Quote:
As much as I hate the typical suburbs I understand why and how some people like them - people who have a car at their disposal. The kids however are stuck where they are. |
fastcars - you grew up in greensville, yes? that's a little more rural than my experience. not all suburban areas are created equally. i can imagine enjoying life in greensville because there's much beauty there: spencer creek, webster's and tew's falls, some interesting architecture and history. my previous neighbourhood, and those of so many others, are completely void of that sort of stimuli. that's the tragedy of most suburban experiences.
|
Quote:
|
fastcars...i think you're missing my point. There is no elitism on the board as far as I can tell.
Would you consider me an elitist if I said "we need less smokers in our society polluting kids in their cars"? No, it's a fact. We need better planning and less car-dependant sprawl in our society. That's not elitism, it's a fact. Check todays Star for a report linking air pollution to heart problems. Anyone on here who doesn't know already, air pollution leads to a whole host of problems. Why should we ban smokers in restaurants, yet allow people to circle the restaurant with their engines idling? A lot of this has to do with perspective...the media and society in general has convinced us that living in car dependant suburbs is good and smoking is bad. The same people who 'choose' to live in these areas never shut-up about the price of gas (which is much lower than it should be in N.America) and yet will sit in a drive-thru to pay $5.00 for a bit of coffee and syrup. We need to start calling things as they are, and not as the TV tells us they are. Sprawl is bad in every way imaginable. That's not elitist, but I apologize if it comes across that way. It's simply the truth. |
Tecumseh, Ontario. I am in a suburban/subdivision type area, but close enough to an arterial road that there is a Tim's that closeby. Hoofing it another 5 minutes beyond that yields an A&P, Shoppers and other services. I find it just as easy to walk to be honest, than it is to fire up my truck and drive--takes just as long. I can't really say I do it for altruistic reasons--it's just what makes sense.
Yeah the dude--Greensville-area--did I share that previously or was that just an insanely good guess? Either way, I won't argue with you on one point--Highland Hills. Given that I went to high school nearby to there, I can attest to the fact that that area was built at the absolute nadir of quality and thought when it came to suburban dwellings--I knew someone in that area and the house was awful. The older subdivisions (University Gardens) and the newer (Pleasant Valley) were far-and-away better than Highland Hills. Frankly I think Dundas is a great example of a place where urban-style living and suburban developments co-exist really well...Highland Hills aside. |
I may have missed the point RTH. You missed mine--indeed it is the truth--your truth. I happen to disagree, therefore, it is not my truth.
|
Quote:
I'm sorry ,but some things in life don't work like that. That's the Spectators singular most frustrating attribute IMO - always trying to show 'both sides' of a story instead of just looking at the facts. I'd ask you to share with me facts, medical reports, financial statements, tax/infrastructure reports, safety stats etc.... that PROVE your fact. I can do all of the above, and more, to prove mine. |
Sprawl is bad in every way imaginable
To put a finer point on it, I'm arguing that it is not bad in "every way imaginable" as you stated. I am certain that there are ways in which sprawl is negative--I didn't say there wasn't. There are also ways in which sprawl is sustainable and positive. Again, I would argue, that just because you believe in something earnestly and passionately (which you do in this case) doesn't make it fact. Even a hard fact, if that's what you are interested in, has a multitude of causes and explanations. Pollution from industry and coal heating was horrendous in the early industrial period--in an era when people either lived in high density cities or on farms. So your beef with The Spec now is that they are too neutral? How would you feel about The Spec if they stated facts the way I see them? Would that be more palatable? Again, the deeper issue here is that someone can be as positive and forward-thinking about "urban" Hamilton as possible, but if they are unwilling to damn cars, big box stores and the suburbs to hell, they are simply dismissed here, because they are WRONG, right down to the marrow of their bones. Frankly I find it completely provincial and counter-productive. I wonder what the tenor of these discussions would be if I simply dug in my heels all the time and said, "I'm right, you're wrong, case closed" without ever being willing to listen to other points-of-view. Frankly, I'm about ready to start driving the de-amalgamation bus--I think perhaps the "divide" is too great...let Flamborough and Ancaster build their own roads, let Hamilton fix it's own sewers--and the fact that the "old" City of Hamilton will be completely pinned in development-wise can be solved by redeveloping brownfields. |
Quote:
Find me studies and reports that show the benefits of sprawl. It's not my opinion. This is multitudes of planners, doctors, educators speaking. Not me. My complaint with the Spec is that ALL THEY DO is present 'your' opinion. That's why they always parade out the Desantis' of the world whenever another medical report shows the horrendous health effects of sprawl. They refuse to simply state the medical facts. They give us bullcrap from some guy whos job is to build homes. RTH did some writing on this a while back: http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog.asp?id=033 http://www.raisethehammer.org/index.asp?id=046 - read the ending part of this blog entry. Great stuff about the Home Builders. ps...if it makes you feel any better, change my sentence above to "ALMOST every way imaginable". Although nobody has still come on here and given one solid, hard fact showing any positive effect of un-checked sprawl. |
If we are to bash sprawl, our reasons for bashing it must be based on facts about it's harmful effects, such as environmental degradation, car-dependency, etc. RTH is right that sprawl is bad and there's a lot of factual information to back that up. There's no question about that.
