U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-01-2014, 10:55 AM
 
Location: West Madison^WMHT
3,279 posts, read 3,126,005 times
Reputation: 4062

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
From one person, the OP.
We're seeing some "Push" here in New Hampshire from HUD and the local "Granite State Future". Even ignoring the paranoia about Agenda 21, there is a definite push; in my small NH town the RPC is pushing to change zoning to encourage higher density in-town housing and discourage turning idled farmland into housing developments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agenda 21
Recently the methodology for “ecological footprinting” has been developed to assess the sustainability of current human activities by estimating a city’s or household’s total appropriation of the Earth’s ecological carrying capacity. The methodology estimates the resource consumption and waste assimilation requirements of a defined human population or economy in terms of a corresponding productive land area. This land area is then compared with the average per capital and area available on the planet in order to evaluate the sustainability of local lifestyles and identify activity areas that require change.
This is just one of many areas in which there is a push for "compact land-use patterns", reduction of sprawl and encouragement of higher-density housing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-01-2014, 01:14 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 17 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,995 posts, read 102,568,112 times
Reputation: 33059
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA View Post
That's true, but the challenges are far greater in a lot of cases. More money doesn't always help, that's for sure. However, I imagine that there aren't a lot of alternatives in really bad schools.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR_C View Post
Because there is often a much larger percentage of special needs students in urban districts.
But, but, but. . . I thought the city schools were wonderful! That's what the urbanists here on CD try to tell us. School funding is a complex issue and it varies by state as well. However, higher per-pupil spending generally means higher teacher salaries.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2014, 01:23 PM
 
Location: Mt. Airy
5,311 posts, read 5,329,932 times
Reputation: 3562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
But, but, but. . . I thought the city schools were wonderful! That's what the urbanists here on CD try to tell us. School funding is a complex issue and it varies by state as well. However, higher per-pupil spending generally means higher teacher salaries.
??? Since when have all the "urbanists" on here been saying that city schools are wonderful? If anything, that's one of the few areas where I've felt that "suburbanists" and "urbanists" have agreed was an issue. Sure, there are some great elementary schools in the city, but I don't think anyone's claiming that city middle and high schools are "wonderful"...

You are one crazy suburbanist!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2014, 01:52 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 17 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,995 posts, read 102,568,112 times
Reputation: 33059
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA View Post
??? Since when have all the "urbanists" on here been saying that city schools are wonderful? If anything, that's one of the few areas where I've felt that "suburbanists" and "urbanists" have agreed was an issue. Sure, there are some great elementary schools in the city, but I don't think anyone's claiming that city middle and high schools are "wonderful"...

You are one crazy suburbanist!
Well, thank you very much. I will keep that in mind the next time I get a post deleted/edited for "rude".

I will direct you to this search of "schools" on this forum.

I think inner city schools aren't as bad as they used to be....
Now, that says a lot for city schools, doesn't it? Not as bad as they used to be?

Will Families Really Live in Cities?
Lots of stuff about schools on there.

What are downtowns missing?
Urban vs Suburban Schools
Making cities more kid (and people) friendly

Plus much more!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2014, 03:06 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
27,165 posts, read 29,660,252 times
Reputation: 26651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
But, but, but. . . I thought the city schools were wonderful! That's what the urbanists here on CD try to tell us. School funding is a complex issue and it varies by state as well. However, higher per-pupil spending generally means higher teacher salaries.
All that is totally regional. For example, Oakland gets a bad rap for having awful schools. Most elementary schools are pretty good, and the middle and high schools are improving tons. The high school closest to me went from the bottom thirds to 2nd in the district in about 10 years. Parents *want* to send their kids there now. In my local forum, when people post about the high schools sucking, I mention the hue improvement the school near me has seen. Many of the people have preschool age kids, and who knows what the middle school will be like by the time they get there. They have at least 5 years to decide what to do!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2014, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Mt. Airy
5,311 posts, read 5,329,932 times
Reputation: 3562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Well, thank you very much. I will keep that in mind the next time I get a post deleted/edited for "rude".

I will direct you to this search of "schools" on this forum.

I think inner city schools aren't as bad as they used to be....
Now, that says a lot for city schools, doesn't it? Not as bad as they used to be?

Will Families Really Live in Cities?
Lots of stuff about schools on there.

