jade408

The Bay Area is really pricy. It takes $200k to live in a terrible Oakland neighborhood. Like the ones that give Oakland its rep. Want a good school district? Think about $600k for 1500 square feet. And you'll have about a 40-50 minute commute to the major job centers. Or more. Want to raise your family in Silicon Valley? Hope you've got a million dollars for an outdated ranch home. Want a 1 bedroom condo in SF? Thats about $450k in an up and coming area with no grocery store. Median price in SF right now is hovering around a million dollars.

We have tasty food (in Oakland), but its very different than NOLA food. Lucky for us, all the Cali farmland starts at the edge of the Bay Area. We've got space for local cows, oysters, cheese and produce, and all sorts of other stuff in the 50 mile radius (or closer depending). But probably the big thing, for Oakland in particular, is high quality ingredients/well-prepared stuff at moderately priced places. Like it is totally possible to get organic tacos, fast-food and ice cream. It is "normal" for places at all price points to have local ingredients. Which we all know in the US is far too rare these days. Basically it is either at the hole in the wall country place. Maybe. And the uber expensive 4 star place.

There is also a lot of cultural mixing too. Like don't be surprised if an all-american place has siracha, Mexican hot sauce, salsa and tabasco as condiments. Sadly Louisiana style hot sauce takes a bit more work to get on the regular table.

Roody

I understand your impatience with wishful thinking. But really, as a species, it's our biggest strength. Maybe it sounds better if you call it "hopeful analysis and planning".

The important thing is to balance the "wishful" with the "thinking". Without hope and optimism, we become paralyzed with cynicism. Without balanced thought, our wishes devolve into silliness.

Sprawl is an objective evil. It's negative consequences can be measured quantitatively: increased pollution, loss of farmland and wildlife habitat, damage to community cohesion, political corruption, loss of productivity, and so forth. All of these bad effects have been measured. They really exist.

At its root, as the Biblical God said, sprawl is caused by greed and the love of money. A few people--developers and crooked politicians--get rich, and the rest of us pay the real price.

I-Like-To-Bike

Couldn't agree more.

You might consider your previous statement about balanced thought.

daihard 

Again, this is a car-free forum. Unless sprawling helps car-free or car-light lifestyle, I consider it an objective evil in this context.

I-Like-To-Bike

Given your choice of an extremely narrow view for making determinations of "objective evil", how should the majority of people who live in the U.S. (especially in areas you choose to call "sprawling") react to a tiny subset of people who determine that only car-free or car-light lifestyles are "good", while all others are considered an "objective evil"?

Do you expect anybody outside of your narrow "context" to give a damn what "improvements" such narrow minded people dream about?

daihard 

Like I said in an earlier post, some cities are making changes to make their residents' lives easier without having to drive. Those who like the sprawled areas are free to live and drive in such an area. I've come to believe that driving is an evil that should be avoided, and I try to live that way. That is why I am posting in this Living Car-Free forum, where the "tiny subset of people who determine that only car-free or car-light lifestyles are 'good'" gather. They are my audience here.

Your reply would make more sense if my opinion had shown up in other forums such as "General Cycling Discussion" or "Foo."

Roody

I have never known or talked with anybody, or read anything written by anybody who likes sprawl. It's ugly, wasteful and destructive by any standards whatever. There is nobody who likes sprawl, unless they are either making money off it or trying to incite flame wars on an Internet forum.

Machka 

Really?

Try typing "benefits of urban sprawl" into Google.


And if "sprawl" includes suburbs, small satellite towns, and country living ... many, many people like sprawl. They quite happily choose to live in those locations, and choose to live there over living in the middle of a crowded city.

MickeyMaguire

This is an interesting point. Your thoughts on this reflect what has happened in and around Columbus, Ohio (my present location). The city expanded and swallowed up surrounding towns that are now officially annexed. The so-called urban sprawl began in America as a description of what happened to Atlanta, Georgia (initially). It is now becoming over-used.

