# The tragedy of suburbia



## Jason Whipple

This guy is dead on and worth taking the time to listen to. :thumbsup:

A few bad words here and there. It's a TED speech.


----------



## GRB

Excellent video. Thanks for posting, Jason. :thumbsup:


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

I think this guy is a kook that likes to hear himself talk. So the world is not as he likes it. Why doesn't he buy the lots and build as he likes, then some one can come in back of him and bag on his ideas:blink: I can't believe I didn't see any Graffiti :blink:


----------



## Jason Whipple

Dirtywhiteboy said:


> I think this guy is a kook that likes to hear himself talk. So the world is not as he likes it. Why doesn't he buy the lots and build as he likes, then some one can come in back of him and bag on his ideas:blink: I can't believe I didn't see any Graffiti :blink:


Sorry, we're talking about the continental US here not some islands we took from a foreign Country.

I should have been more clear...:laughing:

If you have great big malls with full parking lots out there then that's just super!:clap:


----------



## E-Centric

While I agree that he enjoys being the animated presenter, I also think he makes some solid points.

That was in '07(I think) and since then, there's been quite a big push for a good portion of his points -- growing, working, and living closer to where you need to be to live(I just didn't want to say "work", since it's not the only thing we should focus our lives around).

Something along those lines -- http://www.nrdc.org/cities/smartgrowth/solve/orenco.asp

On the whole, he's in-line with what AptPupil stated in another thread, that it's our responsibility to make the changes we want, rather than wait to accept or decline the changes that happen.

--CWP


----------



## duburban

Jason Whipple said:


> Sorry, we're talking about the continental US here not some islands we took from a foreign Country.
> 
> I should have been more clear...:laughing:
> 
> If you have great big malls with full parking lots out there then that's just super!:clap:



oahu, worst traffic in the US! 

it does suck...


----------



## GRB

Jason Whipple said:


> Sorry, we're talking about the continental US here not some islands we took from a foreign Country.
> 
> I should have been more clear...:laughing:
> 
> If you have great big malls with full parking lots out there then that's just super!:clap:


Brrr. 95 degrees out, yet so cold. :thumbsup:


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

duburban said:


> oahu, worst traffic in the US!
> it does suck...


That's what I hear yet we have groups that fight a mass transit rail system the the feds want to give us 100s of million to build:blink:


Jason Whipple said:


> Sorry, we're talking about the continental US here not some islands we took from a foreign Country.


And what country was that?? And the Mainland wasn't taken?




duburban said:


> If you have great big malls with full parking lots out there then that's just super!:clap:


 That's the unique thing about where I live. I am a 15 min. walk from the worlds largest outdoor mall, a short bike ride from epic surf and a bike ride the other way is beautiful forest hiking with beautiful waterfalls. 45 mins. north is the 7 mile miracle.
Very few places can a guy go snow boarding and surfing on the same day :blink:


----------



## Tom Struble

GRB said:


> Brrr. 95 degrees out, yet so cold. :thumbsup:


and a white hot return by dwb:laughing:


----------



## Jason Whipple

Dirtywhiteboy said:


> That's the unique thing about where I live. I am a 15 min. walk from the worlds largest outdoor mall, a short bike ride from epic surf and a bike ride the other way is beautiful forest hiking with beautiful waterfalls. 45 mins. north is the 7 mile miracle.
> Very few places can a guy go snow boarding and surfing on the same day :blink:


You're right; it's "unique".


----------



## Jaws

dirtywhiteboy said:


> that's what i hear yet we have groups that fight a mass transit rail system the the feds want to give us 100s of million to build:blink:
> And what country was that?? And the mainland wasn't taken?
> 
> 
> That's the unique thing about where i live. I am a 15 min. Walk from the worlds largest outdoor mall, a short bike ride from epic surf and a bike ride the other way is beautiful forest hiking with beautiful waterfalls. 45 mins. North is the 7 mile miracle.
> Very few places can a guy go snow boarding and surfing on the same day :blink:


nice


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

I'm sorry about the response as I have always lived in the city. For those of you that have always lived in the country, I understand that growth and progress is hard and unwanted. And unorganized growth even worse. But with growth comes more work. I for fun took a trip on google street view the other day down my old hood in Fort Lauderdale Fla. down sunrise blvd. to be exact and was shocked at what I saw Man has that place changed in 25 years


----------



## Kent Whitten

Having taken architecture and design seriously, I think this guy is spot on. Most of what we as society build today is absolute junk. We cater to the cheap consumer. 

I was on our towns comprehensive committee and I tell you it is one huge uphill battle. Most people cannot see what the future should be like for their own community. They think everything is fine, don't fix what isn't broken. It's ****ing broken, I assure you.


----------



## asbestos

I've seen some seriously ugly architecture and planning in HI (kaneohe come to mind) we let profit driven idiots create problems then we have to try and clean them up. Sprawl is always pushed as creating jobs or "people have to live somewhere" We use land like a second grader uses construction paper.


----------



## aptpupil

i didn't watch the whole thing, but i found some good food for thought and definitely relevant to the forum. i agree with kent when he says that so much of what we're doing these days is junk. we're a society that has placed too much emphasis on "progress" and money and what this guy is talking about is just one manifestation of that issue.
i'm from LA which is one of those rare places that dwb was talking about - surf and snow in the same day. however, it was also unfortunately developed at a time when the automobile was becoming popular. certain companies whistling bought up the streetcars and converted them to buses thereby all but ensuring that the freeway (and thus the suburb) would take hold. long term sustainability and ideas like community were basically lost in the hustle to expand. the age of the levittown was born.
tough issue, but i think the root cause is that money is the most important consideration in our culture. until we fix that, we're just treating the symptom instead of the cause.


----------



## Tom Struble

i don't wanna live close to you jerks:no:


----------



## GRB

Tom Struble said:


> i don't wanna live close to you jerks:no:


Oh, thank god. 



Honey... Take down the For Sale sign. Struble's staying in NJ.


----------



## Sar-Con

Sure he makes a few decent points...but society has evolved since the time of middle ages. 