What are downtowns missing?
Urban vs Suburban Schools
Making cities more kid (and people) friendly

Plus much more!
City schools not being "as bad as they used to be" means that they're wonderful and on par with suburban schools? That's beside the fact that claims of improving schools is happening where gentrification is happening. There are still plenty of impoverished neighborhoods in most cases...and a gentrified neighborhood doesn't mean the school has improved either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2014, 03:52 PM
 
226 posts, read 194,903 times
Reputation: 274
AJNEOA,

I apologize for not being more specific when I said that government at all levels was discouraging use of SOVs. What I should have said was that the feds are pushing such initiatives primarily to reduce GHG emissions. Local authorities in places such as the Bay Area and the Seattle region have produced long-range plans which incorporate targets for reductions in per capita vehicle miles traveled. The overall goal in both areas is to get a better balance of jobs and housing so that people don't have to drive as much to get to work. The documents place a lot of faith in strategies such as transit-oriented development to achieve these goals.

In addition, the feds have approved pilot projects allowing tolling of interstates in certain areas including here in Seattle. While the authorities will have a job on their hands selling widespread road pricing to a justifiably skeptical public, some form of it is likely coming to our most congested urban areas at some point.

In Washington state, we have the Commute Trip Reduction Act, which requires most employers in urban areas to provide incentives for employees to take transit, carpool, ride their bikes, or walk. If those don't work, they have to provide disincentives to driving such as raising parking costs. Where I work the cost of garage parking a decade ago was $17. Now it's $85. The garage is still full, but a lot more people take transit now because they can get a monthly pass that normally costs over $100 for $15.

While roads get the lion's share of transportation funding in most places, that's no longer true for areas such as Seattle that are constructing rail systems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2014, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Mt. Airy
5,311 posts, read 5,329,932 times
Reputation: 3562
Quote:
Originally Posted by tifoso View Post
AJNEOA,

I apologize for not being more specific when I said that government at all levels was discouraging use of SOVs. What I should have said was that the feds are pushing such initiatives primarily to reduce GHG emissions. Local authorities in places such as the Bay Area and the Seattle region have produced long-range plans which incorporate targets for reductions in per capita vehicle miles traveled. The overall goal in both areas is to get a better balance of jobs and housing so that people don't have to drive as much to get to work. The documents place a lot of faith in strategies such as transit-oriented development to achieve these goals.

In addition, the feds have approved pilot projects allowing tolling of interstates in certain areas including here in Seattle. While the authorities will have a job on their hands selling widespread road pricing to a justifiably skeptical public, some form of it is likely coming to our most congested urban areas at some point.

In Washington state, we have the Commute Trip Reduction Act, which requires most employers in urban areas to provide incentives for employees to take transit, carpool, ride their bikes, or walk. If those don't work, they have to provide disincentives to driving such as raising parking costs. Where I work the cost of garage parking a decade ago was $17. Now it's $85. The garage is still full, but a lot more people take transit now because they can get a monthly pass that normally costs over $100 for $15.

While roads get the lion's share of transportation funding in most places, that's no longer true for areas such as Seattle that are constructing rail systems.
No apology needed. I appreciate the information.

What's happening out West sounds interesting. In VA, it feels very different...at least in Central VA. What's troubling with all of the new regulations that you mentioned is that they seem to be there to counter the deeper layer of encouragement that has been around for the last 50 - 60 years. Rather than changing land use policies, raising the gas tax, implementing tolls, etc., there's another layer of regulations piled on that in turn try to alleviate some of the issues that those states are dealing with. I don't know enough about it, so that's just the impression I have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2014, 12:51 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 17 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,995 posts, read 102,568,112 times
Reputation: 33059
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA View Post
City schools not being "as bad as they used to be" means that they're wonderful and on par with suburban schools? That's beside the fact that claims of improving schools is happening where gentrification is happening. There are still plenty of impoverished neighborhoods in most cases...and a gentrified neighborhood doesn't mean the school has improved either.
Well, yes. That is what I was trying to say.

There's actually more of a total lack of interest in schools by the urbanists than anything else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2014, 05:44 PM
 
1,709 posts, read 1,674,215 times
Reputation: 1838
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Well, yes. That is what I was trying to say.

There's actually more of a total lack of interest in schools by the urbanists than anything else.
Because it's known as a fact by urbanists, anti-urbanists, and the indifferent that most urban schools are pretty awful. But it's not a direct cause of deurbanization, rather than a result of it. People moved out of the cities, thus less tax money went towards those schools and they declined in quality. Conversely, urbanists figure that if people come in to the cities seeking the amenities they can't find in suburbs, then the money will return to the schools and they will improve. It's not so much a lack of interest so much as a focus on the overall solution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top