MobiusX

I created a Suburban Sprawl flyer, which does support the car free lifestyle, while, at the same time, providing statistics and other information. The two main books that I used to get the information from are Suburban Sprawl Nation by Andres Duany and The Public Transportation Fact Sheet from 2010 by the American Public Transportation Association, which is the latest one available. You simply send them an email requesting the book and they mail it to you. It's free. Here is the flyer.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

wahoonc

Good start, now you need to make one showing how to overcome the issues

Aaron

MobiusX

one of them is already in there, supporting the car free lifestyle, guess it's too small to read though.

I-Like-To-Bike

This flyer hardly makes the "car free lifestyle" in the suburbs look appealing. How does portraying car less people as victims support "car free lifestyle?"

MobiusX

the victim part is there more like to say " did you know you've been living in this place in these conditions that make life difficult in these situations---that you were not even aware of?, well there are other options than the car" plus, like it says on the flyer, that statistically speaking, there are real victims, victims of car accidents for example compared to a safer way to commute that are available, but people are brainwashed to thinking that driving is the only way, I like the flyer for the fact that it includes everybody in it, the children, elderly, parents, teenagers, so nobody can read it and deny the fact that what is there is not true since these are actual facts, but I am sure a lot did not know these facts to be true.

Dahon.Steve

I think the comment on weary commuters can be a little subjective. It's not just time that makes a commute weary but also the mode of transport. I have a commute into New York City each morning that takes about an hour and 15 minutes! However, about 50 minutes is spend sleeping in an express bus or listening to music. What would make this a weary commute is if I was on a bus or train standing each day for 50 minutes! So if the mode of transport is pleasent, then a long commute does not have to be weary at all.

I do agree that driving in gridlock each day for 60 minutes would be quite weary.

Robert Foster

Who would read the flyer? Urban dwellers already willing to deal with higher crime, poor city schools and lack of room for their children to play. Would a suburban dweller that left the city for better schools, more personal space, a lower crime rate and lower cost per square foot be interested? Or would you simply be preaching to the choir.

cycleobsidian

Thumbs up. I love your information so far.

I do believe that your description of children who live in suburbia is very accurate. They are kept in infancy as the only way they can get around is with their parent's assistance. Parents then have the ability to micromanage their lives. Right until the age of 16 or 17, young adults then have to negotiate to borrow a car or get their parents to buy them one.

I do believe as well that people don't realize what a trap they are in living under those conditions. I myself didn't give it a second thought when I lived in suburbia. Fast forward to living in a more urban area, and now I know why I used to have such conflict with my kids over going place to place; I always either had to drive them to all their athletics or after school practices when I was weary myself. When they got to the age of driving then we were always in conflict over their wanting to use the car. I much prefer city life; I think it is much less stressful.

Perhaps Robert Foster needs to find a better city to study. Not everyone has to live in a poor crime ridden area of a city. Many cities have low crime rates. (I live in one.) Many city schools are excellent. I haven't done the research on it, but I would hazard a guess that not all suburban areas have great schools.

In any case, onward and upward, MobiusX, you are on the right track.

Smallwheels

I read the flyer and it has some good information. Where is the call to action? Where is the solution to these problems? Does this flyer have a back page or is this the front and back page side by side?

There needs to be a list of solutions to these problems to show something can be done about it. You can either choose just one solution to focus attention or offer several and hope some stick in the minds of the readers.

If there is no new law or proposal happening in government at the time that can be supported by the people, then this flyer is a waste of time unless you have deep pockets to put them out regularly to capture the minds of the citizens. It usually takes a minimum of three views of something for it to register with people using direct mail. More often it takes seven views to make an impression.

All of us working together could come up with at least five points of change to show people something could be done to help with this problem. Not all neighborhoods are as segregated as gated island communities. Solutions would work better for some than others.

What would we do to alleviate the problems of sprawl?

