Bend, Oregon Gets Its Comeuppance

[Patrick]

I've been to Switzerland, and Midway looks nothing like a swiss town. Where's the charm? You would need a car if you wanted to live there wouldn't you? Many European towns are not like that. Have you ever noticed in Europe when you enter a township, often you pass a sign with farmland surrounding you. Then you enter a fairly compact town. Traditionally in Europe, farmers would live in a compact town and go out to their farms, on the surrounding land, during the day. They would then return to town before night. That's a fact.

I've been to Switzerland.
I know Switzerland.
Switzerland is a friend of mine.
And Midday is no Switzerland

Ouch... :stir:

Rob understands my point on Midday. He's been to Europe, I've been to Europe. Although we might disagree on some stuff, we do share the same thoughts on Urban issues.

 

[Harvey]

Personally, I'm hopeful that soaring energy costs will produce the market forces that cause suburban sprawl to end. I think you can maintain a high quality of life living in a smaller/denser footprint where you can walk/bicycle to things and have cost-effective public transportation.

Geoff for President.

Soaring energy costs are not the problem. In the long run, they are impetus for a solution.

 

[Admin]

I've been to Switzerland, and Midway looks nothing like a swiss town. Where's the charm?

That's got to be a troll. There's no other rational explanation.

(that's our friend Sam's house, BTW)

You sure are right, no charm there!!

You would need a car if you wanted to live there wouldn't you?

Just get on your horse.

I just don't think I could reconcile living in a sprawled out community such as SLC.

And I just don't think that I could reconcile living under the same roof as my neighbor.

And besides, can you go for a dip in the hot pot behind your house in Park Slope?

 

[Admin]

Personally, I'm hopeful that soaring energy costs will produce the market forces that cause suburban sprawl to end. I think you can maintain a high quality of life living in a smaller/denser footprint where you can walk/bicycle to things and have cost-effective public transportation.

Geoff for President.

Soaring energy costs are not the problem. In the long run, they are impetus for a solution.

I personally find it rather amusing, and not a small bit hypocritical, that you'll advocate high-density living, yet built a cabin in the middle of nowhere to "get away from it all" on weekends.

 

[rfarren]

Rob understands my point on Midday. He's been to Europe, I've been to Europe. Although we might disagree on some stuff, we do share the same thoughts on Urban issues.

What do we disagree on? Bagels... I'll have to try those, but I'm holding out judgement till then. :wink:

 

[rfarren]

You showed me a picture of some nice natural scenes. There's nothing really charming about those shots at all. Rural doesn't all the sudden equate charm. Again, it looks nothing like Switzerland. It's nice scenery, one can't deny you that.

BTW, I could put a hot tub in back of my Apt. I would have to install it, but as you can see I prefer a garden, and yes those are chickens laying eggs:

 

[rfarren]

I personally find it rather amusing, and not a small bit hypocritical, that you'll advocate high-density living, yet built a cabin in the middle of nowhere to "get away from it all" on weekends.

How so? It's not as if the suburbs are low density living.

 

[Admin]

To fully honor this statement:

You showed me a picture of some nice natural scenes. There's nothing really charming about those shots at all.

and this one:

I personally find it rather amusing, and not a small bit hypocritical, that you'll advocate high-density living, yet built a cabin in the middle of nowhere to "get away from it all" on weekends.

How so? It's not as if the suburbs are low density living.

we have today introduced a new smiley to the boards for your posting pleasure:



Are you and Copeland actually twins separated at birth?
(inside joke directed at Marc_C & Skidog)

To quote Marc_C from a great backchannel email debate last night with the aforementioned Copeland (and apologies to Marc_C for doing so without permission):

Opinions backed up by reality are fine. Pulling crap out of your ass to support an untenable position is annoying.

 

[rfarren]

we have today introduced a new smiley to the boards:



Are you and Copeland twins separated at birth?

HA! I actually laughed out loud.