Huge cathedrals aren't being built today because we don't have slave labour anymore. 

Civic centres are built for the product on the inside, not asthectics on the outside. Save that for the ball-parks and arenas that have serious dough from the sports teams they host....

I could go on, but you get my drift. This guy is one speech away from suggesting a law is written that says our roads have to be paved with gold because its looks nicer.


----------



## Rio

Sar-Con said:


> Huge cathedrals aren't being built today because we don't have slave labour anymore.


What huge cathedrals were built by slave labor?


----------



## hdavis

This guy pops up from time to time. He's a professional whiner with his own version of utopia. Valid points don't really matter except that it gives him a chance to sell solutions that are even bigger problems.

Some of the ugliest, most area inappropriate buildings I've seen are funded by tax dollars, designed by architects, and excessively costly to build and maintain. Design by committee and federal/state/local requirements is churning out steaming piles - I'm not interested in going down this road any further. If someone actually builds a utopia, I might check it out and see if I'd like to live there and see what the labor market is.


----------



## Jason Whipple

I'm sure everyone is going to take something different from this video but for me I see that we've tried and tried to recreate something we already knew how to do but in the process have made a mess of things.

We've lost the desire for detail and replace it with very bland and boring buildings. The event's are what make the place and not the atmosphere created by the layout of the land and it's Architecture.

I remember when I was working in the huge Malls as a young carpenter. People couldn't wait till they got done. It's almost all people talked about. Now you drive by these places and they're just enormous vacant buildings with empty parking lots. I really don't see them ever coming back into fashion. Now we see smaller more open shopping centers with full parking lots in other neighborhoods. How long will this be in fashion?

The problem is that with each great new step we think we're taking we leave monuments of epic size sitting in every corner of the US. No one wants to do anything with these buildings because like the speaker say's, "it's just not good enough to care".

Thankfully I'm seeing first hand a movement towards new urbanism. Making use of the older building and neighborhoods in many of the cities around here, big and small. The character of the homes and building are unlike anything we would build today and most are very restorable. These area's will be the up and coming while the plastic track homes built 20 years ago will slowly transform into the new ghetto's with their vacant elephant buildings standing near by.


----------



## UpNorth

Jimmy makes a lot of good points in his book, _The Geography of Nowhere._ Rather than listening to his bloviations in this video, read his book.

Visit his website. He sells his own paintings, and some are pretty good. He lives a couple hours south of me, and is married to a friend of mine's first wife. Six degrees of separation and all that.


----------



## aptpupil

i'm not arguing in favor of a planned utopia or another Brasilia, but there needs to be a little more thoughtful planning in city development. it certainly wouldn't hurt to build things that look pleasant and have some artistry, in addition to being useful.
"all fine architectural values are human values, else not valuable." - frank lloyd wright


----------



## hdavis

I'm all for it, as long as my ideas of pleasant and artistry are followed.


----------



## aptpupil

hdavis said:


> I'm all for it, as long as my ideas of pleasant and artistry are followed.


interesting. are you being facetious or do you really think that?


----------



## fjn

*Kunstler*

I as of yet have not listened to the video. I 'am familiar with Kunstler having read 2 of his books, Geography of Nowhere & Home from Nowhere. His latest book The Long Emergency,was way to depressing,i do not think i hit page 8. Having said all that,he has a few points worth considering. The part he and the majority like him do not understand is the more you push against something,anything the more it tends to expand and extend itself. Mother Teresa understood this rather esoteric concept. Check out her being quoted on war protests and peace rallys. The essence of that idea is that,unbeknowenst to Kunstler and his cronies the more he beats the drum,the more he may be counted as part of the problem,as opposed to the solution. Among other issues, those drum beaters talk a whole lot about problems,and very little about solutions. I have little patience for fear mongers,panic peddlers,and the chicken littles.


----------



## Tom Struble

and i bet he knows this and cashes in on it somehow


----------



## aptpupil

fjn said:


> I as of yet have not listened to the video. I 'am familiar with Kunstler having read 2 of his books, Geography of Nowhere & Home from Nowhere. His latest book The Long Emergency,was way to depressing,i do not think i hit page 8. Having said all that,he has a few points worth considering. The part he and the majority like him do not understand is the more you push against something,anything the more it tends to expand and extend itself. Mother Teresa understood this rather esoteric concept. Check out her being quoted on war protests and peace rallys. The essence of that idea is that,unbeknowenst to Kunstler and his cronies the more he beats the drum,the more he may be counted as part of the problem,as opposed to the solution. Among other issues, those drum beaters talk a whole lot about problems,and very little about solutions. I have little patience for fear mongers,panic peddlers,and the chicken littles.


not sure if i understand what you're saying about pushing against something and thus making it worse. so, if you fight crime you increase it?
definitely see where you coming from when it comes to being solutions oriented instead of just complaining. first you have to recognize the problem, though, and i don't think a lot of people think about suburbs being bad. it's cheap land, i get to own a house, i have to drive more. they may not consider the alternatives. they may visit a older city and see the nice architecture and marvel at it, but maybe it doesn't click that we have less of that than we had before. 
so, after reading his other books, what solutions do you propose?


----------



## Tom Struble

Jason Whipple said:


> I'm sure everyone is going to take something different from this video but for me I see that we've tried and tried to recreate something we already knew how to do but in the process have made a mess of things.
> 
> We've lost the desire for detail and replace it with very bland and boring buildings. The event's are what make the place and not the atmosphere created by the layout of the land and it's Architecture.
> 
> I remember when I was working in the huge Malls as a young carpenter. People couldn't wait till they got done. It's almost all people talked about. Now you drive by these places and they're just enormous vacant buildings with empty parking lots. I really don't see them ever coming back into fashion. Now we see smaller more open shopping centers with full parking lots in other neighborhoods. How long will this be in fashion?
> 
> The problem is that with each great new step we think we're taking we leave monuments of epic size sitting in every corner of the US. No one wants to do anything with these buildings because like the speaker say's, "it's just not good enough to care".
> 
> Thankfully I'm seeing first hand a movement towards new urbanism. Making use of the older building and neighborhoods in many of the cities around here, big and small. The character of the homes and building are unlike anything we would build today and most are very restorable. These area's will be the up and coming while the plastic track homes built 20 years ago will slowly transform into the new ghetto's with their vacant elephant buildings standing near by.


it's all cycle-able whats old is new and visa versa there's no great thinking done


----------



## Jason Whipple

Tom Struble said:


> it's all cycle-able whats old is new and visa versa there's no great thinking done


You think those great big Malls can be recycled into something? They would make nice prisons maybe. oh wait!