1. Support zoning changes to allow mixed use businesses and housing to coexist within the same neighborhood.
2. Support zoning changes to allow housing and businesses to exist within the same building.
3. Support better mass transit, whether it is for more routes or just more trips on existing routes.
4. Support bicycle lanes and bicycle parking to alleviate parking problems.
5. Mandate all on street parking spots have 24 hour parking meters which can change the fees according to peak needs.
6. Support the creation of bridges or other crossings so pedestrians and bicyclists can cross main roads safely without having to deviate miles to reach their destinations.
7. Remove the minimum parking spaces requirement for businesses if they supply more bicycle parking spaces.
8. Give businesses greater tax credits if they give employees bus passes or cash for riding their bicycles, or carpool.
9. Repeal zoning regulations that have minimum lot sizes and minimum dwelling sizes so that smaller more affordable housing can be created everywhere.

Those are some of the things I remember being discussed on this forum and in others. What am I forgetting to put down?

I actually would love to see every other suburban neighborhood street torn up and have houses or apartments built in their place. People could use the sidewalks to get to the next main road to catch the bus or use other transportation methods. The end of the street could be used as a parking lot. It would require all the people on the street to accept the fact that they couldn't park their cars in their driveways anymore, but their neighborhoods would be quieter and more friendly. I doubt it would happen in many places unless the city gave the residents a cash payment for the change. After all, the city owns the street and the land from the sidewalk to the street. The city could also wave any restrictions on converting car garages into other uses as an additional incentive.

nathan.johnson

I'd like to read the flyer, but the words are a little to small for me to read easily and I'm not much in the mood to squint. Any chance you could make a larger version or save it as a pdf?

MobiusX

I did write the name of the book so if someone wants to know more information about it. This is the first step, for someone to even become aware of the problems while supporting a free car lifestyle, etc..

MobiusX

I can email it to you if you want.

Robert Foster

Bring up Lake Forest California and compare it to your city. https://www.cityrating.com/citycrime....orest&state=CA I am pretty sure which one has the lower crime rate. But still when someone looks at the reasons people move to the suburbs the reasons are almost always the ones I listed. And just for you the crime stats are listed per capita.

You might find this interesting as well.

https://www.iusb.edu/~journal/static/...98/Paper5.html

References are at the bottom of the report.

But maybe more to the point. It is almost offensive to believe in this day and age that urban dwellers made an educated choice to live in the conditions they live in and suburban dwellers were tricked into foolishly leaving the city when life is so much better there. It sounds like real-estate agents trying to boost sales. The only people remotely interested in a flyer deriding suburban life are urban dwellers. It is no more interesting to suburban dwellers than heat islands and crime rates are to urban dwellers. People live where they live because they like something about where they live.

MobiusX

not always, they live there because they lived there their entire lives and aren't even aware of the issues of the problems of suburban sprawl, some might and are too young to move, they might be children or teenagers that were taken away from an urban area and are now suffering the consequences of suburbia, anybody can read the flyer, I'm sure a lot of them weren't even aware of everything on the flyer, it might make them think more like "wow, i can actually save a lot of money just by taking the bus" etc... I guess you forgot to read the last part of the flyer, the Bored Teenagers? I will type it here then, "But there is more to protecting life than avoiding ccrime, as any parent of a sixteen-year-old driver will attest. Far and away, car crashes are the largest killer of American teenagers. Yet all the suburban parents who can afford it will readily buy the additional cars that provide independence for their children, often in order to regain their own freedom. When they get behind the wheel, teenagers automatically join the most dangerous gang in America. A young driver has a significantly greater chance of dying from an automobile mishap than from gang activity.

Robert Foster

Piffel.
Children will live where parents feel they can take care of them. With modern communication it is close to impossible people don't know what they do or don't have. A flyer isn't going to change a parent who moved from a urban area to "escape" something real or imagined. People know what the problems of commuting are and either move to relieve it or try to find work where they don't have to commute as much. If you have never lived in an urban area then wait till you have before you assume others don't know why they left. There are many reasons people would rather live in a urban area. But there are just as many reasons people want their own home and yard and more control over their school district. No one life style is better or worse for the individual that has decided to live there.
Urban versus suburban versus rural living has become purely political and biased based on preconceptions of all sides. Some of my family would consider high density urban living the same as a reservation or Manzanar, look it up if you need reference. Others seem to view urban living as utopia. But the truth is both have things you must deal with and without knowing both groups reasoning you will never know why they made the decisions they did. Take a look at something from the other side of the argument: https://www.smartplanet.com/blog/smart-takes/megacities-inevitable-desirable-urban-vs-suburban-reconsidered/9917
Suburban development didn’t happen in a vacuum it happened for a reason, when you understand the reason you will know who will read the flyer and who will consider it junk mail.

chewybrian 

The cul-de-sac photo really hits home for me. This is the reality where I live. Huge neighborhoods have only one connection to a busy road without a sidewalk or bike lane. One dead-end pretzel of roads backs up to the next. They are separated by only back yards, but unconnected, so there is no walking or cycling between them in most cases.