I actually prefer small towns that are far enough away from big urban centers that they are unlikely to be swallowed up any time at all. With the so-called "internet economy" it might be possible for small towns to build an industry that is connected to the rest of humanity without having the growth of numbers that in past times was required for economic survival.

Machka 

I also prefer small towns that are far enough away from big urban centers that they are unlikely to be swallowed up any time at all. My ideal location is exactly that ... to live in a small town 20 or 30 km out of a larger centre. But a larger centre that is not too big and not too inclined to grow too rapidly.

In addition to the internet economy, some companies are looking at decentralisation ... putting manufacturing facilities in smaller communities. The idea being that they may be able to find a less expensive location, less overhead, and it would provide employment for people in smaller communities. The internet and video conferencing, etc., make this more viable.

Roody

Swallowed up by what?

And what do we call it when an urban center grows too rapidly?

phoebeisis

Below 6 lines- cut of Jade's post
We have tasty food (in Oakland), but its very different than NOLA food. Lucky for us, all the Cali farmland starts at the edge of the Bay Area. We've got space for local cows, oysters, cheese and produce, and all sorts of other stuff in the 50 mile radius (or closer depending). But probably the big thing, for Oakland in particular, is high quality ingredients/well-prepared stuff at moderately priced places. Like it is totally possible to get organic tacos, fast-food and ice cream. It is "normal" for places at all price points to have local ingredients. Which we all know in the US is far too rare these days. Basically it is either at the hole in the wall country place. Maybe. And the uber expensive 4 star place.

Yeah,I figured you guys might have good locally grown produce.
In NOLA- despite our FOOD reputation-"normal people" rarely get local produce.
We can get local seafood-but much of the seafood in grocery stores is that "foreign grown" all but toxic asian and south american "farmed" seafood.
Horrible tasteless frozen and with god know what sort of chemicals in them.
We do have GREAT SATSUMAS( mandarin oranges sooooo good and easy to peal) and navel oranges(very nice flavor but the thinner skinned type that are a little tougher to peal than the ones we get from "you" CA grown navels which are nice,but not quite as nice a flavor as ours)
Other than that seasonal citrus-we have NO local produce
Now WE means "normal not rich folks"
Now there are some local smart "boutique" farmers growing high quality produce for chi chi restaurants. Yeah the pricy local "not pure tourist" restaurants use very good local ingredients-but they aren't available in local groceries
Now Whole Food-MIGHT have some local produce-if they do it is probably very pricy

The actual produce we get-is TERRIBLE- especially the tomatoes.
They are GRAINY and MUSHY at the same time!! Now they LOOK GREAT-perfect-but they are terrible-and $1.50-$2.00 a pound.
Canned diced tomatoes-del monte -are much better quality texture-CANNED better that "fresh"-pitiful garbage that passes for food

I love tomatoes-so I grow mine. Everything grow GREAT in south louisiana-I have grown tomatoes on and off since i was 14 or so-and i was a finicky eater so I would;'t eat my own tomatoes-finally did-but not until I was maybe 20 years old(irish american potatoes-lots of potatoes-and meat were what we ate-despite being 150 years removed from "mick-land")
Now I grow cherry tomatoes-they produce in 55 days-and they aren't on the vine as long so the "BUGS" don't have as long to raid them.
Here is my crop today-terrible picture

Dave Cutter

It hurts my brain to think in such in short terms!

Cities only started appearing a handful of years ago.... in a global time scale. Unless of course you measure time with a stopwatch. Cities have appeared and then vanished for what... 6-7 thousand years? Most "modern" cities were on the verge of pandemic abandonment when cars replaced the horse as the primary means of transportation. It is factual to say... that cars created what you are calling sprawl... while at the same time saving the "city" paradigm.

But..... I think if you take a minute to reflect on the "City paradigm".... you will realize it's a worn-out old concept. Any "value" to the construct of a city gets very hard to identify.... once paradigms and rationalizations are removed. Certainly... cities will be with us for centuries to come. But their value has become greatly diminished.

This is a historically awesome time to be alive! In my lifetime: I have met people who were adults when they experienced their first automobile ride... and I met a man that walked on the moon.