Sorry, but you can't compare Midway is as charming as lets say Tinzen Swizterland. I looked at midway on street view. It's not a charming town. Some nice vistas for sure, but a charming town?

Again, to advocate high density living does not exclude the idea of getting away. Furthermore, suburbs are considered high density living.

 

[Admin]

BTW, I could put a hot tub in back of my Apt.

You mean like this one?

(Homestead Crater in Midway, a natural hot pot 96 dF year-round.
http://www.viamagazine.com/weekenders/u ... pool05.asp )

 

[rfarren]

I'm afraid not. But not every swimming pool is the grotto azurro.

Is that what your hot tub looks like in your backyard? If I move to slc should I expect that in my backyard?

Really what's your point? You said midway had a charming Swiss downtown, I countered and said it did not. Compared to a European town of comparable size it is very sprawled out. Are you going to argue otherwise? Are you going to argue that is more charming than tilzen, Vaduz, Monte reggione?

Don't deny you live in a sprawled out landscape. You don't see me saying I live in a forest.
[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

 

[Marc_C]

Again, to advocate high density living does not exclude the idea of getting away. Furthermore, suburbs are considered high density living.

OK. Now you're just thrashing. We've had statements tantamount to.....

Midway gets negatively compared to an urban area.
Midway gets negatively compared to a mythical place somewhere in Switzerland.
Midway gets negatively compared to the suburbs.
High density living is preferable.
Suburban sprawl is bad and horrible.
Suburban living is high density.
Urban living is high density, but the good kind.
If it's in the suburbs, everything has vinyl siding.
Apparently there was no one west of the Mississippi before the advent of the automobile.

So you use the argumentative technique of changing the frame of reference each time you feel you're loosing ground. Nice. I guess Midway is hell on earth. Somehow you and Patrick are experts on Midway from 2500 miles away and based on a single long distance aerial view and a couple of Google street images, yet whine and complain when the same is done for NYC and Park Slop.

It's also interesting that when I made (my admittedly trollish) comment, I only said I find NY brownstone buildings ugly and that degree of urban density is something I wouldn't be able to stand - doesn't matter if it's NYC, Brooklyn (cause apparently some folks think Brooklyn isn't part of the city), Chicago, San Francisco, or Salt Lake City. There was no direct or implied comparison or claim that SLC was better, nor were there any comparisons to Switzerland - you and Patrick injected all that in to the conversation. And "charm" is totally subjective and is completely in the eye of the beholder. Zermatt has charm. Paris is utterly devoid of charm.

I didn't think it was so easy for a thick-skinned New Yorker to get their panties wadded into such a defensive knot. I guess living in the suburbs of Brooklyn makes one soft.

 

[Harvey]

I personally find it rather amusing, and not a small bit hypocritical, that you'll advocate high-density living, yet built a cabin in the middle of nowhere to "get away from it all" on weekends.

I never typed the quote attributed to me above. I think i get what you are trying to say though.

What I did say was:

Soaring energy costs are not the problem. In the long run, they are impetus for a solution.

I stand by it.

I've never actually figured my own carbon footprint, so I don't know if it's large or small compared to other Americans. I'm sure it high relative to the rest of the world. Carbon pro's for our lifestyle...we have a very small house and I've been walking to work for over 20 years. I average about 6000 miles a year driving. (Almost all of that to the cabin I'll grant you.) Both our houses put together are under 1300 sq feet. We drive fairly small cars.

Negatives...while we have been improving the energy efficiency of our house (new windows, furnace, attic insulation) it's still a sieve. Also our use of the woodstove in the mountains is a major "enviro-crime."

I never claimed to be living a life without contradiction. I find it's very hard to be altruistic and still do the things I love. Lift served skiing is a prime example. It may be better than clear cutting...but a lot of other kinds of recreation are lower impact.

