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.
I am going to keep it real globally cities have always been where most people with money lived. In America the people with money were so scared of minorities and the threat of crime they ran to the suburbs (keep in mind a lot of this crime can be traced to the CIA pumping drugs into the inner city but thats another conversation). Heck the highway system was built specifically so those people could go to and from their jobs in the cities back to the burbs
What were seeing now is the children of those (mostly white) rich people moving back into cities because crime has gone down and the populace is as blue collar as ever. Let crime go up again and these same Hipsters will run right back to the suburbs and they will call it a "suburban Renaissance" or some otger nonsense to hide the fact their scared.
Very astute post. This is especially true of inland northern cities such as Chicago and Buffalo. The freeway systems were built just to accommodate white flight.
Very astute post. This is especially true of inland northern cities such as Chicago and Buffalo. The freeway systems were built just to accommodate white flight.
However it's unclear if that process can be repeated on the scale it was back in the 1960's. In those days, urban cores were often surrounded by vast tracts of undeveloped land less than 10 miles away. If the same process were to happen again, not only would more freeways need to be built further out, but many of the original ones that are at capacity would have to be rebuilt as well. Many cities are geographically constrained by water or mountains, or both. The available land to spread out is much further away. The only way to achieve the kind of efficiency of the original freeway system over these greater distances would be to rebuild it for traffic speeds in the 150+MPH range, barring some other major change in transportation technology.
Very astute post. This is especially true of inland northern cities such as Chicago and Buffalo. The freeway systems were built just to accommodate white flight.
You know, I've heard some nutty stuff about why the freeway systems were built, but this one takes the cake!
Since this thread talks about one of my favorite subjects, schools, I thought I'd post this story I heard yesterday about Denver schools here.
**Boasberg and other leaders repeatedly stressed that to reach the goals, the entire community needs do what it can to assist, for example, mentoring a student.
How long have I been saying stuff like this, while some on this board have shrugged off the entire issue of schools in the city, and/or claimed that charters, magnets, and private schools can take care of the city school problem, w/o having to trouble themselves about it?
Boasberg and other leaders repeatedly stressed that to reach the goals, the entire community needs do what it can to assist, for example, mentoring a student.
have to do with urban planning?
Quote:
The number one goal, say district leaders, is to place a high performing school in every neighborhood.
When has anyone ever argued that school placement was not a part of urban planning? Whether that school is high performing, or not, is up to the district, (sort of) not the urban planner.
When has anyone ever argued that school placement was not a part of urban planning? Whether that school is high performing, or not, is up to the district, (sort of) not the urban planner.
Don't play coy, JR_C! You can do a search if you really are asking the second question in good faith.
Plenty of people on this forum have argued, at times vociferously, that schools are not a part of urban planning. When the discussion about how to get/keep families in the city comes up, the parents among us all say "schools", yet we are few in number, and many people blow off the whole idea of schools as an issue in Urban Planning altogether. If they ever do plan to have kids, they'll send them to a charter or magnet school, the h*ll with the neighborhood public schools.
I've never clicked on that thread, as skylines aren't of interest to me. But, on a frivolous level (IMO) skylines are related to urban planning. The shape of a skyline is made by the placement and height of its individual buildings.
Quote:
Plenty of people on this forum have argued, at times vociferously, that schools are not a part of urban planning. When the discussion about how to get/keep families in the city comes up, the parents among us all say "schools", yet we are few in number, and many people blow off the whole idea of schools as an issue in Urban Planning altogether. If they ever do plan to have kids, they'll send them to a charter or magnet school, the h*ll with the neighborhood public schools.
But, when parents say that schools are important to them, they aren't referring to where the school is located--an urban planning issue. Instead, they are referring to the performance of the schools--not an urban planning issue.
You're going to have to provide some examples, because I don't believe anyone has ever said that school placement is not part of urban planning.
I'd agree, but post #15 relates it to built form, which is related to urban planning.
I've never clicked on that thread, as skylines aren't of interest to me. But, on a frivolous level (IMO) skylines are related to urban planning. The shape of a skyline is made by the placement and height of its individual buildings.
But, when parents say that schools are important to them, they aren't referring to where the school is located--an urban planning issue. Instead, they are referring to the performance of the schools--not an urban planning issue.
No, I'm not going to provide examples. I have been reprimanded for "dredging up old threads", etc too many times to go to all the trouble of finding this stuff just to see my posts deleted.
I don't think you can make such a dichotomy about schools. Performance of schools is certainly a concern of parents, and way more important to most of them than having a school within walking distance. If you want to keep families in the city, and keep hipsters in the city after they've had kids, especially if you expect them to use the public schools, you have to be concerned with the public schools' performance.
I don't think you can make such a dichotomy about schools. Performance of schools is certainly a concern of parents, and way more important to most of them than having a school within walking distance. If you want to keep families in the city, and keep hipsters in the city after they've had kids, especially if you expect them to use the public schools, you have to be concerned with the public schools' performance.
I agree with everything in bold. But school performance, IMO, is not an urban planning issue.
I agree with everything in bold. But school performance, IMO, is not an urban planning issue.
That is kind of like saying police, fire departments or hospitals are not urban planning issues. At the very least, you have to consider how children will access the schools since that is a transportation consideration. If the school system is so bad that everyone is forced to shuttle their kids around every morning to a handful of private schools, that is a huge logistical problem urban planners have to account for. Likewise, if an area is void of private schools and therefore doesn't support families living there (aside from ones that can't or don't see a need to invest in their childrens education), that also affects zoning decisions (less parks, more jails).
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.
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.
