3 ms·

>Downtown-centric planning isn't the only valid tool What are the others? >Where's the intelligentsia for those of us who don't want to live in small boxes I

>Downtown-centric planning isn't the only valid tool What are the others? >Where's the intelligentsia for those of us who don't want to live in small boxes It's not there because most experienced people in this domain know is a pretty poor way for people to live and architect cities. It needs to be subsidized and take away from the economic productivity of the city centers. As someone who lives in a "small box", I will most likely never leave the city again unless I intend to farm in some way. I spend less material resources living here, all my neighbors are friends and feel like we actually have a community, events are only 10-15 minutes on foot, etc.

dahdum 8y ago
This comes across as rather patronizing, dense city centers are not only way people should live. You accept the trade offs of living in a dense city, but not everyone should be expected to feel the same way about the crime rates, poor schools, traffic, noise pollution, or SF style feces/needle filled streets.
- icebraining 8y ago
  I agree that not everyone should have to live in city centers, although that raises questions about the cost per capita of public services and who pays for them. But I can assure you that high crime rates, poor schools and SF style feces/needle filled streets are not inevitable characteristics of dense cities. And as someone currently living in a small town with a lot of farm machinery, I can also assure you that noise pollution is unfortunately not exclusive to cities.
- kadenshep 8y ago
  >You accept the trade offs of living in a dense city, but not everyone should be expected to feel the same way about the crime rates, poor schools, traffic, noise pollution, or SF style feces/needle filled streets. City centers shouldn't be expected to subsidize other people's ideal life styles. Crime rates and poor schools wouldn't be a problem if we took a fraction of the money we spend on infrastructure of suburbs and pointed it towards maintaining and improving city centers. >or SF style feces/needle filled streets. I'm sorry, what was that about patronizing? None of the characteristics you mentioned are inherit or even a common quality of city centers.

dahdum 8y ago

This comes across as rather patronizing, dense city centers are not only way people should live. You accept the trade offs of living in a dense city, but not everyone should be expected to feel the same way about the crime rates, poor schools, traffic, noise pollution, or SF style feces/needle filled streets.

icebraining 8y ago
I agree that not everyone should have to live in city centers, although that raises questions about the cost per capita of public services and who pays for them. But I can assure you that high crime rates, poor schools and SF style feces/needle filled streets are not inevitable characteristics of dense cities. And as someone currently living in a small town with a lot of farm machinery, I can also assure you that noise pollution is unfortunately not exclusive to cities.
kadenshep 8y ago
>You accept the trade offs of living in a dense city, but not everyone should be expected to feel the same way about the crime rates, poor schools, traffic, noise pollution, or SF style feces/needle filled streets. City centers shouldn't be expected to subsidize other people's ideal life styles. Crime rates and poor schools wouldn't be a problem if we took a fraction of the money we spend on infrastructure of suburbs and pointed it towards maintaining and improving city centers. >or SF style feces/needle filled streets. I'm sorry, what was that about patronizing? None of the characteristics you mentioned are inherit or even a common quality of city centers.