Real talk about sprawl (hotels, bus, pub)

[waronxmas]

Originally Posted by ATLTJL

I'm also curious....would you call my area walkable? I'm in the suburbs and you can't really walk much of anywhere, at least you really wouldn't. But the neighborhood has modest homes, 3 and 4 bedrooms, that are all on pretty small tracts of land, nothing more than 1/4 of an acre. There are sidewalks throughout and a swimming pool, tennis courts, and community lake. At just about any time of the day, there are people jogging, walking dogs, or just walking around on the sidewalks that are throughout the community. So while it wouldn't fall under the traditional sense of walkability, would you call it walkable since it has sidewalks and people are always out walking? Further, would you call it dense? The greater area is not dense at all, but the actual subdivision is quite dense with smaller tracts than many intown areas.

No, that isn't walkable (though I conceded "walkable" gets thrown around here to mean stuff it doesn't mean, just like "density").

The key thing your area lacks in being walkable is connectivity. It isn't enough that walk anywhere around your house, rather what counts is what else you walk can to. Is it possible to do all of your shopping without having to get in a car? What about going to the gym or to the park? If there is transit, can you walk to it and take it work or do you have to drive?

It is the inability to do those things that have a correlation with rising obesity in this country. Most people who live in areas such as these get stuck in this rut due to the long hours they work and their children to ever make time for exercise. Eventually, it just becomes more comfortable to drive every where. The sad thing is, this was all done on purpose.

The good news is that it isn't an overly complicated solution (technically) to all of this. The suburbs (and by this I mean ones that are not centered on a former small town like Decatur, Chamblee, East Point, Marietta proper, etc) is to provide better connectivity between job/retail/activity centers and residential areas. Density, contrary to popular belief, does not have have to increase to accommodate this either. Of course money and political will can get in the way of this happening.

What we do know is that this grand experiment of building communities to the 1930s World's Fair model has failed. Let's stop building places to fit the car and build them to fit the human.

[Onthemove2014]

Originally Posted by waronxmas

Let's stop building places to fit the car and build them to fit the human.

Thank you. I am not sure how anyone could disagree with this idea.

For most of human history we built cities and villages based on humans and accessibility. Why do we continue to build backwards?

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by Onthemove2014

For most of human history we built cities and villages based on humans and accessibility. Why do we continue to build backwards?

Hmmm....could be because for "most of human history", the only mode of transportation for the average person was their feet, so the cities and villages has to be built based on how far a person could reasonably be expected to walk to get what he/she needed.

As horses became more readily available, things opened up a bit (think "Little House on the Prairie").

Once cars became commonplace, people weren't restricted to living in dense conditions, and had more freedom to live where and as they choose.

While there are many who are starting to look back into moving to denser areas, there are still plenty who have no interest in doing so. Builders still build only what people want, otherwise they wouldn't sell what they built- so until there's enough of a shift in demand from what you're calling "building backwards", I'm thinking you'll continue to see similar patterns to what you've seen over the past 3/4 of a century or so.

[cqholt]

I'm thinking you'll continue to see similar patterns to what you've seen over the past 3/4 of a century or so

That is true, but not on the scale we witnessed in the 90's-late 2000's.

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by cqholt

That is true, but not on the scale we witnessed in the 90's-late 2000's.

Agreed. As/if the market demand for more/better intown living options increases, I'm sure builders and developers will be more than happy to provide product that meets those needs.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by BobKovacs

Agreed. As/if the market demand for more/better intown living options increases, I'm sure builders and developers will be more than happy to provide product that meets those needs.

There is no "if". Residential development is taking place in the city.

A large condo development is being built on N. Highland next to the Beltline, and infill houses are rehabs are being built/fixed up in existing intown neighborhoods.

[cqholt]

Residential development is taking place in the city.

Columbia properties are building infill mixed-income community apartments on empty lots in Edgewood.

[Onthemove2014]

Originally Posted by BobKovacs

Hmmm....could be because for "most of human history", the only mode of transportation for the average person was their feet, so the cities and villages has to be built based on how far a person could reasonably be expected to walk to get what he/she needed.

As horses became more readily available, things opened up a bit (think "Little House on the Prairie").

Once cars became commonplace, people weren't restricted to living in dense conditions, and had more freedom to live where and as they choose.

While there are many who are starting to look back into moving to denser areas, there are still plenty who have no interest in doing so. Builders still build only what people want, otherwise they wouldn't sell what they built- so until there's enough of a shift in demand from what you're calling "building backwards", I'm thinking you'll continue to see similar patterns to what you've seen over the past 3/4 of a century or so.

I understand how we were able to do it but the reason why is not simply because "people wanted more space". There is plenty of evidence that suggests this move was pushed by auto manufacturers in the early 20th century. Couple that with the fact that we were wealthier country post WW2 and we could afford to build expensive highways to accommodate sprawl. Other country have sprawl but nowhere near the level that the U.S. has.

[Onthemove2014]

We really need to ask ourselves: why do we love our cars so much? Is it because many of us don't know any other way.

[cqholt]

There is plenty of evidence that suggests this move was pushed by auto manufacturers in the early 20th century.

GM was one of the biggest conspirators.
General Motors streetcar conspiracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia