site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2mo ago (text post)   2659 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for September 20, 2024

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Would you want to live in this cute, perfectly-code-compliant neighborhood?

(Yes, I was too lazy to add radii to the driveway corners. Sue me.)

It looks like it was designed in a DOOM map editor. That’s not actually a downside.

Too much wasted space while the houses are tiny. The road between the houses is bigger than the houses themselves, and double-wide driveways are hideous.

I would do the following:

  • slim down the road as much as possible (one-way, pedestrians have priority, no setbacks etc)
  • somehow classify on-street parking as off-street parking, then each lot will have three parking spaces
  • if that's not possible, turn setbacks into driveways (6m/20ft deep setbacks)
  • make the houses as wide as the fire safety code allows and as shallow as necessary, aiming at 33sqm/330sqft per occupant

Example implementation

Note that parallel-parking spaces are 8 ft * 22 ft rather than 9 ft * 20 ft, so the lots have been changed from 60 ft * 100 ft (6000 ft^2) to 66 ft * 91 ft (6006 ft^2). Also, the installation of underground utilities presumably will require a lot of easements somewhere.

Yeah, this looks nicer. I would make the parking spaces 7x21ft, but I guess pickups are just that big.

Now you just need to change the floor plans so that you can enter the houses from the front again.

At my current stage of life, no. But it does look better than the various slum efficiency and sub-basement units I lived in when I was younger.

Is there a particular reason for all the side yard space and front drives? Is it supposed to be generally preferable to row homes or town houses? I would rather have slightly more personal square footage and a small back garden, than a side yard and code minimum sized bedroom. You could have a back alleyway, shared front parking diagonally in the center of a long cul-de-sac, or even resident street parking (parallel or diagonal), if parking is necessary.

Another option that would have similar density, but more interior square footage, for a development would be a n-over-one or "stumpy." It's not cute, but real-estate developers in North America clearly think they offer the best net balance for medium density right now.

I also thought that they were below-code size, but I see now the minimum size requirements were removed from the International Residential Code in 2015. I had no idea. Also did not realize they added appendix AQ, specifically with respect to "tiny homes." I guess that's a win for density.

Is there a particular reason for all the side yard space and front drives?

Under the International Zoning Code:

  • The densest single-family residential zone has lots of at least 60 ft * 90 ft and 6000 ft^2. The lots in this image are 60 ft * 100 ft.

  • At least two 9 ft * 20 ft off-street parking stalls must be provided for each dwelling unit. I've made the driveways double-width for the larger houses, to accommodate multigenerational households.

Is it supposed to be generally preferable to row homes or town houses?

I didn't consider anything but single-family houses in this particular flight of fancy.

The sheer gall of the authors calling their American building/zoning codes international will never cease to inflame me.

Its very common for American companies to push their standards worldwide regardless of suitability for local conditions (eg local countries using the metric system for a start). I don't think it's from superiority, just out of ignorance. Many Americans are woefully uneducated about the world outside of America. (clearly doesn't apply so much to the 'very online', such as our American posters here.)

Actually, the International Codes indeed do see some use outside the US.

I prefer attached garages.

A garage is a needless luxury, just like a closet and a pantry.

(In response to deleted comment "Where's the garage???" by @sarker)

Ooh. Yeah, we have hail around here. People would riot without their garages.

Are you a desperately poor 3rd worlder or something? Where does this opinion come from? And where do you store your food if not the pantry?

The comment was intentionally phrased in an inflammatory manner for laughs (since this is the Friday Fun Thread). Seriously, though, as a reasonably-well-off person living in the US, I personally have little need of garages, closets, and pantries.

  • I have no pantry. All my room-temperature food is in the kitchen cabinets.

  • I have a closet, but I hardly use it. Rather, I keep all my regularly-used clothes in a large plastic basket or haphazardly around my bedroom. And a wardrobe can serve the purpose of a closet anyway.

  • I have no garage. I can see how it might be useful for working on a car, but I personally just go to a mechanic.

I deleted it because I figured the big black blocks are garages and driveways, but I guess I was mistaken.

The big black blocks are driveways without garages.

Garages are kino. You can park your car there, have a gym, or a woodshop, or a metal shop, etc etc.

A basement can serve most of the same purposes.

Not all areas have need for basements: if you're not digging to get below the frost line (warmer climates), soil is shallow, or the water table is near the surface (the entire Gulf coast), a basement is really expensive to build as an option, and they aren't very common choices. I'll keep my garage.

G-d preserve me from schlepping heavy equipment to a basement.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats