Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Michael Winslow Czeiszperger <michael AT czeiszperger.org>]

On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 11:59 AM, Thomas C. Meggs wrote:
> Personally I don't like the way Southern Village is laid out. I don't 
> like how the road in
> surrounds that massive open area and seperates it from the houses 
> (Correct
> me if I'm wrong, I've only been there once, a while ago, at night). I
> think the houses should be built in a square around the green area, and
> cars should be on the outside. And it needs some nice land scaping.

Maybe you were there a while back? The parks are integrated into and 
among the houses. The open space consists of:

1. Village Green on Market St.
2. 4 small parks with equipment for kids
3. Soccer field & sand volleyball court
4. Public gardens
5. Soccer field behind Scrogg's Elementary School

You're never more than a couple of small blocks from a park. I do like 
the one large green area concept too, as it gives you a lot of land to 
run, which the smaller parks can't give. On the downside everyone would 
have to walk farther to get to a larger park.  The city does have plans 
to turn the 80 acres directly south of SV into a large park, which 
would fill in that gap.

Also, good points about the relationship between the automobile and 
suburban land use. I have a picture of my grandparent's house which was 
built 150 years ago. The picture is about 100 years old, and you can 
clearly see the light rail system that connected all of the towns in 
those days.

Mixing replies again:

On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 12:15 PM, Gina Norman wrote:

> That being said, it might be an acceptable sacrifice for walk-ability 
> etc.  (Of course, I'm probably the only person around who'd *have* to 
> go to a HT to get the things I need even tho the Wellspring is right 
> there.  And the post office and the dry cleaner and my friends' 
> houses, etc. I figure I'm going to be out in the car every day anyway, 
> so if I hit the grocery on the way home from work or on the way from 
> getting my hair cut, is that such a terrible thing?  I suppose I am 
> high-maintenance...)

I don't think the point is to not drive at all, at least not for 
everyone, but rather to reduce the number of car trips. Theoretically 
if you reduce the number of hours everyone in the neighborhood is in 
their cars you can support the increased density and population without 
affecting the road system nearly as much as a traditional suburb.

On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 09:50 AM, Paul Jones wrote:
> about new urbanism, i can only say: "Truman Show"

Assuming you forgot a smiley face, there's really no difference between 
a development based on New Urbanism compared to any other subdivision 
in terms of covenants.

__________________________________________________________________
No place better demonstrates the worst aspects of both the American
character and public policy than the nation's highways.
        -- michael at czeiszperger dot org, Chapel Hill, NC