3 ms·
The thinking is that it keeps out poor people and people of color. “There is this perception… that if we have sidewalks, we’re going to bring people who do not
by aaronbrethorst 6y ago
The thinking is that it keeps out poor people and people of color.
“There is this perception… that if we have sidewalks, we’re going to bring people who do not belong to our neighborhoods,” she says. In the post-World War II era, many Americans left the cities to live in suburbs with big garages and, just as important, people who weren’t white and middle class like them.
https://www.popsci.com/politics-versus-sidewalks/ https://www.popsci.com/politics-versus-sidewalks/
- kortilla 6y agoAll of the neighborhoods built in the 50s near me in California had sidewalks, no mandatory setbacks, and zoning that allowed corner stores, making them pleasant to walk through. The zoning didn’t seem to go to shit until much later than the “post-WW2” generalization.
- aaronbrethorst 6y agoCalifornia != United States. Here's an example about post-war suburbs from near Minneapolis, where I grew up: https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/fight-over-suburban-sidewalks-a-window-onto-21st-century-life/ https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/fight-over-suburba...
- kortilla 6y agoCalifornia is certainly part of the US though. Anecdotes invalidate stupid generalizations but anecdotes don’t validate generalizations. You should look up the history of Edina. It was established well before the war and had laws until shortly after the war that land had to be owned by Caucasians. They had no interest in sidewalks when they were built even when they had laws explicitly keeping minorities out.
- coldtea 6y agoYes, because at the post-WW2 time they could more openly keep blacks out even without covert zoning laws...