BOWERS: What's so bad about suburban sprawl anyway?

The Star [South Chicago] ^ | 1/39/6 | Michael Bowers

[passionfruit]

"Yes, suburbia does not take up much land, but it gobbles tax dollars, wastes infrastructure, creates stress, becomes part of a combined domestic environmental cocoon wrapped in congestion, pollution, and due to faulty planning, induces social and intellectual isolationism, obesity, etc. "
I disagree. Suburbanites pay taxes that subsidize the cities. This was brought to light recently when the San Fernando Valley tried to secede the city of LA. Those folks are being taxed to death and not receiving the services they pay for. Their tax dollars go to support L.A..
The inner city was urged by their leftist leaders to turn out to vote to keep the valley part of Los Angeles, and they won. Why would Los Angeles voters care if the Valley seceded from Los Angeles? Taxes.

[BenLurkin]

Not only that.

Urban areas could easily transformed into "special enforcement zones" (eg the current 'no drugs/guns within 1,00 feet of a school yard' regulations in some cities) The elites will not be subject to the same laws as those of us trapped in the urban zones.

And best of all, the well-to-do elites -- of BOTH parties it appears -- will be able enjoy ski runs in Vail uncluttered by the ugly mess of their fellow Americans living within sight of their luxury condominiums.

[HairOfTheDog]

LF: McMansion neighborhoods surrounded by WalMart-Kohls-Target-Home Depot shopping centers, with the same chains of restaurants: Olive Garden, TGI Fridays, Starbucks, Red Lobster...

BL: I don't find that disturbing at all.

I do find it sad that communities and regions that used to be unique and quaint are fading. Instead of the Ma and Pa cafe that we used to make a point of stopping at on the way to Reno, there are the same fast food places we have at home. We can travel anywhere in this country now, and never see anything new, at least in terms of architecture and services. This land has great diversity in landscape, but the towns are all the same. It ~is~ a loss.

Here at home we still have a few local businesses... our local grocer who now has huge chain groceries on all sides of him. We'll shop there as long as he stays open... because I like that I know the name of the man who owns it, and went to school with his kids. It means something to me.

[ScreamingFist]

Instead we are being stuck with this soul-less cookie cutter enviornment that is leaving us nothing to tie ourselves to, and look at what it's doing to the kids who are raised in these environments. I'm not sure that we really have much of a choice here. The big winners are the developers--the rest of us lose.

I agree. Walled communities with homes 2 feet apart and security at the gates and countless, redundant mega-merchandisers within 20 minutes driving on packed hiways...urban sprawl is a problem. Planning is the key, unfortunately, planning goes out the window when tax hungry city governments are put in charge of development.

[sauropod]

mark

[Chi-townChief]

Just out of curiosity, let's see that 2004 electoral map again:



The county map showing the breakdown of Kerry's support reveals much about the folks who voted for him. His base is isolated, tending to live like rats in overcrowded, democrat-machine-controlled areas rife with corruption (and heavy vote fraud), crime, and government hand-out programs.

The blue towers appear to represent all of the high rise ghettos where Ketchup Boy gets the bulk of his votes such as the Cabrini-Green and Robert Taylor housing projects here in Chicago.

[bfree]

I do find it sad that communities and regions that used to be unique and quaint are fading. Instead of the Ma and Pa cafe that we used to make a point of stopping at on the way to Reno, there are the same fast food places we have at home. We can travel anywhere in this country now, and never see anything new, at least in terms of architecture and services. This land has great diversity in landscape, but the towns are all the same. It ~is~ a loss.

A loss to you on your vacation, but not to those who live in those areas. If people didn't WANT these things, the stores and restaurants would go broke. What is it about free choice that bothers people? Why do you think everyone should share your vision of what should be?

[BenLurkin]

I understand the sentiment and I imagine thee are many, many people who as they travel our nation are looking for unique local shops and diners. Speaking for myself, I prefer the predictability of eating somewhere that I'm familiar with the product.

But the real issue is liberty. No matter what the result I am disinclined to place unreasonable limitations on business development and instead favor capitalism.

Similarly, it is hard for me to get upset about people owning homes even if the tracts at first are drearily similar. (And even that changes over time).

You I'm sure are different, but I suspect that some people are REALLY complaining about the expansion of minority population into formerly all white areas. The liberals in particular prefer a world where they can live in all white enclaves and claim to value "diversity". When diversity shows up on their suburban doorstep they now need a way to shove it back into the urban confines. Opposing "sprawl" is the way.

