quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
No, we committed the same sins as the rest of the country when it comes to lending abuses. We just didn't have the same effects because our community did not grow as fast. We didn't grow as fast because we lost major employers this last decade. Why that happened was somewhat out of our control but some of it was due to crooked businessmen who got caught. Anyway, less growth, less damage. Our crisis is simply unfolding slower.
I don't remember ANY comments or arguments that stopping bridges across the Arkansas would increase values inside its limits. That is a bogus logic you picked up somewhere else, maybe Portland. What I did hear was the fears that it would spur growth of both retail and road building expense in the Jenks, Bixby, Glenpool areas at the expense of other areas, notably downtown and inner city development. The burbs represent older lifestyle development that is more expensive and out of step with the rest of the country.
Perhaps this will refresh your memory. The thread was “OH No…not again…Toll Bridge”. Making property within a boundary more valuable will drive up the price.
Artist: Sorry to drag you into this but when someone tries to call my bluff when I am not bluffing, I feel compelled to respond.
City Father Posted - 09/03/2008 : 10:17:16
quote: Originally posted by Red ArrowA new bridge could also be used by mass transit to the new neighborhoods. Adding mass transit while the neighborhoods are developing will be more successful than trying to add it later as most of Tulsa has proven. High density living has been the topic of many threads. Not everyone wants it for themselves. Even then, "high density" has different meanings for different folks. A bridge that saves 7 miles each way on a round trip is a gas savings on a trip that will probably be taken regardless of the miles. The IDL has been cited as a barrier to sensible development. I see the river as the same type barrier. Crossing that barrier could avoid duplicate retail development that only serves to dilute the customer base at both places and convert more land to parking spaces for cars. I see this particular bridge as making both places more efficient. I would like to agree with you about not "enabling" growth by adding roads and bridges but local history shows that the growth will happen even with insufficient infrastructure. I keep thinking of Portland and their urban growth boundaries when I think of doing or not doing this bridge. Our river can help act as such a boundary. It makes the property within that boundary more valuable and helps stem sprawl and too much driving. "Avoid duplicate retail development".... thats exactly what we get with sprawl, the never ending duplication of big box retail strips and people having to drive everywhere to get to everything. Instead think "nodal" with pockets of medium density scattered around. Suburbs as complete, seperate, mini cities surrounded by trees and farmland, connected with a few good roads and mass transit. Not one contiguous sprawling, inefficient mess. There would be less roads and infrastructure, and believe it or not, more nature and community for people to enjoy. One of the sad comments about typical suburban sprawl is that in the end it destroys the nature and "country feel" that people move out there for in the first place. By keeping the nodes more compact, the country feel is actually maintained. The ideal size for these nodes/small towns is about 100-150 thousand population. I am going to start a different thread to illustrate what I am trying to describe later. Its just a different paradigm for growth, an ideal, if you will. Not everyone will want it, not every place can be that way, but by understanding and having it as an option to consider when making development choices, I think better descisions can be made. Right now we just seem to think in the 2 terms that we understand, that we are used to seeing and see as the only choices of sprawl and urban, when there is actually a very interesting middle road that combines many of the pluses of both and gets rid of many of the negatives of both. Many places in Europe take for granted this type of growth. People there assume its the norm and like it, where as here we argue that somehow the suburban lifestyle as we know it is the norm. Its just a habit that we are familiar with. The way we are talking about this bridge shows that we dont even consider this other option, we continue ever onward with what we know and are familiar with, good or not.
"When you only have two pennies left in the world, buy a loaf of bread with one, and a lily with the other."-Chinese proverb. "Arts a staple. Like bread or wine or a warm coat in winter. Those who think it is a luxury have only a fragment of a mind. Mans spirit grows hungry for art in the same way his stomach growls for food."-Irving Stone
Edited by - TheArtist on 09/03/2008 10:26:11
Country: USA | Posts: 3715