I understand.... this is too great of a change for many people. They can't disassemble and then rebuild the mental paradigms required to retain a comfortable balance in their life. So they task themselves with stopping the change.... they sabotage the natural progress and advancement of mankind. But they do so by convincing themselves that they are preserving something good.

Their efforts would be better spent understanding the world (and people) around them.

jade408

I used to hate tomatoes. But I later realized it was because most were tasteless. And fresh ones are yummy.

I noticed navels can be hit and miss. And we probably keep the best ones to ourselves. The ones I get in the farmers market or from my CSA are so yummy. The ones at the grocery store are like 50/50.

We have a zillion farmers markets. I've got 5 year round ones in a 3 miles radius. Only some chain super markets stock local produce, but we have good indie grocery stores that stock tons. When I travel I always miss our tasty produce. And end up thinking....where are the veggie!

Sounds like your garden is yummy!

phoebeisis

Yeah you are lucky produce wise.
In the 1950's-1970's we had a local produce market in the Quarter-and plenty of other places
And we had " farmers" who would literally park their truck-pickup or bigger truck- on the side of the street and sell their local produce.
Now we still have a market in the quarter-but much of it isn't local produce-and it isn't convenient for most folks.

Yeah my tomatoes-good crop this year-
I planted some lima beans-waaaay too late-so they won't produce-but at least the "land" is cleared-and I'm getting the "feel" for them
My navel orange tree-maybe I'll get 40 oranges-I planted it with no thought 15 years down the road

jade408

That sucks. It kills me that local produce isn't more readily available in the southeast with all the good farm land.

i subscribe to to a weekly box from a local farm. (CSA) They just send over a random assortment of what's ripe. My last one had grapefruit, apricots, tomatoes, cucumbers, carrots, green beans and corn.

The big problem us is the food dessert thing. Easy access to produce and such for anyone in a middle class or higher neighborhood. But the poor neighborhoods are disconnected. We've got a community organization working on a grocery store in one of those parts of town. Right now they run a farmers market with local produce, some even grown in Oakland. It is really cool, and they are nearly at their fundraising goal so they can break ground on a full service store in a community that has no real grocery stores.

Roody

Speaking of local produce... New Jersey was called the Garden State because most of the produce for New York and Philadelphia was grown there. Nowadays New Jersey is the sprawl state, and a lot less produce is grown there. Most of the produce for NYC and Philadelphia is trucked in from hundreds of miles away.

I'm not saying that all of those people should not have moved to New Jersey. But if they had planned better, the people could been fit in better, and some of the sprawl could have been eliminated. It is possible to have quiet, spacious suburban living with much less sprawl. I can visualize suburban villages, surrounded by green belts that are produce farms. This would be a place where Machka might like to live, and where you and phoebeisis could enjoy plenty of fresh vegetables.

phoebeisis

Exactly.
South Louisiana is extremely fertile.But the only produce a "not pretty affluent person" can get is
Satsumas and navel oranges tomatoes and strawberries
and now-a-days you won't always find those 4 locals in the big chain stores.
When you do the local stuff is at least 50% more expensive(worth it but if you are watching your dollars a tomato is a tomato)


An actor-Tyler Perry I think-- opened a grocery store on the west bank-hired locals bought local stuff -got some sort of tax break I think
Unfortunately it closed pretty quickly.It was supposed to "help" the food desert for "po folks" problem-but it failed.
The problem is good produce is expensive -and "po folks" don't have any excess $$-they HAVE to buy the least expensive food-walmart dollar store
"Not affluent" people can't afford to buy good produce-they buy the cheapest they have ready access to-
Some folks can grow a bit of their own- little bit of sunny land-seed-water-fertilizer-shovel or mattock-couple hours a week

I occasionally have to water my tomatoes-and we get 55" a year-
With just 20"-an urban farmer in Oakland would need plenty of water-so growing in some "public space"-neutral ground-is out.

jade408

Here is what is going on in terms of affordable local produce for us. A grocery store for the people planned for West Oakland food desert | Grist

ironically, the produce bowl of the country hardly gets any rain. Loads of irrigation. Our rain is actually pretty concentrated to when you plant stuff. So you definitely need to water plants. We don't get any rain after June 1st until October or November. It is like this in pretty much the whole state. Lots of reservoirs.

