4 ms·

The more you let people build up, the more ground can be left as green space. No one is against park. Land area/space in general is not scarce. What is scarce

The more you let people build up, the more ground can be left as green space. No one is against park. Land area/space in general is not scarce. What is scarce is land area near job centers (or more broadly, near where people want to spend their time outside the home.) The more you spread people out, the more car dependent the city, necessitating more roads and parking lots.

throwaway894345 4y ago
I don’t have any problems with people building up, but I’m very skeptical that the space between tall buildings will be made into parks, and anyway a city park is not what I would consider “nature”. For folks who want density and can content themselves with urban green spaces, I wish you well on your quest to build taller and denser, just please don’t impose that on everyone! :)
- jawarner 4y ago
  Not all urban parks are created equally. I live close to a park 100s of acres in size in a city (Austin, TX).
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    We just have different standards for “nature”. If it’s hundreds of acres of undisturbed forest and you can’t see or hear the city, then it’ll probably scratch the itch, but most large urban parks are mostly grass, gardens, sports fields, playgrounds, etc with a few acres of feel-good wetlands or prairie or bird sanctuary sprinkled around. “Acres” does not nature make.
- brailsafe 4y ago
  Honestly I feel like you're just failing to precisely represent what you're wanting. Here's what I think you're getting at, definitely tell me if I'm off. 1) Cities, whether they're sprawling or dense, or park-laden or not, can be suffocating. It just so happens that yours atm is less park-laden. Thus, your advice for exclusively urban people, is to actually put the effort in to get into real nature; into the mountains, the isolated wilderness, the lakes, etc.. because there's a serenity like that you can't get with facsimiles like neighborhood parks 2) Space between high rises isn't used all that effectively. I think this is particularly a problem with downtown core areas moreso than downtown adjacent areas in a lot of cities. I'm personally not anti-car outright, just anti-car as a primary means of day to day utility oriented travel and the design of urban spaces that prioritize that over others. If you walk or bike or skateboard most of the time, you develop a feeling for the space you're doing that in, and it has an affect on your life. If you're only walking through parking lots, on broken old slabs of sidewalk that nobody cares about, with no flowers or trees or cats or people around, you're going to want to avoid that. I'm a huge advocate for building your immediate surroundings so they facilitate healthy and sustainable living (the opposite of broken parking lots in a suburbab wasteland) but also for getting the fuck out of the whole city pretty often if you can. I rent a car to do this, and might buy a beater in the future to have more flexibility in that respect, but definitely get the hell out once in a while if you can.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    Sorry for the imprecision. My city is “park laden”. I live next to a 1200 acre park. City parks aren’t nature; however, and having seen the real deal there’s only so much one can do to convince one’s subconscious otherwise. But yes, I find daily life in an urban environment (however park laden!) to be depleting. Cities are still tons of fun to visit and explore, I’m glad they exist, etc. This might be different if I could reasonably make it to some nature between work and sunset, but in most cities you won’t make it past the burbs. Hopefully that’s clarifying.
    - throwaway894345 4y ago
      I should also note that I'm glad that there is a movement to make cities more walkable, but I duck out when that sentiment pours over into a sort of religious zeal against more nature-ful ways of life.
      - brailsafe 4y ago
        So on a more frequent basis, what would you hope to be doing in nature, assuming you also work?
        throwaway894345 4y ago
        Specifically, I'd like to do more hiking and cycling, but honestly just being around it--having fresh air and room to breath is great. Also, my geriatric dog is much happier when we take trips out of the city. It's easy enough to work during the day and go for little hikes or bike rides in the evening if you don't have to drive 3 hours round trip.
- evancox100 4y ago
  Yes, urban nature/parks is not exactly the same as being in a forest, or climbing a mountain. But neither is suburban green space! And again, unlike dense urban cores, suburban sprawl requires more destruction of natural environments, not less. What exactly is it you are advocating for/against? If you want to live in “real” nature, like in a cabin in a forest, or on a ranch in the country, then go do that. Nobody is stopping you. Edit: Just to put a concrete point on it, it now takes approximately an hour to get out of the suburbs from urban / downtown Dallas. Nature is further away than ever. Edit 2: Of course you will find people on Twitter or whatever who want to “ban all cars”, but this is not a serious movement or position held by the vast majority of YIMBY/urbanism people. I think most of us would like exactly what you’re talking about: the freedom to let people do what they want on the land they own, and make their own choices as to what living arrangements best for them and their customers. Currently, this option is only denied to people wanting to build up, while suburban sprawl is allowed virtually everywhere. Where I live, Austin, TX, there are parts of our downtown central business district that are zoned for SFH only! It is absurd, we wouldn’t inflict this level of economic destruction on our worst enemies.

