The Zoned Life--exacerbating our dependence on petroleum?

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

[QUOTE=mswas]
You are correct. The lack of a town center is a big part of what defines American cities, with Los Angeles being the prototype.
[/QUOTE]

Interestingly, that is how the Miracle Mile district came to be in the 1920s. The developers determined that it was at a convenient driving distance from several older residential areas that were already established, like Beverly Hills and old Downtown. By a sort of happy irony, that area now is quite pedestrian friendly now, and will become even more so if the subway ever gets extended to the area.

[foolsguinea]

This is interesting to me. I live in a relatively smal municipality (about 5 miles across from city limit to city limit). It’s quite possible to live in walking distance of one’s workplace, & not impossible to get a few acres rezoned by petitioning the city council.

But it’s occurred to me that I’d like to plant some fruit trees in a vacant lot no one seems interested in building on, & possibly I’d sell some fruit (especially if I plant pears, good grief!)–& I can see people freaking out. Agricultural use? In a city? Well, I wasn’t going to water it like a high-yield cornfield, but I can see why people would worry.

All my life I’ve thought the idea of living over one’s place of business was beautiful & attractive. The family restaurant being the obvious type. Apparently I live in a culture where people try desperately to get away from that.

The OP is right. Zones are weird, & while definitely useful for certain kinds of manufacturing, can be a bit sad.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

[QUOTE=rock party]
I agree with your observations, Spectre. I too, am bothered by the vast amounts of petroleum our lifestyle requires. And also by the fact that we built our transportation infastructure on such a finite resource, with no “plan B”. Now many will point out that there will be alternatives in the future, and that the market will sort it all out. But in the meantime, the ability to plan, and to budget, is non exisitant. We’re forced to give billions of dollars to sociaties that hate us and conspire to destroy us. And to sacrifice our young to the “cause”, questionable as it may be.
[/QUOTE]

One of the positive changes I’d like to see is that more of us are able to do what we need to do while just staying put, instead of having to go from place to place. While the electricity needed to support a communication infrastructure also comes, in many cases, from fossil fuels, we have a lot more long-term flexibility in the type of fuel we use, and the other fossil fuels are not as in short supply as petroleum. We will probably be more successful at developing alternative sources for stationary electrical power, than we will be for replacing petroleum fuels in tansport.

[msmith537]

@Spectre of Pithecanthropus

I’ve heard often that one of the major reasons American cities and suburbs are the way they are is zoning laws, which result in mile after square mile of single family houses, whose occupants have to commute tens of miles daily to get to the commercial zones where their jobs are.

The reason cities are designed the way they are is that people want to live in houses with yards and have the freedom that owning a car provides. The notion of the single family home with it’s yard and white picket fences is firmly implanted on the American psyche. People also do not want to live next to industrial parks and other NIMBY eyesores (didn’t you ever play SimCity?). The side effect of living like that is that tens of thousands of homes take up a huge footprint while the workplace destinations - office and industrial parks and urban commercial districts - tend to favor a more centralized design.

@Spectre of Pithecanthropus

Zoning also affects the different stages of our lives. One very deeply entrenched idea in America is that cities are not for children. Occasionally I watch Househunters with my wfe, on HGTV, and many times the installment has centered around a young couple who have a very cool city loft or condo, but now must move to the suburbs because their first baby is on the way. So they move from the Childless Adult Zone to the Zone For Families And Children. There are, of course, good reasons why people want to raise children in the burbs, and why they want houses rather than apartments or condos. But I think a lot of this comes down to urban flight, fueled by overall negligence which, in effect, lets our cities rot from the inside out.

In New York City, the biggest factor is space and cost. A two bedroom in Manhattan can easily cost over $5000 a month. Most families cannot afford that. And I have to tell you, space becomes an issue very quickly when you live in a studio or one bedroom apt.

People talk about public transportation as a cure-all, however the idea is mostly bullshit. To have an effective public transportation system where automobiles are not required, you need to have a population density as high as Manhattan. And quite frankly, most Americans don’t want to live like that. To be effective, a public transportation system needs to be within about 5-10 minutes walking distance and take you pretty much wherever you want to go about as fast as it would take to drive there. That’s kind of why Boston’s T system is such crap.

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
“Arcology”? Once upon a time, that used to be a fair definition of a town!
[/QUOTE]

Except an arcology is a single mixed-zone structure, unlike a town which is a collection of various buildings. And it’s my understanding that they are supposed to be very large.

Real life examples of the concept on a smaller scale can be found in the Time Warner building in NYC or Copley Plaza / Prudential Center in Boston. Both are large structures that contain residences, businesses and zones for shopping.

