Myths embraced by armchair planners

[Huck]

The operative word in that section is "far." Nice try though.

I wasn't "try"ing anything. And I still don't fully understand your point of view. What is far to you? The picture you posted? To me that's not far at all. Far would be residential areas with 100 foot long paths to the main house. 10-15 feet of sidewalk is great, in my opinion. Hell, even 20 feet, where you have space enough to put activities on the sidewalk (cafes, restaurants, vendors, etc.) is awesome to me.

This:



As opposed to this:

[Sacha]

The reason that people drive cars everywhere (in this sprawling low density city) is because there isn't enough public transport.

[OfficialPlanner]

I wasn't "try"ing anything. And I still don't fully understand your point of view. What is far to you? The picture you posted? To me that's not far at all. Far would be residential areas with 100 foot long paths to the main house. 10-15 feet of sidewalk is great, in my opinion. Hell, even 20 feet, where you have space enough to put activities on the sidewalk (cafes, restaurants, vendors, etc.) is awesome to me.

This:



As opposed to this:

Far from the worst example, but an example of a built-form that I dislike

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=All+Sa...84.39,,0,-3.45

Contrasted by one of my favriote neighborhoods in the same city, with buildings near the right-of-way.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=All+Sa...92.34,,0,-3.34

The width of the sidewalk means little without knowing the characteristic of the surrounding land use.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Bay+St...,347.7,,0,7.61

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Queen+...1,43.88,,0,5.9

[Dan]

Around where I am, there's a strong belief among many in the crunchy crowd that "back to the land" type living is actually greener and more sustainable than denser development. It's more of an aesthetic sense of what's environmentally friendly; four acres of woods, a house built with green-certified and recycled materials, an organic garden, a big compost pile, a Volvo 240 on the permeable driveway, and 3.5 goats. Sure, it may be "green", but it's still auto-dependent sprawl that increases commuting times, fossil fuse usage, conversation of farmland and environmentally sensitive areas to residential uses, and the cost of providing municipal services..

It makes planning for TND/NU a challenge, because the people who advocate what I call "green sprawl" generally have very strong ideological beliefs. Many feel it's the only ideal way for people to live, just as some at the other end of the spectrum believe everybody should live in a McMansion on a cul-de-sac.