We do have some urban gardens and such too. People are also getting better at collecting run-off and grey water. Even for home use. Some of my gardener friends have a big barrel.

We have good soil and good sun. Once you work out the water you can grow almost anything. My friend found out there is an avocado tree in the parking lot of her apartment. She lives in the middle of downtown. Lol!

i guess the point is, just because you live in one neighborhood type doesn't mean you can't have a garden or walkability.

phoebeisis

Right-you guys-CA- produce lots of USAs produce-with very little rain.
20" just double "desert" amounts I think- and maybe that 20" is actually you on the coast-inland even less.

The affordable local produce plan-read it-yeah sounds like the guy pushing it-smart enough-
I didn't notice any tax breaks-guess non profits pay no taxes(whole point of non profit-no taxes)- so no tax breaks possible.
It is a tough "business"- guessing most "food desert stores" fail-they are food deserts because the $$-isn't there to buy produce-which per calorie and per "satiety unit" -is expensive. Fingers crossed!

We-NOLA- do have the water advantage over you folks-which means we can have more "home gardens"
But now it is mainly "older folks" older white blacks vietnamese who have a backyard or side yard garden in NOLA metro-

We-south Louisiana-used to have cisterns-big barrels somewhat elevated-that would catch and store water that would roll off the roofs.
They were elevated enough that they gave "running water" in the house.Pretty sure that was the rule in many places-might return if droughts become more common-now we get it from the river-water treatment etc

timmythology

So after reading this entire thread I have to say that I thought sprawl had a different meaning. I had always thought sprawl was used to identify the road towns that only existed along the highway's, and made a very long town core. Versus a urban core that has a dense middle and radiates outward.

For the sake of this thread, the Portland Metropolitan Region or METRO was created just for this purpose. READ ABOUT IT

So if the City of Portland was used as an example. "A community needs to have a body that serves as over sight of development and provides a common vision for the next generation as a foundation." IMO

Roody

I agree. Unfortunately, there is a very vocal minority that tries to block regionalism and planning in any form. And it's hard to get citizens involved in a boring (although very important) issue like urban/rural planning.

timmythology

Well that might be a place to start, and if I recall METRO has a lot of debate about government intrusion. Economically the government will have to be addressed in the US especially if you start looking at the administration cost to run so many different branches of government, and the duplication of services they provide, but is not within the scope of this thread.

loky1179

It is always helpful to think in terms of a global time scale when discussing an issue like urban sprawl. I mean, what did the T Rex do when faced with urban sprawl? Were woolly mamoths happy with the high speed paths favored by the saber toothed tigers, or did they favor quieter back roads? Silly to think we are the first on planet earth to grapple with such issues.

Dave Cutter

Big issues need/deserve big people [grown-up] creativity. You have to be able to look beyond your own horizon to even begin to understand (let alone resolve) large problems. If you can't set aside the paradigms and focus on the real issues.... the solutions will always remain out of your reach.

Pick any major city anywhere in the world.... do the research... try to determine the original bounties. Then chart the growth and patterns of growth over the decades and/or centuries right up to todays city limits. Then select the year in which "sprawl" began.

Urban sprawl has been a feature of cities for as long as they have existed. The dynamic of rich inner city residents moving out to the lower density suburbs of the town can be traced back to antiquity. Villa suburbunas were a feature of ancient Roman civilizations, such as the Roman district of Tusculum where Cicero had his summer house.

In most cases in America... urban sprawl is merely people and businesses moving out of reach of poorly managed and over-taxed city governments. For the most part "sprawl" is a fake term used derogatorily with goals to restrict the freedoms and movement of people.... in hopes to extract a larger tax base.

It is important to note that a handful of well managed communities have experienced increased city density at the same time that poorly managed cities have experienced flight.