What ISN'T productive is people judging the character of people who are ideologically attracted to the suburban environment. When you let your ideological hatred for suburbs get in the way of the real issues of sprawl, it makes your argument seem a lot less credible. Look at James Kunstler for instance. He once stated that because America builds spaces that people don't care about (monotonous and privatized suburbia), Americans don't have a nation worth defending. The comment I was responding to was coalminecanary scoffing at someone because they "find life across from Future Shop so fulfilling". It struck me as the typical kind of arrogant comment that gets spouted off by urban elitists. Because y'know, we suburbanites are all the same. We are all drones who drive SUVs, vote conservative, shop at Walmart, and spend the rest of our time sitting in drive-thru line-ups at Tim Hortons :rolleyes:. It's like me saying that all urbanites do is sit around and drink lattes all day. I said what I said for illustrative purposes. The downtown Hamiltonians who turn their nose up at Waterdown aren't really too different from the Waterdowners who turn their nose up at downtown Hamilton. |
Quote:
I can live with that. I do my best to not make it personal, although I do believe that many people have been duped into 'liking that lifestyle'. They've been told to escape the crime, pollution and congestion of the city for cleaner, greener pastures. Problem is, the crime, pollution and congestion is just as bad, in some cases worse, in the burbs. Kunstler is a lot deeper than you're giving him credit for. Most American's wouldn't dare put their life on the line to preserve an area of bland suburban-ness. Do you really think that they are passionate and willing to sacrifice life and limb the same way someone from Paris or Budapest or Rome would be for their cities?? We're literally witnessing a breakdown of society. People never interact, so they don't care about each other or about the physical surroundings. Again, this is proven over and over in research. Ultimately, I don't really have a problem with what coalmine said. In fact, I think it's quite eye-opening. People are about to make the largest single purchase of their entire lives. They have all kinds of options and choices. And they choose to buy next to a freeway or Future Shop parking lot? It is rather perplexing when you stop and think about it. |
Quote:
Quote:
Community in the suburbs manifests itself in a different way. From my experience, people form community not within their immediate geographic environment, but through associations such as schools, churches, sports teams, work, and networks of friends. They just have to drive a lot of the time to get to each other's houses. |
I was just about to post an apology for stirring up such emotions over a simple question, but I have to respond to your comment:
Quote:
Quote:
Anyway, people are welcome to respond to my question -- maybe something along the lines of "in fact, it is fulfilling because ________" -- and then perhaps I'd be able to better relate to the choice to live in this type of development. Some of you have, but I'm still not convinced. I think the problem is that personally I dislike getting in my car. I find it to be an inefficient way of going about my daily business. I don't like how it disconnects me from the other people on the street. I don't like the attitudes that driving brings out in people (including myself). I don't like the frustrations of traffic. I don't like the cost. There is a lot to dislike. I do appreciate the convenience and the comfort especially in winter. But in my ideal world, I'd be able to walk/cycle to everything I need on any day of the year. So I have trouble relating to living in a neighbourhood where it's a 10 minute walk just to get to the nearest main street - and that street has only a few amenities (if any) - and it's a 10 minute walk between each amenity. I think these characteristics are pretty universal in the neighbourhoods we classify as "sprawl", and they are the characteristics that force undue car usage (especailly for short trips) and all of the negatives that go along with that (congestion, pollution, road rage, etc). So my personal feelings are pretty clear now, and I didn't mean to belittle anyone who chooses to live in the 'burbs, but I DID mean to question their reasoning because there must be some huge benefits to them that I just don't see... |
I forget who said it on here, but someone mentioned that the newer, younger generations are moving back to the city and forgetting suburban sprawl.
Myself, my brother, most of my friends who are moving out of their parents' homes are moving into the city (both Hamilton and Toronto, unfortunately). I think my generation, and those to follow, understand the need to save our planet. We understand the need to preserve greenspace (whether it be parks, conservation lands or farms). We understand that Public Transit IS a better option as most of the suburbs we grew up in are just as, if not more, congested as a city's centre. Not to mention the fact that some developments completely mess up the current, functioning system already in place (ie: look what they did to Upper Stoney Creek! It's SUCH a mess now!) Give the city 10-15 years. If we haven't already imploded, we'll have a fresh bach a PROGRESSIVE thinkers on council, on city staff, and all across the city in general. It's unfortunate that we currently have politicians wasting OUR money on expanding (what used to be) rural roads into highways, building overpasses to big box plazas, and Highways to nowhere. BUT BE PATIENT... the tide has yet to turn in this city. Just wait and see, 10-15 years, people will be laughing at this current coucil we have and it's rediculous decisions much like WE all laugh at (former Mayor) Jack MacDonald for thinking that the trees in Gore Park were "too old"... so he cut them down... as we all know. Then he tries to start a campaign to name the newly-built highway HE OPPOSED after himself. What a fool. |
I personally don't think that the suburbs get the ridicule they deserve. They deserve ridicule because the persons moving to them actually believe that their purchases are a symbol of affluence. Their delusion is a actually quite funny and dangerous simultaneously. Wood framed plastic tract houses, oversized SUVs, and terrible box restaurants are only symbols of bad taste. One day people will come to their senses and see how absurd they really are. Like when you see pictures of people in the 70's with their bell bottoms and awkward clothing it is a subject of ridicule. I think this is generally the way the avant garde and younger generations are beginning to see the suburbs. It is actually funny to hear people defend their preposterously banal lifestyle choices. All I can do is feel sorry for you.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Yes your right I meant banal.
|
Quote:
Cocooning. And unless hey start to put some money into the older city core schools, this trend will not change. Parents make decisions on where they live based on many things, but schools is near the top of anyone's list. |
we moved downtown when we got married and now, 2 kids later, are still downtown and loving it. no plans to EVER go back. we've seen the light! lol.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:18 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.