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 just sat here and read this whole thread, and have found the discussion interesting. I also think some of the "idealism" expressed re: overconsumption, being green, etc. is just plain wacko.
First of all, if you have lived in an area w/ high temps, you are not gonna get out and walk no matter how many sidewalks are available, no matter how close the grocery store, drugstore, dentist, doctor, whatever is.
I lived in Kansas in the KCMO metro area . . . and we had beautiful greenways and sidewalks connecting our subdivisions to conveniences close by - as in - blocks. Very walkable. But dear lord . . . who the heck would even attempt to do that in 100 d. weather? Or in 3 degree weather? Or in a snow/ice storm?
Any region that has extreme temps - heat in summer, snow in winter - is not gonna be an area where people can consistently walk to conveniences.
Plus, is everyone on this thread young and healthy? Not every citizen out there is able to get out and walk distances, even to get to mass transit. And here in the South, WHAT MASS TRANSIT?
I am simply amazed at how disengaged so many of the posters seem to be as far as the reality of how people live and the overall demographics in this country. It is great to sit around and pontificate about "how great it would be if . . ." but life is . . . uh . . . reality. The real world has people in it who live in places that would be miserable for walking, regardless of how many sidewalks, how well planned things are, etc.
And the comments about "reclaiming farmland." Who is supposed to reclaim it - or save it from subdivisions? Uh, if the farmers have bailed out, as it were, and want to sell their farmland to developers, what do you propose? Making national forests out of farmland that sits untilled and untended?
I agree - conspicuous consumerism is audacious. However, if that is how someone chooses to live and he/she has the money to live that way . . . not my business. Someone may look at my SUV and point a finger and say - well she is not a responsible person. That would be quite presumptive. My DH and I telecommute, so we don't drive that SUV very often. And when we do, it runs on ethanol, wh/ may be controversial but it is the only alternative fuel at our disposal. So we are making the best decisions we can based on our lifestyle (we need to be able to haul things so we have to own a truck or SUV). I should not have to justify that to anyone, yet there are those of you who would mandate what type of vehicle I am allowed to buy. Pretty outrageous!
So while you all are out there criticizing how people have chosen to live (in urban area, in walkable area, in the burbs, etc) just remember - everyone is not YOU. Some of us have physical limitations; some of us don't wish to have neighbors on top of us; some of us enjoy our suburban yards, gardens and wildlife; some of us want to be in a cabin in the hills or have a mini-ranch off the beaten path. SO WHAT?
The OP wanted to know about cities. Yes, many cities are into renewal; many are into gentrification, wh/ can also be a way of eliminating subsidized housing, putting people out on the streets who cannot afford housing. So there you have created another social issue.
Urban renewal is a great idea, but just b/c it is a great idea, it doesn't make suburbs a bad idea. The two are not mutually exclusive.
I just sat here and read this whole thread, and have found the discussion interesting. I also think some of the "idealism" expressed re: overconsumption, being green, etc. is just plain wacko.
First of all, if you have lived in an area w/ high temps, you are not gonna get out and walk no matter how many sidewalks are available, no matter how close the grocery store, drugstore, dentist, doctor, whatever is.
I lived in Kansas in the KCMO metro area . . . and we had beautiful greenways and sidewalks connecting our subdivisions to conveniences close by - as in - blocks. Very walkable. But dear lord . . . who the heck would even attempt to do that in 100 d. weather? Or in 3 degree weather? Or in a snow/ice storm?
Any region that has extreme temps - heat in summer, snow in winter - is not gonna be an area where people can consistently walk to conveniences.
Plus, is everyone on this thread young and healthy? Not every citizen out there is able to get out and walk distances, even to get to mass transit. And here in the South, WHAT MASS TRANSIT?
I am simply amazed at how disengaged so many of the posters seem to be as far as the reality of how people live and the overall demographics in this country. It is great to sit around and pontificate about "how great it would be if . . ." but life is . . . uh . . . reality. The real world has people in it who live in places that would be miserable for walking, regardless of how many sidewalks, how well planned things are, etc.