----------



## GRB

Jason Whipple said:


> You think those great big Malls can be recycled into something? They would make nice prisons maybe. oh wait!


Maybe the Blues Brothers had the right idea?


----------



## Tom Struble

Jason Whipple said:


> You think those great big Malls can be recycled into something? They would make nice prisons maybe. oh wait!


i bet you yes they will one day be recycled into something


----------



## GRB




----------



## Tom Struble

had to save the penguins..:thumbup:


----------



## GRB

Tom Struble said:


> had to save the penguins..:thumbup:


:clap::lol:


----------



## hdavis

aptpupil said:


> interesting. are you being facetious or do you really think that?


Since "pleasing" and "artistry" are undefinable outside of opinion, and the goal seems to me (at least from my perspective) for everything to be pleasing and have artistry, I'd at least have to have veto power over anything, else I may be offended in some way. Or you could leave it to the whims of my old homeowner's association (tasteless cretins) or perhaps the village review board for the local historic areas (they approve some hideous messes and refuse some good designs).


----------



## hdrider_chgo

The video was a good articulation of a lot of stuff I've been saying for years.

Can anyone argue that we are not building "Places not worth caring about"? 

Another good concept in the video: Citizen vs. Consumer.


----------



## Tom Struble

who cares


----------



## aptpupil

hdavis said:


> Since "pleasing" and "artistry" are undefinable outside of opinion, and the goal seems to me (at least from my perspective) for everything to be pleasing and have artistry, I'd at least have to have veto power over anything, else I may be offended in some way. Or you could leave it to the whims of my old homeowner's association (tasteless cretins) or perhaps the village review board for the local historic areas (they approve some hideous messes and refuse some good designs).


i hate HOAs.
yeah, those terms are subjective, but i think you'd be hard pressed to find a lot of people who would describe tract homes and malls (or other elements of suburbia) as "pleasing" and/or "artistic." maybe i'm wrong, but i would say "good enough" or "utilitarian" would be better adjectives. 
i tend to agree with jason when he talks about details being left out of suburban buildings. the considerations, it seems to me, for many of these buildings is more about cost per square foot and getting it through the permitting/building process quickly, rather than designing things have an attraction of their own. the predominate suburban building today is designed precisely to not offend - to not evoke a reaction of any kind, in fact. personally, i'm at the point where i'd rather see a building that - in trying to be something different - missed the mark artistically, than to see another poo colored stucco box.


----------



## Tom Struble

well not every old building was a work of art either


----------



## GRB

Tom Struble said:


> well not every old building was a work of art either


No, but I've yet to encounter any as nondescript, sterile, unimaginative, boring, cold, empty, underwhelming, or pointless as some of the crap that's been built in the name of haste & "budget" post WWII. 

Seriously, Tom. Look around at many of the buildings that were built in this country prior to the war. Even the most modest ones often had nice little touches that created character. From built-ins that were actually functional to woodwork that was purely ornamental, many of these places are real treasures. 

Speaking for myself, I just feel better whether I'm viewing their beauty or operating a functional element that's been incorporated into their design. I've always believed that's what good architecture is about.


----------



## Tom Struble

hey i dig the aesthetic:thumbup:


----------



## hdrider_chgo

Tom Struble said:


> well not every old building was a work of art either


And not every building needs to be a work of art. But it should be a place worth caring about. 

Just as important as the building itself is its context. Does it contribute to the community, merely take up space, or detract from its surroundings? 

What we build as a society says a lot about us as the American people. What kind of world are we building for future generations?


----------



## Tom Struble

your right


----------



## hdavis

Part of the problem is some people don't seem to appreciate the buildings for what they are. Barns and other farm buildings are some of the most utilitarian buildings around. If you can't appreciate the beauty of a plain jane barn, IMHO I don't think you're sophisticated enough to decide what's "worth caring about".

Same thing goes for New England salt boxes.

There may be more agreement on what's visually jarring - who knows.


----------



## hdavis

hdrider_chgo said:


> What we build as a society says a lot about us as the American people. What kind of world are we building for future generations?


Over the years I've talked to a lot of people, and they weren't building a world for future generations, they were building a house for themselves, retail space, etc. How can anyone say what future generations would want, especially if we're building what we want right now?


----------



## hdavis

GRB said:


> No, but I've yet to encounter any as nondescript, sterile, unimaginative, boring, cold, empty, underwhelming, or pointless as some of the crap that's been built in the name of haste & "budget" post WWII.
> 
> Seriously, Tom. Look around at many of the buildings that were built in this country prior to the war. Even the most modest ones often had nice little touches that created character. From built-ins that were actually functional to woodwork that was purely ornamental, many of these places are real treasures.
> 
> Speaking for myself, I just feel better whether I'm viewing their beauty or operating a functional element that's been incorporated into their design. I've always believed that's what good architecture is about.


Even the very plain houses built in the Victorian era used wall paper with some very pretty designs over the plaster. Wallpaper, paint schemes, etc can do a lot for interiors - add interest, warmth, change the feeling of the space in many ways. Cosmetically, a lot can be done with exteriors as well.


----------



## GRB

hdavis said:


> Even the very plain houses built in the Victorian era used wall paper with some very pretty designs over the plaster. Wallpaper, paint schemes, etc can do a lot for interiors - add interest, warmth, change the feeling of the space in many ways. Cosmetically, a lot can be done with exteriors as well.


True. In addition, & what I find to be particularly effective, is what's often missing from newer buildings: surface relief. Texture is a big part of how buildings translate to their surroundings & how they're perceived. 

