Posted on 07/31/2013 12:16:09 PM PDT by Lorianne
Charles Marohn of Strong Towns discusses why our current development attitudes are only costing us millions and millions of dollars and is inevitably unsustainable.
Video 41:35
Yea.........Agenda 21 stuff. I went to their website. Its the “New Urbanist” dream of everyone rides a bicycle and real estate in the core is unbelievably expensive so the proletariat workers have to spend an hour or more on a bus to a 600 square ft apt. that costs $1,000.00 a month 60 miles from the elitist haven of the “Urban” scape. In sum: Portland Oregon.
In the new normal of no middle class and no prosperity where the best job anyone can find is serving coffee at Starbucks, I guess it will somehow work out.
Perhaps their are 2 different solutions: the city warrens we hear about, with lots of homes close together (like 'projects'?), but also the rural solution -- homes on main roads with wells and and septic systems (or outhouses?!?), so the infrastructure is small and sustainable.
Actually, a lot of areas are running out of building space and townhouses and closely-packed ‘villas’ are being built instead of McMansions.
Not to mention that the demographics are such that more people will be CHOOSING to live in condos and such, plus others will have NO CHOICE but to live in assisted living type facilities.
What totally pisses me off, here and elsewhere, is the automatic assumption that anything related to preservation, conservation, being “green”, using alternative transportation, etc is automatically and stupidly labeled “Agenda 21”.
Many of us do these things because we are makers, innovators, and because we damn well please, not because we are puppets of some imaginary conspiracy direction by the UN.
I’d never heard of Agenda 21 until some screaming teaparty nut started spitting in my face that I was a part of it because I ride a bike and paddle a canoe. Once upon a time those things were called “personal choice”.
Well, if we are robbing Peter to pay Paul for 60+ years what we have been doing is not sustainable.
Why do you think so many cities are going broke?
Seems like our developments have been Ponzi schemes since just after WWII
Yea, don’t get me wrong, he’s got some good points and so do you and he’s correct about the upsy daisy of the cost of maintenance, etc. I like your “rural” solution. So much so that the retirement “cottage” we bought in a rather, “blue collar” neighborhood near a very small town is on a half acre with septic and its own water well. (I intentionally seek out “blue collar” because this is in West Texas and those neighborhoods are safer, every one’s armed, no one theives......they borrow, and they know how to fix stuff when I don’t).
I’ve somewhat studied on this problem of US cities and their development/re-development and “undevelopment” (Detroit), and its huge and largely a creation of Big Money Developers and millions of acres of cheap land. I mean really, compared to Europe or Asia, this country simply isn’t “filled in”. I don’t know what the solution is, but the best one I’ve seen is in Illinois/Ohio where basically companies involved in manufacturing anything moved out with their headquarters staff and plants to small towns located near Interstate Highways and rail connections to escape Chicago’s taxes, etc. So basically, these become like Company Towns with good schools, ease of access and usually within 1 to 2 hours from a major Metro area if someone wants to see a Play or go to a museum.
I would “guess” that’s going to be what the future looks like because these companies want to attract the best young talent they can and the youngsters, after college and particularly if married and in a family-way, won’t locate in or near the Urban school districts.
Exactly.
No matter what type of development it should be pay as you go, not the Ponzi model we have been using where cities are welfare recipients of the Feds and State government ... by design
I agree.
What is exactly wrong having multiple choices and people decide how they want to live?
I think its a good time for companies to build strong houses in tight and defensible communities.
You got that right!
True; development patterns have been a Ponzi scheme designed by and for fat cat developers to enrich....fat cat developers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.