For the people living in these neighborhoods, it means a 1/4 mile walk to the drug store becomes a mile and a half, including a dangerous and unfriendly stretch along the main road. They might literally hear the bus drive by on the main road from their yard, yet have to walk a mile to get to the bus stop! It's no wonder that they never consider going anywhere in any way but by car.

For me, it means I am continually forced back out into the last place I want to be riding. A few dozen patches of sidewalk, each only a couple hundred feet long, could connect all these roads and allow easy foot or bike travel accross the whole county. So, why wouldn't they build these connections?

I can only conclude that these people value their sense of security above all else. They have made a decision to keep non-residents out of their neighborhood at all costs. It's the middle class version of a gated community with a security guard. They'd rather be shut off from the rest of the world than have a stranger walk down their street.

MobiusX

privacy but lack of community, in these places people have to arrange places to meet to have fun, like at parking lots they have parades there,

*** Andres Duany in class about Suburban Sprawl*** This guy is a genius. This video is long but it's good.

Robert Foster

Ok, I'll see your sense of community and raise you the last several days in London.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14449675

Now that is community in action!

It is clear they didn't have to go far to have fun.

To be serious if these neighborhoods bother you that much couldn't you just move? How did you get there in the first place?

You also might want to protest your condition less and ride more. Considering how long it takes you to cover 8+ miles on a bike.

cooker

That's a review of an article by Kotkin, reviewed by Nusca. Apparently Kotkin is opposed to megacities - typically cities over 10,000,000 population. I can't access the original Kotkin article (paid subscription required) but Nusca concludes by citing his views as follows:

The smart way to grow, according to Kotkin? A distributed network of smaller cities — think the Netherlands — that decentralizes the economy and preserves livability and global competitiveness.

That seems to still support urbanism - just not megaurbanism.

gerv 

Mobius, great video! Do you have a link to the part of the presentation that provides us with Duany's proposal for what seems like in-fill development. He states the problem very well, but the problem is well known.

The solution is where things should get murky. I believe that if you look at many older "sprawl" situations, you'll find that -- often -- things have evolved a little to fill in some of the wide spaces. Zoning has changed a little to humanize some neighborhoods (for example, mixing some commercial with residential).

Probably the most difficult aspect is the layout of streets. A big infrastructure elephant is not easy to mollify. Some cities are starting to get "complete streets" solution, but I can't figure out what that would be for the Virginia Beach example Duany presents.

wahoonc

It boils down to a couple of things; NIMBY and intolerance. Pure and simple. The large town south of me was putting side walks along major thoroughfares, (long overdue IMHO) and some neighbor hoods actually went to court to try and stop it. Their main objection? It would bring "undesirable people" to their neighborhood, face it, if you walk you must be some sort of pervert...everybody owns a car. Ditto having bus stops put in along these same roads.

Aaron

Roody

Emoticons aside, I'm sure you're right about this. But the fact that suburbanites like their environment is not the point. For one thing, many of them have never thought that steps can be taken to improve things.

Even if you're fairly satisfied with the overall quality of your community, there's always room for improvement.

Some of the steps mentioned in posts here would make the suburbs nicer for everybody. Better bicycle infrastructure and better public transit are two prime examples. Better walking facilities would be another improvement most residents would probably like. What's the point of living in a beautiful tree-shaded community if you're taking your life in your hands every time you ride or walk outside your own little pod?

Also, it seems likely that suburban lifestyles will be changing in the next couple decades. With rising energy costs and increased congestion, many suburbanites (like yourself) will want to be driving less. Even if they're not too interested right now, the attractiveness of a community where daily car use is not required is likely to increase in coming years.