They don't necessarily need to be dripping with detail like that often found on Gingerbread Victorians, but they shouldn't be monolithic masses of fiber cement, concrete, or any other material - especially plastic. 

This idea seems to be lost in many of today's buildings. How often do we see blank, uninterrupted walls on houses, or windows that lack any trim whatsoever? Who thinks this is acceptable in anything other than modern architecture, such as that put forth by the likes of Mies van der Rohe?


----------



## Sar-Con

I think the larger problem is not that the large box store is built, it is the unfortunate liablity on the municipality when the building is rendered obsolete, redundent and abandoned. If you thought it was an eye sore when it was operating, wait 2 years after it's been left vacant.


Municipalities need to demand letters of credit to ensure proper funds are set aside for demolition and decomissioning to be done. These massive defunct buildings are too much liablitiy for rate-payers to assume.


----------



## hdrider_chgo

hdavis said:


> Over the years I've talked to a lot of people, and they weren't building a world for future generations, they were building a house for themselves, retail space, etc. How can anyone say what future generations would want, especially if we're building what we want right now?


Maybe having "what we want right now" at the expense of the bigger picture is where part of the problem comes in.

We have many buildings and neighborhoods in Chicago that were built in the 1800's, and are still highly valued and cared about by people today, so I don't think it's that hard to anticipate. Good design is somewhat timeless.

Creating a disposable built environment is also more costly in the long run.


----------



## fjn

*Ideas*

Not that i truly believe this,just to play the devils advocate. Lincoln once said "God must have loved the common man,because he made so many of them". Man must love SUBURBIA,because he built and lives in so many of them.


----------



## TimNJ

If he wants to live in an area where you have to walk to the butcher shop to buy your meat, walk to the vegetable stand to buy your vegetables, ride your horse or bike to the tailors to get your pants made, then he should move there.
I happen to enjoy living in the country and because of that I put up with having to drive 1/2 hr to the supermarket.

I only could sit through about 8 mins and what I want to know is how do service providers, (us and suppliers) park their trucks and equipment to work in those pedestrian town center designed communities without having to shlep your tools or whatever three blocks to where you are working since there is no parking around?


----------



## MSLiechty

Dirtywhiteboy said:


> Very few places can a guy go snow boarding and surfing on the same day :blink:



Ummm i do that every year in CA ! But what id give up to live in HI.


ML


----------



## Jason Whipple

Sar-Con said:


> I think the larger problem is not that the large box store is built, it is the unfortunate liablity on the municipality when the building is rendered obsolete, redundent and abandoned. If you thought it was an eye sore when it was operating, wait 2 years after it's been left vacant.
> 
> 
> Municipalities need to demand letters of credit to ensure proper funds are set aside for demolition and decomissioning to be done. These massive defunct buildings are too much liablitiy for rate-payers to assume.


Bingo! That's the big issue I see. These big boxes hop scotch around these cities and outskirts leaving their trash behind. You can drive around this area and almost trace the steps. Businesses going form one popular spot to the other. Ready to abandon their spots again just as soon as the next great idea and open space comes along. Leaving behind empty, ugly, buildings that no one wants. Yet the same developer can walk away and build another one? :sad:


----------



## Tom Struble

this debate has been going on for as long as people have been building,we each have our own ideas of beauty and what is worthwhile,while sure it's fun to talk about i don't think you will find much consensus

sometimes you just need to reach a certain age to appreciate some things


----------



## Tom Struble

i don't see the crime in that,you throw away your truck when it gets too old,why must everything last 300 years i don't get it


----------



## Jason Whipple

Tom Struble said:


> i don't see the crime in that,you throw away your truck when it gets too old,why must everything last 300 years i don't get it


Well, I don't throw it away. It gets sold to another person who re-uses it. Even if I did, I wouldn't leave it on some street corner for all to see.


----------



## Jason Whipple

Tom Struble said:


> sometimes you just need to reach a certain age to appreciate some things


Or too old to give a damn...:whistling


----------



## Tom Struble

i hope thats not directed at me because it would be an unfair statement

i care how i live and what i get to see and work on and i would love if my kids thought the same way, the thing i don't understand is how you can't accept the fact that somethings are more temporary...have less life span...cheaper..are not ascetically pleasing to you personally, buildings included, that cheapens us as a society?...maybe

but it's your job to care more than others,it's your personal bread and butter..i get that

the thing imo that makes old architecture interesting and beautiful may just be it's rarity


----------



## GRB

Tom Struble said:


> the thing imo that makes old architecture interesting and beautiful may just be it's rarity


But it's not rare in every part of the country, Tom, nor is the age of the buildings that's the issue. Picture a quintessential New England small town in your mind...

Now transpose tract houses, strip malls & box stores where those older buildings stand. Same effect? Not likely. Even though the terrain & natural scenery doesn't change, it's probably suddenly very bland. 

It's not when the buildings were constructed, but the attention to detail & all the other elements folks have mentioned that matter. We can do better, but are either too cheap, too lazy, or too stubborn to recognize that we have templates all over this country to pattern our work after in the form of classic architecture that looks as good today as when it was first built. 

Why then do we insist on building crap in so many cases? :sad:


----------



## hdavis

TimNJ said:


> The thing with commercial buildings is that these places are designed from a practical standpoint, i.e. a box. Add to that for design, you have a retailers corporate logo. Not much you can do with that. With corporations it's all about name recognition. Even Whole Foods buildings are a big "box".


I bet the original Whole Foods store in Austin was 5-10,000 SqFt. Not real tall, no big sign. They made tons of money. As competition heated up, they haad to go with bigger stores and bigger signs. That's retail for you. Too small a store and you get eaten alive, too big a store and you get eaten alive...


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

hdrider_chgo said:


> Creating a disposable built environment is also more costly in the long run.


 I don't think so:no: Most people build what they can afford.



Jason Whipple said:


> Well, I don't throw it away. It gets sold to another person who re-uses it. Even if I did, I wouldn't leave it on some street corner for all to see.


