10908Re: Latest from Jim Kunstler
- Jun 1, 2008On 2008-06-01, Jet Graphics <Jetgraphics@...> wrote:
> Though loops and cul de sac street hierarchy is the typical NorthI find suburbia an excellent example of a Poor Compromise: the worst
> American suburban development pattern, it's so "20th century".
> Frankly, it's only useful for automobile based cultures - which
> translates to eventual extinction.=20
> Typical suburban lots are too small for farming, too wasteful of
> space, and usually consume a ton of time and resources to comply with
> "weed ordinances".
of both worlds, the city and the countryside. On the one hand, suburbia
is dense enough that you have endure with living with other people,
there's no real privacy in the garden, which typically isn't big enough
to really grow much of your own food etc. On the other hand, suburbia is
too sparse to support public transport, local services, etc.
Although I'm not expert on the history, it is my understanding that the
rich people of the past centuries had found a far better compromise: the
best of both worlds. They had mansions in the countryside that they spent
some of their time in, in particular in the summer, and more densely
built townhouses (that's where the term comes from, AFAIK) that they
spend the rest of their time in, in particular in the winter.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>