One thing you might not realize is that suburbs are cities too, that just happen to be sprawled out a little more. They have the same challenges and opportunities as other cities. A good city changes and evolves as the needs of its citizens change. Some suburbanites might take this flyer as an attack on their community. I really don't think that's what's intended. I think the point is to make the community better, to point out the problem areas, and to guide it in the next step of its evolution.

cycleobsidian

Yes, but you've got keep up with the times, Robert. Once upon a time Suburban life was considered the best way to live. Gas was cheap, congestion wasn't as awful as is was today. People did not realize the impacts of their lives in suburbia, they only saw what you saw, which is lower crime rates and better schools. The cities were being gutted and if you had the ability, you got out.

Now, things are different. Parents are looking at their kids and saying, "Boy are you fat. Go ride your bike." And then they realize there's no where to bike to. Mom is saying, I'm exhausted. Do I really need to rush home to take junior to soccer? Isn't there some better way?" Or, "it's costing me $75 a week just in gas to get to work. This is nuts. Let's move closer to amenities, like work and play."

But of course why would you believe me? So I am posting a link on

"Emerging Trends in the Real Estate Market, 2010" written by Price Waterhouse Coopers.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/asset-manag...-trends-us.pdf

On page 27, they state:

"Investors tend to favor the following:

Cities and urbanizing infill suburbs with 24 hour attributes--upscale, pedestrian friendly neighborhoods, convenient office, retail, entertainment and recreation districts, good mass transit alternatives to driving, good school and relatively save streets.

Investors tend to shy away from:

Fringe areas-exurbs and places with long car commutes or where getting a quart of milk means taking a 15 minute drive."

Later, on page 32, they state:

"Infill vs Suburbs--Road congestion, higher energy costs, climate change concerns combine to alter people's thinking about where they decide to live and work. The lifestyle cost-of-living equivalent starts to swing away more dramatically from bigger houses on bigger lots at the suburban edge to greater convenience and efficiency gained from infill housing closer to work."

Try to keep abreast of current trends, Robert.

Roody

I've made this point several times, but you have good backup with the PWC report. People are speculating that there might be a "flip-flop" between the suburbs and cities. Rich people will move into inner cities, while the poor will be forced to move into the suburbs as they become less dewirable.

Certainly, if I owned property in a suburb I would be exploring ways to make the community more desirable for changing tastes and needs, not fighting tooth and naito keep everything the same.

Robert Foster

Believe it or not I agree mostly with cooker. Smaller communities seem to be a direction worth exploring and in effect are representative of the fast growing place in Texas and other states where people seem to be moving. The people living in such communities have far more clout when looking for change and just enough power to draw jobs and companies to their area. The point I am making is people didn't accidently move first into urban sprawl and then to suburbia they did it after deciding to give up on the living style they had before. Once a person has made that decision they are rarely if ever interested in a flyer by anyone suggesting they made a bad decision. Trying to change the mind of such people is like spitting in the wind.
But as you know I tend to believe people have to change themselves first and worry less about trying to change others till they do. I still believe the OP needs to work on overcoming the restrictions they perceive they have or move before they will be taken seriously. It is contradictory to advocate for a car free lifestyle by saying it is too hard to get 8+ miles to the library for a healthy person by bike when the person you are talking to finds it easy to drive there. If you want them to give up driving you can’t tell them it will be even harder after you do. People rarely want to do things the hard way. By the community the OP is describing is often called a bed room community and was designed specifically the way it was to cater to people that simply want to get out of the city and sleep in a peaceful place before rejoining the rat race the next day. If they didn’t like the idea why would they have moved there in the first place?
I like the cooker’s suggestion, or observation, that small communities developing community infrastructure can be an answer, notice I didn’t say “the” answer. But bedroom communities take years to become true suburbs with stores, mini malls, malls bike paths and other services. People moving there knew that beforehand. So I say again if the OP can’t deal with where they live why not move? I wouldn’t work up a sweat going 8 miles to the library today; I would have five years ago. Maybe more time on the bike and less on how hard life is might help more than a flyer? I know the results of more cycling would be quicker than the flyer.