And the comments about "reclaiming farmland." Who is supposed to reclaim it - or save it from subdivisions? Uh, if the farmers have bailed out, as it were, and want to sell their farmland to developers, what do you propose? Making national forests out of farmland that sits untilled and untended?
I agree - conspicuous consumerism is audacious. However, if that is how someone chooses to live and he/she has the money to live that way . . . not my business. Someone may look at my SUV and point a finger and say - well she is not a responsible person. That would be quite presumptive. My DH and I telecommute, so we don't drive that SUV very often. And when we do, it runs on ethanol, wh/ may be controversial but it is the only alternative fuel at our disposal. So we are making the best decisions we can based on our lifestyle (we need to be able to haul things so we have to own a truck or SUV). I should not have to justify that to anyone, yet there are those of you who would mandate what type of vehicle I am allowed to buy. Pretty outrageous!
So while you all are out there criticizing how people have chosen to live (in urban area, in walkable area, in the burbs, etc) just remember - everyone is not YOU. Some of us have physical limitations; some of us don't wish to have neighbors on top of us; some of us enjoy our suburban yards, gardens and wildlife; some of us want to be in a cabin in the hills or have a mini-ranch off the beaten path. SO WHAT?
The OP wanted to know about cities. Yes, many cities are into renewal; many are into gentrification, wh/ can also be a way of eliminating subsidized housing, putting people out on the streets who cannot afford housing. So there you have created another social issue.
Urban renewal is a great idea, but just b/c it is a great idea, it doesn't make suburbs a bad idea. The two are not mutually exclusive.
You're absolutely right in many ways. However, after living in Spain, I disagree with you that people won't walk outside in the heat. People do it all the time there. People also walk a lot in Charleston and Savannah and it gets hotter than hell in those cities.
But back to your overall point, it is all about choice of lifestyle. However, many local governments don't realize this, as many local politicians AND residents are fearful of density, walkable communities, mixed-use development, and multifamily housing--thus favoring exclusive single-family zoning. Local governments also cave to demand by big box retailers to build a conventional building with a huge setback from a major street, surrounded by a sea of parking.
This issue isn't personal, rather it's societal. It's all about sustainability and logical patterns of development. Time and time again, the negative impacts of segregated land uses and cul-du-sac residential development oriented around the automobile have become evident. IMHO, as gas prices rise and people value their time more wisely, you will actually see more and more people raise their families in condominiums or flats in urban areas. Suburban living is fine, but when everyone is forced or coerced into living a suburban lifestyle, that's when it becomes unsustainable.
I just sat here and read this whole thread, and have found the discussion interesting. I also think some of the "idealism" expressed re: overconsumption, being green, etc. is just plain wacko.
Yeah. I mean, caring about the environment is such a loony notion.
You can call it "idealistic" -- that's just detracting from the real issue. Please don't mischaracterize what I and others have said with regard to living sustainably.
This is not a critique of living in a big house in the middle of nowhere.
This is not a critique of spending thousands of dollars of your annual income on gasoline.
This is not a critique of you wanting to opt out of taking public transportation for any reason whatsoever.
What this debate is about, on the other hand, is how YOUR CONSUMER CHOICES affect the world around you. In other words, there is nothing innately wrong with living that lifestyle, but what is wrong is how it happens to, indeed, have a negative affect on the environment. If you and others don't realize how your living choices will affect the world around you -- or even care for that matter -- then you're simply shortsighted or just plain self-centered. In other words, this is not such a cut-and-dry "that's my personal right, so leave me alone" debate. It affects EVERYONE. As such, I and the rest of society have every obligation and right to criticize the living habits that affect the environment that WE live in. We're all on this big, green (for now) Earth together.
I don't expect everyone to live perfectly, because I sure don't. I also completely understand that not everything is in the average Joe's control, but this is far from a quest of somehow being self-righteous, and we should at least do what we can to prevent development from hurting the environment.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,476,450 times
Reputation: 12187
Quote:
Originally Posted by south-to-west
You're absolutely right in many ways. However, after living in Spain, I disagree with you that people won't walk outside in the heat. People do it all the time there. People also walk a lot in Charleston and Savannah and it gets hotter than hell in those cities.
