this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2025
1410 points (97.5% liked)

Fuck Cars

12581 readers
1075 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Just as soon as somebody buys the LA and and develops it into affordable homes. Because I'm sure as hell never gonna be rich enough to fix a stupid golf course into something useful.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

There isn’t any context on where this is, but:

  • there aren’t enough golf courses to really impact housing supply
  • parks and recreational facilities also serve a societal good assuming they’re accessible and serve the community as a whole
  • golf courses aren’t usually located along transit
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

1 and 3 are not good reasons not to try something like this. 2 feels like bad faith because this isn't either of those things, it's a golf course. Less than a quarter of golf courses in the US are freely open to the public, and a quarter of them are members only. That's thousands of golf courses that are taking up space/land and water and returning next to nothing of value to the community or the environment, or worse than nothing in many cases.

Source for numbers: https://mygolfspy.com/news-opinion/study-percentage-of-public-vs-private-courses-in-the-us/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Sure I’m not arguing against, per se, more that it’s not enough to be worth worrying about.

Of the private golf course that are where people would want to live and where transit would be viable, that would not be better turned to more public parks and recreation, and where a locality can afford eminent domain, go for it. I’m sure there there are such projects. However I’m also convinced it would be a lot of work and expense for a vanishingly small percentage increase in housing supply.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

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

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›