View Single Post
Old Posted Mar 18, 2008, 8:40 AM
Samwill89 Samwill89 is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 430
Originally Posted by LMich View Post
Why test when we already know the most successful way to live in a city? Again, 'testing' different kinds of sprawl is wanting to have your cake and eat it, too. It's trying to reinvent the wheel, and it ultimately we know that it has more negative consequences than sustainable, urban development. What's the use of testing when we know the substandard outcomes of the product? Sprawl by any other name is still sprawl.
That is the point of testing, because we don't know for sure the most successful way to live in a city. The models I mentioned pretty much separates larger cities and divide them into self-sustaining communities that depend less on dangerous energy and fuel consumption and more on urban living in existing less-than-urban environments.

There is no way America cities can go back into their Pre-WWII urbanity unless we can change the dominant auto-centric mentality. That will take a lot of social and economic changes.
Reply With Quote