 So then they get to throw it away:laughing: And you feel good:laughing:



hdrider_chgo1506102 said:


> I ;live in an old part of the city. Most Sunday mornings in Summer, I walk over to the park where we have a farmers market, and I shop for fresh fruits, vegetables, meats, cheeses and bread from the people that grew them or made them. The selection changes weekly throughout the growing season.


Well good for you:blink: How many in your family:blink: I'm not going to carry food for 4 :no:


hdrider_chgo1506102 said:


> I think that's a much better way to spend an hour than sealed in an automobile, and then interacting with chain store drones, but that's just me.


You seal yourself in your car:blink: I never do that, windows always open. 


So it looks like you want someone to tell people what to build:no: Hay as long as it passes code, I don't care. That's what code is for right?


----------



## GRB

TimNJ said:


> What I disagree with is the people who want to mandate that all development should look like a Norman Rockwell town with all the white picket fences and have Mr. Haney's General Store on the corner.





Dirtywhiteboy said:


> So it looks like you want someone to tell people what to build:no: Hay as long as it passes code, I don't care. That's what code is for right?


I've not heard anyone here suggesting any of the above. What I've heard from those advocating a rethinking of what we build is honest discussion about a problem that gets little attention & is in fact not even acknowledged to be an issue by many. 

It's dirty pool to try to spin the issue so those who are willing to speak their mind are perceived as wanting to dictate policy & impose their views on others. It's not about any of that; it's about generating dialogue regarding the topic.


----------



## hdrider_chgo

Dirtywhiteboy said:


> hdrider_chgo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Creating a disposable built environment is also more costly in the long run.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think so:no: Most people build what they can afford.
Click to expand...

A well-designed, well-built product that lasts is the best value over time. If you are considering only your own, immediate wants, and not considering your impact on the environment, your neighbors, or society, yes, disposable is probably cheaper.



Dirtywhiteboy said:


> Well good for you:blink: How many in your family:blink: I'm not going to carry food for 4 :no:


They make these things called two-wheeled shopping carts. (The round things on the bottom are called wheels.) It enables even the elderly and infirm to gather food without a car.

Part of the reason for the obesity epidemic in this country (which we all have to help cover the costs of) is due to people not walking anywhere.



Dirtywhiteboy said:


> So it looks like you want someone to tell people what to build:no: Hay as long as it passes code, I don't care. That's what code is for right?


Actually, we are telling people what they have to buy. The tract house builders, which build 80% of the new homes in the U.S., and are subsidized by the government, dictate what is available.

The tract developments are subsidized primarily through the government's cost of building and maintaining more and more roads, and other sprawling infrastructure. This drives up taxes for all of us. The environmental damage caused by this type of public policy is also extensive, and we ultimately have to pick up the cost for all of that as well. 

Since I'm paying part of the cost of this mess, I believe I should have some say in it.


----------



## hdavis

:wallbash::wallbash::wallbash:


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

hdrider_chgo said:


> If you are considering only your own, immediate wants, and not considering your impact on the environment, your neighbors, or society, yes, disposable is probably cheaper.
> .


OK sorry I'll step out of this post as it dose not concern me, for I am one that has always lived for the immediate needs of my family. Just the most basic of things..........nothing fancy,,,,,,,,,,,


----------



## TimNJ

GRB said:


> I've not heard anyone here suggesting any of the above. What I've heard from those advocating a rethinking of what we build is honest discussion about a problem that gets little attention & is in fact not even acknowledged to be an issue by many.
> 
> It's dirty pool to try to spin the issue so those who are willing to speak their mind are perceived as wanting to dictate policy & impose their views on others. It's not about any of that; it's about generating dialogue regarding the topic.


You haven't seen some of the developments around my area. Township zoning dictates styles of house, colors, what kind of fence if any is allowed....A lot won't even allow you to park you work truck on your property. I'm not talking a big box truck, just a regular pickup.

Another development that comes to mind that was played up to be an example of a "community" was built some years ago near Disney in FL.


----------



## hdavis

hdrider_chgo said:


> A well-designed, well-built product that lasts is the best value over time. If you are considering only your own, immediate wants, and not considering your impact on the environment, your neighbors, or society, yes, disposable is probably cheaper.


Best value over time is a sapling frame covered with thatch. They're disposable. If you want to live somewhere else, you just go build another one.



hdrider_chgo said:


> Part of the reason for the obesity epidemic in this country (which we all have to help cover the costs of) is due to people not walking anywhere.


If this were true, all you have to do is get obese people to walk. When you do that, you just end up with an obese person who can get around better.



hdrider_chgo said:


> Actually, we are telling people what they have to buy. The tract house builders, which build 80% of the new homes in the U.S., and are subsidized by the government, dictate what is available.


They build what people will buy, and in locations people want. Developers that get this wrong go under. I din;t see a problem here - I've looked at tons of tract houses over the years going from $60-70K up to $400-500K. You can get great houses.



hdrider_chgo said:


> The tract developments are subsidized primarily through the government's cost of building and maintaining more and more roads, and other sprawling infrastructure. This drives up taxes for all of us.


Nice try. Gas taxes are supposed to pay for this. Most states as well as the federal government use gas taxes for other purposes. All the people who live in suburbia and have to use more gas than others get stuck paying more than their fair share of the roads and other stuff.


----------



## GRB

TimNJ said:


> You haven't seen some of the developments around my area. Township zoning dictates styles of house, colors, what kind of fence if any is allowed....A lot won't even allow you to park you work truck on your property. I'm not talking a big box truck, just a regular pickup.
> 
> Another development that comes to mind that was played up to be an example of a "community" was built some years ago near Disney in FL.


Tim, I agree that there are plenty of municipalities, HOA's, etc. that try to dictate certain aspects of development. I also agree that it's unnecessary & we don't need more gov't. interference in our lives. 

That said, I haven't heard any of the arguments being put forth by those of us suggesting we should try to build better that make the case for gov't. mandates or involvement. To the contrary - it has to begin with people in all positions recognizing the value of aesthetically pleasing, durable buildings & creating a demand for them. 