[aruvqan]

[QUOTE=Lumpy]
You might want to check out a book titled The Geography of Nowhere, a biting criticism of many features of American land use. Suffice to say, once upon a time cheap oil made it possible (and in a narrow sense “rational”) to build the way we did; and now expensive oil will undo that.
[/QUOTE]

God I freaking hope so.

We have a small microfarm in the sticks - mainly because it was the first thing within 30 miles of the Submarine base in Groton in our price range that didnt totally suck donky balls [90K$US for 2.75 acres, a house and a 20x30 3 storey barn] but the drive in to Hartford sucks ass, and both mrAru and I work for companies in Hartford. Granted I telecommute 99% of the time now, but I never go outside the house, and I would personally be a lot happier with about 1000 square feet of old factory loft with air conditioning, high speed internet, a handicapped parking space and an elevator [Im permanently a gimp now, and flip between cane, crutches and wheelchair depending on how crappy I am doing any given day] To be honest, I would actually prefer at this point in my life to live in Hartford in a condo/factory loft [the one from Forever Knight would totally rock] that we owned.

[MichaelQReilly]

[QUOTE=aruvqan]
God I freaking hope so.

We have a small microfarm in the sticks - mainly because it was the first thing within 30 miles of the Submarine base in Groton in our price range that didnt totally suck donky balls [90K$US for 2.75 acres, a house and a 20x30 3 storey barn] but the drive in to Hartford sucks ass, and both mrAru and I work for companies in Hartford. Granted I telecommute 99% of the time now, but I never go outside the house, and I would personally be a lot happier with about 1000 square feet of old factory loft with air conditioning, high speed internet, a handicapped parking space and an elevator [Im permanently a gimp now, and flip between cane, crutches and wheelchair depending on how crappy I am doing any given day] To be honest, I would actually prefer at this point in my life to live in Hartford in a condo/factory loft [the one from Forever Knight would totally rock] that we owned.
[/QUOTE]

Check out the units at the Colt building, they are somewhat pricey, but they are exactly what you are looking for. I personally would love to find a nice old house in Hartford, but I really can’t afford the property tax hit of living in the city.

It boggles my mind that people choose to live where they do. I live right near the northern part of main street in Glastonbury, so I can literally be in downtown Hartford in 5 minutes assuming no traffic. But sometimes I drive out to the eastern part of town to take my dog to the reservoir and I see these million dollar homes. I don’t know who would want to live there, it would take an hour round trip to pick up one thing from the grocery store. The kicker is they are being built on what was previously farm land, so that someone like me, who would love to buy a small farm one day, will literally never be able to.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

[QUOTE=msmith537]
The reason cities are designed the way they are is that people want to live in houses with yards and have the freedom that owning a car provides. The notion of the single family home with it’s yard and white picket fences is firmly implanted on the American psyche.
[/quote]

Of course we like cars, there’s nothing wrong with them. But the ‘freedom’ and pleasure of owning and using one seems to have become much diminished, while the steering-wheel drudgery of the daily commuting grind has increased. If you’ve ever had a long car commute in your life, you know what I mean. It’s like being a slave to the wheel as you sit there minding the (slow) traffic, and there are a dozen things you’d rather do and places you’d rather be, than stuck in traffic.

In New York City, the biggest factor is space and cost. A two bedroom in Manhattan can easily cost over $5000 a month. Most families cannot afford that. And I have to tell you, space becomes an issue very quickly when you live in a studio or one bedroom apt.

Similarly with suburban houses–it’s not they that I am here to criticize, although I personally don’t like them. I think the problem is that, IMO, our concept of how people can work and get their jobs done isn’t really evolving past the old fashioned idea of everybody needing to go to the office, whether it’s really critical to the job or not. If telecommuting were encouraged more, the environmental impact of living in those big suburban houses could be diminished.

People talk about public transportation as a cure-all, however the idea is mostly bullshit. To have an effective public transportation system where automobiles are not required, you need to have a population density as high as Manhattan.

You raise good points here. I started this thread partly with that in mind. We can’t solve our transportation problems by building mass transit systems everywhere. I think it’s time to look at our energy and transportation issues, not from the angle of finding a substitute for petroleum, or by getting people out of their cars and into buses and trains, but by re-evaluating our basic need to be transported. Or rather, we need to do any and all of these things depending on the situation.

[even_sven]

Our idea of suburbia is not some sort of inherent thing- it was created sixty years ago with the GI bill. It is something that is now no longer working, but will remain entrenched as long as developers and city planners have each other’s hands in each other’s pockets.

There are many small things we can do to increase an area’s walkability- place large parking lots behind stores instead of in front. Locate schools and parks in the middle of developments. Locate strip malls to be walker-friendly as well as car friendly. This does not have to be an all-or-nothing deal.

Public transportation is also possible on a small-city scale. Santa Cruz, CA (pop 50,000) has an amazing public transit system- you can get just about anywhere you need to go, any time of day, with not-too big of delays.

