BOWERS: What's so bad about suburban sprawl anyway?

The Star [South Chicago] ^ | 1/39/6 | Michael Bowers

[Arrowhead1952]

We basically got taxed out of the city of Austin. The wife quit working after Lisa was born, and the wife was making more money than I did. I had better insurance and benefits, so we decided to move to a cheaper area.

Then, Austin threatened to annex that area, so we moved again. We bought this home for less than the previous two, so that was a blessing. Austin is turning into a hippie survivors of the 60s heaven.

[ScreamingFist]

Lots of these people shouldn't be complaining so much. The flip side is if your town is shrinking or stagnant. Then, you'd love a little sprawl to increase your tax base. Those are the towns that are the ones trying to attract developers and new businesses.

My little town (30 miles away) just recently had Starbucks and a Walgreens built, I like it as do all the locals, it means the town is growing. What we don't want is another Starbucks across the street and tearing down the old museum so that Eckerds can compete with business from Walgreens. Understand? It's called urban planning and it's out the window in most suburbs. Unregulated sprawl is a blight, I don't need 5 new drugstores within 1/2 block, at the expense of the historic 100 year old buildings and neither do you.

[sgtyork]

Maybe you need to travel more. Having lived in Ft. Worth, New Orleans (before the hurricane), Chicago, and Milwaukee, believe me, other than the shopping strips they don't look the same when you really drive around. An example, with frugal Polish/German ethnicity there are more duplexes in Milwaukee than anywhere. New Orleans had houses on stilts.

[Larry Lucido]

Hey, a carless utopia! And they got bicycles, too!!

[HairOfTheDog]

There are still neat places... and I hope there always are. But you can't deny that upon driving in to most towns, the signs point to the same chain stores we have at home.

[sgtyork]

It's called urban planning

It sounds like the state planning who are the winners and who are the losers. You introduce unwarranted emotion by making the choice one between a "museum" or a drug store. Oh gosh, that's always the choice our precious museums!

Why should your local leaders decide that Walgreen's gets a store and Eckerds doesn't? Seems like a recipe for making local government officials accept money under the table and for driving away jobs.

[ScreamingFist]

You introduce unwarranted emotion by making the choice one between a "museum" or a drug store. Oh gosh, that's always the choice our precious museums!

Actually, FRiend, directly across the street from Walgreens new store is an old museum, and a 200 foot oil derick donated to the town.....and the street out front is called Route 66...and just down the road about 1 mile is the Route 66 museum. The name of the town is Elk City Oklahoma. Talk of something you know, then you won't appear ignorant when you get a response.

[VanDeKoik]

The problem is not sprawl, its the fact that cities are no longer laid out in a logical grid system anymore. We now have streets that don't go anywhere. huge seven-lane super roads that are impossible to cross on foot. No pedestrain scale development at all. An awful mess of a place results. Who cares how cool it is to have all of these stores making tons of money if your city looks like S*it. Cities in the nations past actualy made a flipping effort to tame this type of chaos through planning. For some reason the 50's and 60's made such a thing inconvenient.

[palmer]

directly across the street from Walgreens new store is an old museum, and a 200 foot oil derick donated to the town.....and the street out front is called Route 66...and just down the road about 1 mile is the Route 66 museum. The name of the town is Elk City Oklahoma.

Well that does it, I know where I'm going on vacation next year!

[Lancey Howard]

This thread needs a map.

Here's another map:

[Lancey Howard]

Is that the Houston Hilton?

[metesky]

Welcome to Free Republic.

You sound like a New Urbanist, bud. I checked your web sites and I have a question: Do you build houses for people with less than a million bucks to spend?

Most of your stuff appears to be way over-sized and garish beyond belief.

[metesky]

Instead of the Ma and Pa cafe that we used to make a point of stopping at on the way to Reno, there are the same fast food places we have at home.

Blame zoning, MADD and the anti-smoking campaign for shutting down all the decent and unique little bistros, bars and saloons.

[HairOfTheDog]

Blame zoning, MADD and the anti-smoking campaign for shutting down all the decent and unique little bistros, bars and saloons.

While each of those have a part in these changes... I actually blame technology. There is no such thing as local anymore in this media age...

[bvw]

Our best defense against nuclear attack -- suburban sprawl. Damn good of Ike to initiate and carry through with ir.

[metesky]

Yes, well there is that too. Like losing regional accents because all the newscaster talking heads have the same accent no matter where you go, the kids start talking in the same flat tone.

I proudly go out of my way to make sure I keep sounding "Boston", even though I haven't lived in Town for over forty years.

[Springman]

Bump for later.

[x]

Screw up one state and then move onto the next. That's the American Way. My ancestors started out in Virginia in the 17th century, moved to Tennessee at the end of the 18th century, moved to Missouri in the early 19th century, and then some of them moved to California in the 20th century. I'm not sure where they're headed to in the 21st century, but you gotta problem with that?

Sooner or later you'll run out of states and space. And when enough states have tipped, then you'll be in real trouble.

People certainly have a right and a reason to complain about how things are changing in states like Virginia or Arizona or North Carolina or Colorado or New Hampshire. But they might think a bit before promoting the the changes that tip states into the liberal or democratic column.

[WhyisaTexasgirlinPA]

While I agree with you that it is a shame to tear down a 100 year old building, unless you own it, you really have no say in the matter. And they have no say in your business dealings if you chose to sell property.

[ScreamingFist]

While I agree with you that it is a shame to tear down a 100 year old building, unless you own it, you really have no say in the matter. And they have no say in your business dealings if you chose to sell property.

Ug. And the new Supreme Court rulings support your stance. What's a church, home or historic building's value when the city can make MORE MONEY on taxes..........LOL. Enjoy your walmart, I kind of like the old brick buildings myself.