To involve those who don't get it would poison the process, IMHO - particularly if those folks are like the majority of bureaucrats most of us have encountered.


----------



## Jason Whipple

Dirtywhiteboy said:


> So then they get to throw it away:laughing: And you feel good:laughing:


I'm sure it goes through several user before being tossed away and when it does come to the end it gets recycled and sold for scrap so it can be sent off to China and made into another new truck for me to purchase.:thumbup:

I don't understand how you're missing the point that it's obvious that we allow developers to build great big, crappy looking buildings that only end up being abandon and become an eye sore for the rest of us to live around while they just pull up steaks and build another failure a few blocks up that again, will be abandon. 

I doubt, with the limited space on the islands, you have the same kind of problem that we do in the states. The most important thing I see that's needed is to have some accountability to these fat cat developers who build and run after they make their money and not be allowed to just leave huge, empty, ugly building on our blocks just like you wouldn't expect me to dump my truck on the side of the road when I'm done with it and leave it to the tax payers to deal with.

See the difference?

Add: My truck will probably be used over and over for about 20 years. The Vacant Mall a few block down from me was built a little over 20 years ago. Trying to compare my truck that fits into 1 of thousands of those vacant parking spots in an abandon Mall development that takes up about 20 acres of land is a piss poor comparison. Please try harder...


----------



## TimNJ

GRB said:


> Tim, I agree that there are plenty of municipalities, HOA's, etc. that try to dictate certain aspects of development. I also agree that it's unnecessary & we don't need more gov't. interference in our lives.
> 
> That said, I haven't heard any of the arguments being put forth by those of us suggesting we should try to build better that make the case for gov't. mandates or involvement. To the contrary - it has to begin with people in all positions recognizing the value of aesthetically pleasing, durable buildings & creating a demand for them.
> 
> To involve those who don't get it would poison the process, IMHO - particularly if those folks are like the majority of bureaucrats most of us have encountered.



The only role gov't should have is code enforcement.
This whole subject is one reason the "custom builder" is pretty much a thing of the past. You get a developer who offers Plan A,B,C, or reverse A,B,C. They can build a quality house, it is just a cookie cutter. 
The fact that they have those limitations drives down their cost, so they (hopefully) put out a product that has mass appeal at a lower than "custom" cost. This helps a lot of people get into the market who may not otherwise be able to buy.


----------



## Tom Struble

plus if we all lived closer together it would be much easier to control how big a soda your allowed to buy:clap:


----------



## hdrider_chgo

Dirtywhiteboy said:


> OK sorry I'll step out of this post as it dose not concern me, for I am one that has always lived for the immediate needs of my family. Just the most basic of things..........nothing fancy,,,,,,,,,,,


Fair enough. However if one has children, I believe their future well-being should be part of the equation as well.

My parents taught me that it was never okay to make a mess and leave it for someone else to clean up. We were brought up to clean up after ourselves. But I think much of our culture is now geared toward creating a mess and leaving it for the next generation to clean up. That goes against everything that was instilled in me, but maybe I'm just hopelessly old fashioned.


----------



## Tom Struble

well said:thumbsup:


----------



## hdrider_chgo

hdavis said:


> They build what people will buy, and in locations people want. Developers that get this wrong go under.


People largely buy what is put in front of them, as long as it has a good line of B.S. attached. Anyone in marketing can tell you that.



hdavis said:


> Nice try. Gas taxes are supposed to pay for this. Most states as well as the federal government use gas taxes for other purposes. All the people who live in suburbia and have to use more gas than others get stuck paying more than their fair share of the roads and other stuff.


Gas taxes don't come close to covering the cost of roads, much less the rest of infrastructure, and they never did. So the suburban lifestyle is heavily subsidized by the government.

The infrastructure in the U.S., including roads and bridges, is crumbling to pieces, because we supposedly can't afford to maintain it. The last thing we need is to build more roads that we can't maintain. Let's take care of what we have before we pave over more countryside.


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

Jason Whipple said:


> I'm sure it goes through several user before being tossed away and when it does come to the end it gets recycled and sold for scrap so it can be sent off to China and made into another new truck for me to purchase.


I've put 180,000mi on the last used van I bought with 60,000 on it so that's 240,000mi on it. How many miles do you but on a vehicle before you discard it:whistling I'll bet I'm less wasteful in that area! 


Jason Whipple said:


> I don't understand how you're missing the point that it's obvious that we allow developers to build great big, crappy looking buildings that only end up being abandon and become an eye sore for the rest of us to live around while they just pull up steaks and build another failure a few blocks up that again, will be abandon.


I don't know anything about this, it dosen't happen here and I've never seen that in south Fla.:no:


Jason Whipple said:


> I doubt, with the limited space on the islands, you have the same kind of problem that we do in the states.


 No problems here, this is paradise


Jason Whipple said:


> you wouldn't expect me to dump my truck on the side of the road when I'm done with it and leave it to the tax payers to deal with.


When I'm done with a truck that's what I do with them:blink: What are you supposed to do with them:blink: It's legal here:blink:


Jason Whipple said:


> See the difference?


 :confused1:


Jason Whipple said:


> Add: My truck will probably be used over and over for about 20 years. The Vacant Mall a few block down from me was built a little over 20 years ago. Trying to compare my truck that fits into 1 of thousands of those vacant parking spots in an abandon Mall development that takes up about 20 acres of land is a piss poor comparison. Please try harder...


 Why don't you buy that land and mall and make it nice nice:whistling



hdrider_chgo said:


> Fair enough. However if one has children, I believe their future well-being should be part of the equation as well.


Look I made it fine with no one looking out for my future well being and my kids will be fine too


hdrider_chgo said:


> But I think much of our culture is now geared toward creating a mess and leaving it for the next generation to clean up. That goes against everything that was instilled in me, but maybe I'm just hopelessly old fashioned.


 I clean up after the tourist & local pigs all the time! From cigarette butts to fast food and beer bottles, Fne pigs



As far as you farmer market and little pull cart:laughing: I'll stick to my van and go to Costco where things are cheaper, Home Depot is next door and woodcrafters 2 blocks away.