People in Savannah and Charleston line trees along their streets and sidewalks to lessen the summer heat. Shade in 100 degree weather feels awesome
My pics from Savannah
http://static2.bareka.com/photos/medium/7589421.jpg (broken link)
^^^I don't see many people out walking! I agree with anifani and I was thinking the same thing about the heat in Phoenix. It is not like Spain; it is more like Saudi Arabia!
The way we have planned has made suburbs and cities mutually exclusive. I hate to remember how freeways plowed the city blocks of Mpls. so people can get to downtown. Hey, it doesn't effect me. It hurts the vitality of the city so that it can sprout new suburbs.
Most other cities on earth have a higher number of people who walk. Even some American cities have a high number of people who walk/bike/crawl down streets. People walk in New York, Chicago and Boston. They are a hell of alot colder than Kansas City. Weather is not the reason why people live in suburbs or drive.
The most frustrating thing is how many people believe you need to have ticky-tacky subdivisions and strip malls to have a back yard or some space. You don't. You can have all the single-family homes in the world and be just as sustainable as Paris or Manhattan; it is how they are planned. Take a smaller front yard, build some convenient stores on corners within residential areas, don't relegate all commercial activity into specialized nodes filled with parking. Have a mix of housing, not everyone in a certain area needs a large home. Where does Grandma live?
Nobody dictates what you drive (or they shouldn't). Alot of people need trucks. However, the number of trucks and Hummers far outweighs the number of people who ACTUALLY need them. The crux is that they have become the ONLY method of transportation.
People walk in Midtown Atlanta, New Orleans, Midtown Houston, Uptown Dallas just to name a few. And if you haven't spent a summer in Washington DC, I can tell you it can get very hot but that really doesn't stop people.
The weather, like everything else, is just another excuse. People in the US are lazy and overweight. Some people will make up every excuse in the book.
The way we have planned has made suburbs and cities mutually exclusive. I hate to remember how freeways plowed the city blocks of Mpls. so people can get to downtown. Hey, it doesn't effect me. It hurts the vitality of the city so that it can sprout new suburbs.
Most other cities on earth have a higher number of people who walk. Even some American cities have a high number of people who walk/bike/crawl down streets. People walk in New York, Chicago and Boston. They are a hell of alot colder than Kansas City. Weather is not the reason why people live in suburbs or drive.
The most frustrating thing is how many people believe you need to have ticky-tacky subdivisions and strip malls to have a back yard or some space. You don't. You can have all the single-family homes in the world and be just as sustainable as Paris or Manhattan; it is how they are planned. Take a smaller front yard, build some convenient stores on corners within residential areas, don't relegate all commercial activity into specialized nodes filled with parking. Have a mix of housing, not everyone in a certain area needs a large home. Where does Grandma live?
Nobody dictates what you drive (or they shouldn't). Alot of people need trucks. However, the number of trucks and Hummers far outweighs the number of people who ACTUALLY need them. The crux is that they have become the ONLY method of transportation.
Well said! I agree wholeheartedly.
The issue, unfortunately, is that people will justify anything with "personal rights." It's that kind of fragmented, individualistic thinking that leads us to forget that we're each a piece of the human puzzle. There's nothing "idealistic" or "preachy" about that, and I couldn't think of any more of a practical cause than fighting for the environment. Unless that's kept in balance, then there won't be ANY lifestyle to live.
People walk in New York, Chicago and Boston. They are a hell of alot colder than Kansas City.
Per City-Data's weather stats (and my own knowledge), the only city colder than KC is Chicago, and that is only by a degree or two in Dec/Jan. Boston and NY are actually warmer, though Boston not by much. The average low in NYC in Dec/Jan is only a few degrees below freezing.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 02-04-2008 at 08:34 PM..
Reason: Add quotes, fix typo
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.