[bfree]

Too bad your not the king of the world. Others happen you like those things that you decry, but I guess you know best for everyone, just like Hillary and the left.

[HairOfTheDog]

If you don't think it's a loss that ALL our towns now look ~exactly~ the same, then you'll undoubtedly be very pleased in the new America. I do think we've lost something.

[HairOfTheDog]

Speaking for myself, I prefer the predictability of eating somewhere that I'm familiar with the product.

That has it's appeal to the "Accidental Tourist" who really doesn't like to travel.

As for your last paragraph... I don't even comprehend the point. That's not at all what I see.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

"When the sprawl reaches your doorstep, sell your land for many times what you paid for it and then go buy yourself another property a few more miles out where you can live comfortably until the sprawl reaches your doorstep again. REPEAT."

You're my kind of Capitalist, PassionFruit! I'm sitting on a little gold mine on the edge of two converging cities, myself. Selling in five years or so is planned, and in the meanwhile, I'll enjoy being one of the last small farms out here.

I've gone from City to Suburbs to Small Town to Farm.

And then I'll find another small farm south of here & "repeat" until I can't physically care for myself any longer, then me and my pile of money will move to the city where everything's more convenient for we 'Little Old Ladies.'

That's my plan, anyway. :)

[ScreamingFist]

Too bad your not the king of the world. Others happen you like those things that you decry, but I guess you know best for everyone, just like Hillary and the left

Live wherever you want, enjoy your home depots and gated communities. I moved to the sticks so I wouldn't be subjected to unlimited views of home depots and walmarts and the opinions of nasty little snots like you.....

[passionfruit]

I am so glad you agree! What the whiners on this thread don't realize is that the wealthy got that way by seeing opportunity where others saw problems. Real estate has made many paupers into princes!

[BenLurkin]

You're right -- I don't travel much for the sake of travel. I hope you do not think poorly of me for that.

As for the racism -- is is quite real. Liberals are some of the biggest racists around. They would never say they want to keep their suburb "all white". But I believe they are jumping on this "urban sprawl" argument as a way of keeping the minorities in the cities. (And as I said I don't mean you)

Also, the well-to-do are on this as well. They see scenic America as theirs to enjoy and could care less about you and me. They don't want to get to the top of the ski run and see a Wal-Mart sign in the distance.

So it is not only racism -- it is selfishness as well.

[ScreamingFist]

Also, the well-to-do are on this as well. They see scenic America as theirs to enjoy and could care less about you and me. They don't want to get to the top of the ski run and see a Wal-Mart sign in the distance.

Or wind generators from their ocean front homes.......

[HairOfTheDog]

Well who would?

I'm not one of those who sees endless expansion as a good thing.

[passionfruit]

You don't have to see endless expansion as a good thing. You have to recognize that it is inevitable.

A good Reublican President, Teddy Roosevelt saw to it that we will always have plenty of National Parks and Forests. That land will be preserved and is arguably the most beautiful on earth.

Our children are growing up, and they want what Mom & Dad gave them as kids. They want to provide a nice home in a safe neighborhood, good schools and freedom for their children. That means expansion.

[HairOfTheDog]

Our children are growing up

Well, I do realize it's inevitable, which means, for the things I really value, I'm lucky to be alive today, because it'll eventually be gone.

For my part, looks like I'll not be having kids, so at least I'm not adding to it.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

"Real estate has made many paupers into princes!"

And Princesses, LOL! Bought my first house at age 25. While I was in the Army I rented it out and also owned other rental properties which my Dad managed for me during periods when I was overseas.

My best investment ever was a grand old Victorian that I bought cheap and restored to her former period glory. Now THAT was a lot of work, but a lot of fun, too. Furnishing it with period pieces found at estate sales and Goodwill, and a mother that was a pro with a thread and needle for velvet curtains and tufted furniture helped, too.

I've had a lot of fun. Now DH & I have a 1906 Four Square Colonial farmhouse, but I'm not sinking a lot of money into the house aside from continually upgrading it for energy efficiency. The land is worth much more than this house, which will probably be razed anyway for a subdivision in the future.

One of the reasons I married my husband was that he was willing to re-roof my house in the 'burbs to ready it for sale before we married and bought a house together...and he had six brothers to help. :)

There's got to be a method to your madness when it comes to Real Estate, or people just think you're mad, LOL!