----------



## hdrider_chgo

Dirtywhiteboy said:


> Look I made it fine with no one looking out for my future well being and my kids will be fine too


I'll guarantee that there were human beings out there in the past who cared what kind of future you had, even if they didn't know you personally. A lot of people that came before us sacrificed so that we could have a better life.


----------



## hdavis

hdrider_chgo said:


> People largely buy what is put in front of them, as long as it has a good line of B.S. attached. Anyone in marketing can tell you that.


Pretty tough to get anywhere when you keep ignoring the points and reframe to suit yourself. You're back to presenting this as if it was a single choice, take it or leave it, and it isn't. I already pointed that out. That's a certain level of dishonesty on your part. Rhetoric is very good at solving rhetorical problems, but not very good for real problems.


----------



## fjn

*suburbs*

There are far more issues that play into ones decision where to live,inner city,burbs,country/farm. To attempt to try to reduce it to the beauty and duribility of buildings,or lack of those qualities is not realistic. One humongous factor that comes to bare ,is the notoriously horrendous quality (or rather lack of) quality of inner city schools. With Chicago close to the poster child for horrible public education all the pret t y buildings cannot entice families to stay. To live there leaves parents few viable options. Now that a lottery exists for a parent to get their child into a MAGNATE school, that option is left to chance,and chance only. The other option is to pay their property taxes (which a portion goes to city schools) and then dig deeper into their bluejeans to hope that a private school is in the cards. Of course this comes at a premium cost,which can negate any savings captured from gasoline savings. And does by a huge margin. With many private schools hanging on by a thread this option is quickly fading.Surely any inhabitant of Chicago is aware of the recent anouncement of after 147 yrs. the flagship private school St. Scholastica is closing it's doors in June. There goes one more viable option for those that want to live in those pretty,sturdy buildings. So,as one can see,many issues come to bare. Let us not try to fool ourselves into thinking pretty vs.ugly buildings is the sole crux of the issue where one chooses to hang their hat each night. This perspective imho is just the tip of the proverbial iceburg.


----------



## hdavis

When I had kids in school, school choice was the most important location factor.


----------



## fjn

*suburbs*

I'am very sure that the sociologists have their own inter active site. I 'am willing to bet they have a thread titled THE LARGER TRAGEDY OF THE INNER CITIES.


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

hdavis said:


> When I had kids in school, school choice was the most important location factor.


I live in one lacal for 20 for that reason and now moved to my current for the same reason. My kids walk to school.


----------



## hdrider_chgo

hdavis said:


> Pretty tough to get anywhere when you keep ignoring the points and reframe to suit yourself.


Which point have I ignored?


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

If you don't like it where you live move somewhere where you like it:blink:


----------



## Jason Whipple

Dirtywhiteboy said:


> If you don't like it where you live move somewhere where you like it:blink:


I can't argue with that. :thumbup:


----------



## GRB

Jason Whipple said:


> I can't argue with that. :thumbup:


I can. 

It's not about liking where one lives. It's about society as a whole reevaluating the path we're on when it comes to buildings & community.

It's about durability.

It's about sustainability.

It's about community. 

It's about realizing there may be better alternatives to those we create within our comfort zones. 

It's about being students. 

It's about being teachers. 

It's about knowing the difference between right & wrong in some cases. 

It's about respecting history. 

It's about acknowledging the fact we don't know it all & those with dissenting views & opinions may in fact be onto something. 

It's about respect.


----------



## Tom Struble

well..i'm for that stuff:thumbsup:


----------



## fjn

*Suburbia*

Here are a few imho, flawed premises that come to my mind at this moment. 1) If i push hard enough against unwanted things,they will go away 2)With enough effort,or hard work, I can accomplish anything. 3) To be in harmony with another,we have to want and believe the same things. 4)There is a finite container of resources that we are all dipping into wit h our requests. 4) THERE ARE RIGHT WAYS AND WRONG WAYS TO LIVE. 5) By gathering data about the manifestations or results of the way the people of the earth have lived and are living, we can effectively sort them into absolute piles of right and wrong. 6) By ferreting out the undesirable elements in our society, we can eliminate them. 7) If we do not continue to beat the drum of our history we are destined to make the same mistakes.


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

fjn said:


> Here are a few imho, flawed premises that come to my mind at this moment. 1) If i push hard enough against unwanted things,they will go away 2)With enough effort,or hard work, I can accomplish anything. 3) To be in harmony with another,we have to want and believe the same things. 4)There is a finite container of resources that we are all dipping into wit h our requests. 4) THERE ARE RIGHT WAYS AND WRONG WAYS TO LIVE. 5) By gathering data about the manifestations or results of the way the people of the earth have lived and are living, we can effectively sort them into absolute piles of right and wrong. 6) By ferreting out the undesirable elements in our society, we can eliminate them. 7) If we do not continue to beat the drum of our history we are destined to make the same mistakes.


This list makes it sound as everyone is the same, but we are not! If we were we ( the white settlers) would not had to kill off and herd up and put on reservations the people that were here before us. Now our country is still being built by people from all over the world. Who is to say what is right and wrong?


----------



## Jason Whipple

fjn said:


> Here are a few imho, flawed premises that come to my mind at this moment.
> 
> 1) If i push hard enough against unwanted things,they will go away 2)With enough effort,or hard work, I can accomplish anything.
> 3) To be in harmony with another,we have to want and believe the same things.
> *4)*There is a finite container of resources that we are all dipping into wit h our requests.
> *4)* THERE ARE RIGHT WAYS AND WRONG WAYS TO LIVE.
> 5) By gathering data about the manifestations or results of the way the people of the earth have lived and are living, we can effectively sort them into absolute piles of right and wrong.
> 6) By ferreting out the undesirable elements in our society, we can eliminate them.
> 7) If we do not continue to beat the drum of our history we are destined to make the same mistakes.


Please! Let the "enter" button be your friend. It will make it easier to count. :laughing: You have 2 #4's...