throwaway894345 4y ago

I don’t have any problems with people building up, but I’m very skeptical that the space between tall buildings will be made into parks, and anyway a city park is not what I would consider “nature”. For folks who want density and can content themselves with urban green spaces, I wish you well on your quest to build taller and denser, just please don’t impose that on everyone! :)

jawarner 4y ago
Not all urban parks are created equally. I live close to a park 100s of acres in size in a city (Austin, TX).
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  We just have different standards for “nature”. If it’s hundreds of acres of undisturbed forest and you can’t see or hear the city, then it’ll probably scratch the itch, but most large urban parks are mostly grass, gardens, sports fields, playgrounds, etc with a few acres of feel-good wetlands or prairie or bird sanctuary sprinkled around. “Acres” does not nature make.
brailsafe 4y ago
Honestly I feel like you're just failing to precisely represent what you're wanting. Here's what I think you're getting at, definitely tell me if I'm off. 1) Cities, whether they're sprawling or dense, or park-laden or not, can be suffocating. It just so happens that yours atm is less park-laden. Thus, your advice for exclusively urban people, is to actually put the effort in to get into real nature; into the mountains, the isolated wilderness, the lakes, etc.. because there's a serenity like that you can't get with facsimiles like neighborhood parks 2) Space between high rises isn't used all that effectively. I think this is particularly a problem with downtown core areas moreso than downtown adjacent areas in a lot of cities. I'm personally not anti-car outright, just anti-car as a primary means of day to day utility oriented travel and the design of urban spaces that prioritize that over others. If you walk or bike or skateboard most of the time, you develop a feeling for the space you're doing that in, and it has an affect on your life. If you're only walking through parking lots, on broken old slabs of sidewalk that nobody cares about, with no flowers or trees or cats or people around, you're going to want to avoid that. I'm a huge advocate for building your immediate surroundings so they facilitate healthy and sustainable living (the opposite of broken parking lots in a suburbab wasteland) but also for getting the fuck out of the whole city pretty often if you can. I rent a car to do this, and might buy a beater in the future to have more flexibility in that respect, but definitely get the hell out once in a while if you can.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  Sorry for the imprecision. My city is “park laden”. I live next to a 1200 acre park. City parks aren’t nature; however, and having seen the real deal there’s only so much one can do to convince one’s subconscious otherwise. But yes, I find daily life in an urban environment (however park laden!) to be depleting. Cities are still tons of fun to visit and explore, I’m glad they exist, etc. This might be different if I could reasonably make it to some nature between work and sunset, but in most cities you won’t make it past the burbs. Hopefully that’s clarifying.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    I should also note that I'm glad that there is a movement to make cities more walkable, but I duck out when that sentiment pours over into a sort of religious zeal against more nature-ful ways of life.
    - brailsafe 4y ago
      So on a more frequent basis, what would you hope to be doing in nature, assuming you also work?
      - throwaway894345 4y ago
        Specifically, I'd like to do more hiking and cycling, but honestly just being around it--having fresh air and room to breath is great. Also, my geriatric dog is much happier when we take trips out of the city. It's easy enough to work during the day and go for little hikes or bike rides in the evening if you don't have to drive 3 hours round trip.
evancox100 4y ago
Yes, urban nature/parks is not exactly the same as being in a forest, or climbing a mountain. But neither is suburban green space! And again, unlike dense urban cores, suburban sprawl requires more destruction of natural environments, not less. What exactly is it you are advocating for/against? If you want to live in “real” nature, like in a cabin in a forest, or on a ranch in the country, then go do that. Nobody is stopping you. Edit: Just to put a concrete point on it, it now takes approximately an hour to get out of the suburbs from urban / downtown Dallas. Nature is further away than ever. Edit 2: Of course you will find people on Twitter or whatever who want to “ban all cars”, but this is not a serious movement or position held by the vast majority of YIMBY/urbanism people. I think most of us would like exactly what you’re talking about: the freedom to let people do what they want on the land they own, and make their own choices as to what living arrangements best for them and their customers. Currently, this option is only denied to people wanting to build up, while suburban sprawl is allowed virtually everywhere. Where I live, Austin, TX, there are parts of our downtown central business district that are zoned for SFH only! It is absurd, we wouldn’t inflict this level of economic destruction on our worst enemies.