Get Up 8 // Tag: news

Ripples from an Ugly House

A friend, in response to an article in the LJS, said:

...Is part of being in a neighborhood with others mean they have to conform to the standards of certain people in the group? In the new article the end mentions someone who said, They said the property owner should be left alone as long as he doesn't bother anyone. Is there danger to the neighborhood if this house is left as it is?

I tried to respond in the forum where this took place, but length limits on responses made a thoughtful, complete response impossible, so I moved it here:

A hundred people, many with reservations about liberty, individuality, and social justice, turned out to demonstrate that the owner is bothering them, so the initial premise of the resident quoted at the end of the article is simply flawed. The owner, by allowing his property to fall into disrepair, dilapidation, and blight, is bothering someone, so now what?

...And that was the main theme of the evening: So now what do we do, not only about this house, but the problem of decaying and dilapidated properties in general?

I can think of a few dangers the neighborhood faces resulting from properties like this, causing us to consider the question So now what?

There are actual physical dangers like vermin infestation, mold, problems with sight lines on the intersection in question, and attractive nuisance.
The neighbors across the intersection are trying to sell their house. Are potential buyers more or less likely to purchase their house with the problem house sitting just across the street? What effect will this have on surrounding property values?
Anyone who has lived in Lincoln for any length of time knows that there's a stigma attached to the north side (north of O), and the core neighborhoods (around downtown, both north and south). Does blighted housing stock aggravate or mitigate this perception?

Blight and the perception of blight drive decreasing economic diversity in Lincoln's core, as more affluent residents — those who can afford it — opt to live in the suburbs or on acreages. This has all sorts of negative consequences, such as continuing decline in the core as it's starved for resources, pressure on critical services to cover an exponentially increasing area (increasing costs and decreasing effectiveness), and increased natural resource consumption.

A lot of hay has been made about things like paint colors, because its easy to point at that by both those calling for change and those saying live and let live. The real issues are more profound.

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 15:25

Comments: 2

Makes You Go Hmm

Anyone else wonder why school districts in Nebraska are getting downer-cattle beef from a meat packer in California?

Surely we have downer cattle right here in our own great state...

Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:35

Comments: 0

Flickrosoft

Yahoo! Battles! The! Horde! (Headline style stolen shamelessly from The Register.)

This.

I wrung my hands a little when Microsoft bought into Facebook, but shrugged, because I really don't have much invested in facebook. (I'm not talking about monetary investment. Microsoft interest in something in which I held some shares would not be a bad thing. In a money-way.)

Flickr, on the other hand, seduced me in to releasing my control over my photos, with promises web2.0, hangin' with the cool kids, relief from maintaining my own photoalbum software (which was half-assed, but better than the available offerings—it turns out, good album software is hard), and decreased bandwidth requirements.

Once again, I'm thinking about web3.0. I'm sure this has been defined elsewhere, in some other way, but let me give you my definition: web3.0 happens when we stop pretending web2.0 belongs to us, when it really belongs to huge advertising platforms. Web3.0 is when we distribute the social network, and control our identities locally.

Now I have to go work on some half-assed photoalbum software. Again.

Thu, 07 Feb 2008 11:24

Comments: 0