[Spoke]

[QUOTE=even sven]
Our idea of suburbia is not some sort of inherent thing- it was created sixty years ago with the GI bill.
[/QUOTE]

Well, our current form of suburbia anyway.

An earlier form of suburbia was built on trolley lines. Atlanta’s Inman Park, for example:

After the Civil War, Inman Park became Atlanta’s first planned community and one of the nation’s first garden suburbs. It was conceived and developed in the 1880s by entrepreneur Joel Hurt, who believed people should live in a countrylike atmosphere convenient to the central business district…

…Never short of innovations, Hurt also formed one of the nation’s first streetcar systems to provide “rapid transit” from Inman Park to downtown.

[robby]

[QUOTE=MichaelQReilly]
…It boggles my mind that people choose to live where they do. I live right near the northern part of main street in Glastonbury, so I can literally be in downtown Hartford in 5 minutes assuming no traffic. But sometimes I drive out to the eastern part of town to take my dog to the reservoir and I see these million dollar homes. I don’t know who would want to live there, it would take an hour round trip to pick up one thing from the grocery store. The kicker is they are being built on what was previously farm land, so that someone like me, who would love to buy a small farm one day, will literally never be able to.
[/QUOTE]

Well, after I got out of the Navy (I used to be on the USS San Juan, like aruvqan’s husband, IIRC), my first job was in Glastonbury. It took about 15 minutes of house hunting to realize that there was no way we could afford a house in Glastonbury, so we ended up another 20 miles down the road, in another town. Now, I’m making more, and my wife is working, too, but we are pretty well established in our town. To move closer to work (which is now in Hartford, for me), we’d have to uproot our son from school, his friends, his Boy Scout troop, etc. Since my whole childhood as an Army brat was an unending series of constant moves (I went to 13 different schools in 6 different states and foreign countries before going off to college), I’d rather not do this.

On the other hand, my wife and I each drive 30 miles each way to work. This may still not be sustainable in the long run, considering the rising cost of fuel.

Also, MichaelQReilly, I’d add that the “northern part of Main Street in Glastonbury” is a fairly crowded, busy area. This area consists of restaurants, strip malls, gasoline stations, another strip mall (including a Home Depot and a Shaw’s), more restaurants, with a smattering of houses that are gradually being torn down or converted to businesses. This area is also a stone’s throw from East Hartford. All in all, I can see why people would want to be in a more rural area like South Glastonbury or the like. If I could afford it, I’d live in one of those houses you describe. Instead, I live another 20 miles out.

[BrainGlutton]

[QUOTE=Spectre of Pithecanthropus]
I think it’s time to look at our energy and transportation issues, not from the angle of finding a substitute for petroleum, or by getting people out of their cars and into buses and trains, but by re-evaluating our basic need to be transported.
[/QUOTE]

Be careful of where that sort of thing can lead.

[MichaelQReilly]

[QUOTE=robby]

Also, MichaelQReilly, I’d add that the “northern part of Main Street in Glastonbury” is a fairly crowded, busy area. This area consists of restaurants, strip malls, gasoline stations, another strip mall (including a Home Depot and a Shaw’s), more restaurants, with a smattering of houses that are gradually being torn down or converted to businesses. This area is also a stone’s throw from East Hartford. All in all, I can see why people would want to be in a more rural area like South Glastonbury or the like. If I could afford it, I’d live in one of those houses you describe. Instead, I live another 20 miles out.
[/QUOTE]

I wasn’t criticizing living out in the boonies, as I said, I would love to have a farm somewhere out your way. What I am saying is I think its dumb to have a huge home in the middle of nowhere. I was specifically talking about homes way out in the east end of town off Hebron Ave. There is nothing out there, no shops, no restaurants, anything. Its one thing to be out there on a farm, its another to have suburban style existence out there.

Also I don’t see what is so horrible about being near the center of any town. Unless you live right on the main street, the traffic isn’t that bad, and any inconvenience is more than made up for by the easy access/walkability.

[robby]

[QUOTE=MichaelQReilly]
…Also I don’t see what is so horrible about being near the center of any town. Unless you live right on the main street, the traffic isn’t that bad, and any inconvenience is more than made up for by the easy access/walkability.
[/QUOTE]
Well, it’s not the best place to have kids riding their bikes or skateboards in the street. Town centers are also noisier, busier, more crime-ridden, etc.

As far as the specific example of Glastonbury goes, I used to walk every day from my office (which was right on Main Street) to go to lunch, and it was like taking your life in your hands. The traffic lights are simply not set up for pedestrians. Trying to cross Main Street or Griswold Street is an exercise in futility. Even when the pedestrian “walk” signal comes on, there is a continuous stream of cars turning right on red that simply not used to seeing pedestrians, and are as apt to run you over as look at you. I can’t imagine trying to walk down to the Stop & Shop on Glastonbury Blvd. You’d have to walk a mile to get there, cross the huge expanse of a parking lot, etc. It’s simply not set up for walking.

