of single family…its rental mostly by necessity signaling a fundamental defect in the recovery.
Now back to the recipes.
Carrera I'm with you on the roundabouts but otherwise disagree with pretty much everything you've said up there.
On another topic, Angus downloaded Pokemon Go today and it totally invigorated how we walk the dog. He went into the courtyard of a historic church that he never would have been interested in before.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.