[DugwayDuke]

My friend, it certainly is about "making people live in cities". Just examime Algore's campaign call for billions in grants to cities to establsih "Green belts" of several miles depth around the cities to preclude roads and housing development in those areas. Perhaps you should do some research on the Wildlands Project....

[backhoe]

...do some research on the Wildlands Project....

Exactly- the more you look, the worse it seems to be.

I've tagged the 1990's as "The Decade of Fraud(s)..." not just thanks to the likes of the clintons and dot-bombs, but stuff like this.

We have a guy in my town whose SUV proudly sports a "Altamaha RiverKeepers" bumper sticker... and I presume what it really means is his group gets to Lord it over other groups less favored.

[Lorianne]

No it's not. For example the Traditional Neighborhood Development movement simply advocates different design techniquest than the typical 1960's spaghetti street subdivisions with shops, schools, etc located where you have to drive.

Anti-sprawl development is NOT anti-single family home development. It is for better designed housing developments using tried and true traditional elements like connecting streets, shops and schools and churches, and playgrounds IN the neighborhoods ... just like traditional so-called close-in suburbs were planned 1900-1950 before the sprawl-type subdivisions came into vogue in the 1960's (with the advent of the interstate highway system).