I actually find it easier to walk to lunch in downtown Hartford, just because, as an old-style city, it is actually pedestrian friendly, with pedestrian traffic signals with count-down timers, wide sidewalks, etc.

[MichaelQReilly]

[QUOTE=robby]

As far as the specific example of Glastonbury goes, I used to walk every day from my office (which was right on Main Street) to go to lunch, and it was like taking your life in your hands. The traffic lights are simply not set up for pedestrians. Trying to cross Main Street or Griswold Street is an exercise in futility. Even when the pedestrian “walk” signal comes on, there is a continuous stream of cars turning right on red that simply not used to seeing pedestrians, and are as apt to run you over as look at you. I can’t imagine trying to walk down to the Stop & Shop on Glastonbury Blvd. You’d have to walk a mile to get there, cross the huge expanse of a parking lot, etc. It’s simply not set up for walking.

I actually find it easier to walk to lunch in downtown Hartford, just because, as an old-style city, it is actually pedestrian friendly, with pedestrian traffic signals with count-down timers, wide sidewalks, etc.
[/QUOTE]

We agree about Hartford. I’m not holding Glastonbury up as some paragon of urban living, just saying that its much preferable to be in close to town than somewhere that requires a 20+ minute drive just to get to the store.

[aruvqan]

[QUOTE=MichaelQReilly]
Check out the units at the Colt building, they are somewhat pricey, but they are exactly what you are looking for. I personally would love to find a nice old house in Hartford, but I really can’t afford the property tax hit of living in the city.

[/QUOTE]

Seriously pricey and so not handicapped accessible. In general anything labeled eat at or breakfast bar is anathema to me, and anybody else who can not handle anything barstool in height! Also, looking a the layouts, the bathrooms dont have the space for wheelchair access, unless they have some units that are not shown.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

[QUOTE=even sven]
have each other’s hands in each other’s pockets.

.
[/QUOTE]

I’m confused. This sounds like an M.C. Escher print.

[Sleel]

Well-planned zoning can be a very good thing. No zoning sucks putrid dog balls.

There’s basically no such thing as zoning in Japan. The few planned areas, like the recently completed Roppongi Hills, are big projects that were planned and laid out by a design team. Everything else is massive chaos.

You might have 3 convenience stores 200 m apart, and have no grocery store for several km in any direction. You might have someone build a factory right next to a field, which is the “back yard” to a 25 story housing complex, and have a row of 70 year old shacks with decaying metal roofs down the street from that. Sometimes you have to travel tens of km by train to get to a place that actually has the service you need. There’s no planning, no organization, no rhyme, no reason, and often terrible usability from a resident’s point of view.

I bloody well miss zoning.

[BrainGlutton]

[QUOTE=Sleel]
Well-planned zoning can be a very good thing. No zoning sucks putrid dog balls.

There’s basically no such thing as zoning in Japan. The few planned areas, like the recently completed Roppongi Hills, are big projects that were planned and laid out by a design team. Everything else is massive chaos.

You might have 3 convenience stores 200 m apart, and have no grocery store for several km in any direction. You might have someone build a factory right next to a field, which is the “back yard” to a 25 story housing complex, and have a row of 70 year old shacks with decaying metal roofs down the street from that. Sometimes you have to travel tens of km by train to get to a place that actually has the service you need. There’s no planning, no organization, no rhyme, no reason, and often terrible usability from a resident’s point of view.

I bloody well miss zoning.
[/QUOTE]

Chaos?! In Japan?!

Hm! I always thought of Japan as this orderly, uptight, heavily regulated, Confucian-bureaucratic society!

[foolsguinea]

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Hm! I always thought of Japan as this orderly, uptight, heavily regulated, Confucian-bureaucratic society!
[/QUOTE]
It’s not China, you know, as much as previous regimes have tried to pretend they have Chinese culture.

Arguably, China isn’t as Confucian & orderly as it would like to think it is, either.

[msmith537]

[QUOTE=robby]

I actually find it easier to walk to lunch in downtown Hartford, just because, as an old-style city, it is actually pedestrian friendly, with pedestrian traffic signals with count-down timers, wide sidewalks, etc.
[/QUOTE]

Well…pedestrian friendly except that unless it’s changed a lot, I’d worry about being jacked up as a pedestrian.

One of the problems with Connecticut is that people with money tend to not live in the cities. Everyone either lives in a suburban house and drives into Harford, Bridgeport, New Haven, etc or they take the train to NYC. Without the tax base, there’s not much monet to develop downtown centers to attract residents.