3 ms·

> Every advocate for making urban design more [pick one: walkable, bikeable, beautiful, lovable, inviting, human-scale] has at some point or another faced the c

> Every advocate for making urban design more [pick one: walkable, bikeable, beautiful, lovable, inviting, human-scale] has at some point or another faced the charge of elitism. No. That's not how that works. You're not an elitist just because you want a nice neighborhood. You're faced with charges of elitism when you advocate for this type of stuff after you've moved into a space once inhabited by low income people who were chased out by developers who artificially beautified the neighborhood thereby inflating its value overnight. Those low income people would love to have a beautiful neighborhood too. Instead they spend most of their day toiling at shitty jobs and riding public transportation. They have so little money things like tree shaded bike paths and flower beds are a fantasy. The real issue is no one wants to spend money making low income peoples lives better. How many beautiful housing projects have you seen vs luxury condo towers?

zachkatz 5y ago
> artificially beautified What's the difference between artificially beautifying and genuinely beautifying?
- MisterTea 5y ago
  Genuine beautifying comes from the community.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
quadrangle 5y ago
The article isn't saying gentrification-complaints are wrong! Gentrification is a serious problem, and the author isn't denying it. Strong Towns absolutely wants to see money spent making low-income lives better. And the movement does the work to grapple with all these challenges. Tree-shaded bike paths are cheaper than all the costs of crime and health-care issues that are caused by the unhealthy environments imposed on poor communities. Here's an article highlighting their critique of luxury-condo-tower approach: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/8/23/beware-the-four-letter-words-of-vibrant-downtowns https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/8/23/beware-the-fou... And here's a focus on how poorer neighborhoods are actually more fiscally sound while the systems we have effectively subsidize the wealthy: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/2/6/the-hidden-value-of-a-poor-neighborhood https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/2/6/the-hidden-valu... That one happens to be by the same author as the article you're replying about. And here's one about the way our suburban experiment is creating poverty: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/8/15/what-does-suburban-poverty-look-like https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/8/15/what-does-subu... The Strong Towns movement is all about addressing these things. And the initial posted article here is about the tragedy of how good-for-humans places are associated with elitism. It's not saying there's no reason for that association, it's saying that association needs to end by way of making everywhere better.

zachkatz 5y ago

> artificially beautified What's the difference between artificially beautifying and genuinely beautifying?

MisterTea 5y ago
Genuine beautifying comes from the community.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

quadrangle 5y ago

The article isn't saying gentrification-complaints are wrong! Gentrification is a serious problem, and the author isn't denying it. Strong Towns absolutely wants to see money spent making low-income lives better. And the movement does the work to grapple with all these challenges. Tree-shaded bike paths are cheaper than all the costs of crime and health-care issues that are caused by the unhealthy environments imposed on poor communities. Here's an article highlighting their critique of luxury-condo-tower approach: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/8/23/beware-the-four-letter-words-of-vibrant-downtowns https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/8/23/beware-the-fou... And here's a focus on how poorer neighborhoods are actually more fiscally sound while the systems we have effectively subsidize the wealthy: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/2/6/the-hidden-value-of-a-poor-neighborhood https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/2/6/the-hidden-valu... That one happens to be by the same author as the article you're replying about. And here's one about the way our suburban experiment is creating poverty: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/8/15/what-does-suburban-poverty-look-like https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/8/15/what-does-subu... The Strong Towns movement is all about addressing these things. And the initial posted article here is about the tragedy of how good-for-humans places are associated with elitism. It's not saying there's no reason for that association, it's saying that association needs to end by way of making everywhere better.