----------



## Jason Whipple

Dirtywhiteboy said:


> This list makes it sound as everyone is the same, but we are not! If we were we ( the white settlers) would not had to kill off and herd up and put on reservations the people that were here before us. Now our country is still being built by people from all over the world. Who is to say what is right and wrong?


I'd say it's wrong when it takes up 20 acres and it's empty and it's falling apart.

I'd say everyone else thinks so too or they would still be shopping there.


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

Jason Whipple said:


> I'd say it's wrong when it takes up 20 acres and it's empty and it's falling apart.
> 
> I'd say everyone else thinks so too or they would still be shopping there.


So what would like to do about it:blink:


----------



## Tinstaafl

Though I haven't looked deeply into it, I don't think those huge deserted buildings are the developers' fault. Just as one for instance, for a long time I've seen Lowe's build a store, use it for a few years, and then build a new one less than a mile away. The old store usually sits empty for at least a few years until someone else moves in, or it is razed.

I've always assumed they find it advantageous to do that primarily for tax reasons.


----------



## thecabinetguy

duburban said:


> oahu, worst traffic in the US!
> 
> it does suck...


I'm just glad to not be in L.A. anymore...it was pretty bad on Oahu, but this takes the cake...


----------



## Dirtywhiteboy

thecabinetguy said:


> I'm just glad to not be in L.A. anymore...it was pretty bad on Oahu, but this takes the cake...











Mostly green light poles and a few red ones too:blink:


----------



## JohnG

GRB said:


> I can.
> 
> It's not about liking where one lives. It's about society as a whole reevaluating the path we're on when it comes to buildings & community.
> 
> It's about durability.
> 
> It's about sustainability.
> 
> It's about community.
> 
> It's about realizing there may be better alternatives to those we create within our comfort zones.
> 
> It's about being students.
> 
> It's about being teachers.
> 
> It's about knowing the difference between right & wrong in some cases.
> 
> It's about respecting history.
> 
> It's about acknowledging the fact we don't know it all & those with dissenting views & opinions may in fact be onto something.
> 
> It's about respect.


It's about central planning being dictated by a central authority and we all know what that means.


----------



## Willin

Visited a nice new-urban style neighborhood this past weekend. 

Up the Allegheny river from Pittsburgh lies the riverfront town of Oakmont. Oakmont has a well-known golf course if you play golf, the Oakmont Country Club, where a number of PGA tournaments have been held. Its little downtown lies on both sides of the single-line train track that runs parallel to the river.

Oakmont, like most all the towns along the Allegheny near Pittsburgh, had a riverfront mill, and this residential development is on the site of that mill. The developers got lucky. Most all the riverfront mill towns look shabby and run down, and are full of bad housing and bad commercial buildings. Not so in Oakmont, which flourished as sort of a vacation destination in the late 1800s. Edgewater Steel, which had the mill there, came late to the party.

The riverfront site of the mill, now housing, is further enhanced by having some towering bluffs across the river, and practically no buildings are there to spoil the riparian view.

So this development, done by two separate developers, the first on half built-out, the second one just in infrastructure dig stage, has the view, the riverfront, the little downtown just a short walk away, and easy access to downtown Pittsburgh. Plus, easy access to the PA toll road, E-W I-76, just across the river.

Bars, restaurants, a really good bakery with indoor and outdoor seating, a library, hardware store, and more, within a half-mile walk along city sidewalks. A one-screen art-house movie theater is there.

The first phase was nicely done, but sits above a bank on the river. The second phase sits on an adjacent piece with topo such that it will have a small marina center with docks and a riverfront restaurant and bar. This phase will be more to the new-urban pattern with front porches quite near the sidewalks, areas of storefront shops with loft-type units above, some high end riverfront single family detached houses with nice upper decks for river viewing, and more.


----------



## fjn

New Urbanist developments made their debut around 1980 with the inception of Sea Side in the panhandle of Florida. From that point forward,they started to catch on with a certain amount of regularity. The disconnect of suburbia was beginning to be felt and people were anxious to have a replacement.


With that said,I have not been to every TND as they are called. I have been to a fair representation in various states. The states are Il.In. Ga.Fl. Mo. Md.Ms. and possibly one or two additional ones. It seems to me that there is one common thread that links all such developments. They all seem forced,unnatural and resemble a theme park. Where they fall short in my mind;they all make an attempt at nostalgia and want to emulate a by gone era. While doing this ,instead of building solid,durable buildings like their predecessors,they are the same tacky construction in suburbia just repackaged with a slightly different spin on it.


----------



## Stephen H

Jason Whipple,

thanks for starting this thread.

It was good to see that there are a number of kindred spirits posting here.
Best wishes all,
stephen


----------



## rosethornva

GRB said:


> Seriously, Tom. Look around at many of the buildings that were built in this country prior to the war. Even the most modest ones often had nice little touches that created character.


Y'all know I truly LOVE old houses and all manner of historic architecture, but I can tell you - we built some housing during both World Wars (1917/1918 and 1942-1945) that was JUNK.

Nothing endearing OR enduring about it. 

During WW1, DuPont built huge munition plants in Richmond, Hopewell and Penniman Virginia and DuPont built thousands of single family homes at these plants DESIGNED to last "less than ten years."

These houses had Ruberoid Siding (which was tarpaper impregnated with asbestos) and the interiors had "Beaverboard" (a wood pulp wallboard product). 

Richmond and Hopewell and Norfolk still have many of these old "temporary" houses. (The Penniman houses were moved to Norfolk after the war.) 

They really were junk, and the only reason they've endured for all these years is that they've been substantially rebuilt through the intervening decades. 

There were THOUSANDS of these "six room bungalows" built throughout the country at DuPont munition plants, and they were the cheapest way to cover air. 



Cheap, and ugly with tar-paper siding. 



In some communities (such as Sandston, Virginia), the six-room bungalows are still standing upright (after substantial renovation).




Ruberoid Siding, in all its ugliness:


PS. I am familiar with Kunstler and he makes some good points, but he also comes across as a nut.


----------