I specifically left out the part of Geoff's quote about density because while I know he's right, I have a real hard time living in dense quarters like NYC. I think it's funny that in the mountains, at times I've come across the attitude that "pollution" is created by city dwellers. Something like "because we live closer to nature we aren't part of the problem." I'd bet, per capita, the guy in an NYC apartment building, sharing walls (and heat and AC) with others has a lower footprint.

My point was that when the cost of energy starts to reflect it's true cost, our choices will change. When gas crossed $4 bucks a gallon, driving and the purchase of huge cars dropped.

 

[rfarren]

Am I the one who used an erronious eqaution for population density? What mythical place in Europe? We were commenting on urban layouts, and how this place which you said had a Swiss downtown had anything but.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

 

[Marc_C]

Your way of calculating population density is not entirely correct.

Yet it's one of the ways the US Census calculates it (there are others, particularly for high density urban areas).
http://www.census.gov/population/www/censusdata/density.html
In the case here, we were comparing two rural communities, so it's perfectly valid.

I've been to Switzerland, and Midway looks nothing like a swiss town.

Who said it did?

If your too much of misanthrope that you need to live in a house where you can't see your next neighbor I understand that.

Our former house of 18 years in central CT:

500' gravel driveway, 3.3 heavily wooded acres. Only in the winter could we see at most 3 other houses. Immediate neighbor to the south: 45 acre feed corn field owned by a local veterinarian / gentleman farmer.

But I thought you lived in SLC, which, with all due respect, isn't exactly private.

Which is why we don't live in SLC. We're in Sandy along with skidog, 20 miles south of downtown SLC.

From what I've seen it's a lot of sprawl....I just don't think I could reconcile living in a sprawled out community such as SLC.

As if Broolyn/Queens/Long Island isn't the epitome of sprawl! :lol: :lol:

Oh, btw, this image......

...shot from the parking lot of our local supermarket, less than two miles from our house.

 

[rfarren]

I've been to Switzerland, and Midway looks nothing like a swiss town.

Who said it did?

I believe you did:

It even has a quaint downtown loaded with charm and Swiss character.

From what I've seen it's a lot of sprawl....I just don't think I could reconcile living in a sprawled out community such as SLC.

As if Broolyn/Queens/Long Island isn't the epitome of sprawl! :lol: :lol:

Brooklyn is not sprawled out and neither is queens. I will hand it to you with Long Island as that is sprawl central.

I'm sorry Marc, but I would way prefer to live in your place in connecticut. That is truly rural beauty. Sandy however, is the epitome of sprawl. It's full of strip malls and subdivisions. It is a suburb of SLC, and is hardly rural. It has great views for sure...and the skiing, well that needs no explanation. You don't have to defend why you choose to live there. Personally, I just don't think I could.

 

[Admin]

Sandy however, is the epitome of sprawl. It's full of strip malls and subdivisions.

You, sir, are the master of sweeping over-generalizations. =D> Especially from 2,500 miles away.

 

[rfarren]

Your way of calculating population density is not entirely correct.

Yet it's one of the ways the US Census calculates it (there are others, particularly for high density urban areas).
http://www.census.gov/population/www/censusdata/density.html
In the case here, we were comparing two rural communities, so it's perfectly valid.

Well not entirely. One must remember that borders of towns in europe often extend well past where people live, as farm land is often communal. The equation might very well be inadequate in this case. Remember the example I used of Rome.

For example, Rome's city border is actually larger in land size than Brooklyn. Yet, a huge chunk of the land within the borders is farmland surrounding the city. However, if you were in downtown rome you wouldn't say that the population density is less than that of Brooklyn's. In fact, I'm sure you would say it's more. My guess though is by your measurement the population density of Rome would come out as less than that of Brooklyn's. That would be very misleading.

I also believed you used a town of 40,000 vs. a town of 4,000. I'm sure that could lead to some screwy numbers as well. I would be more interested in seeing how a town of 4,000 stacks against a town of 4,000. This I think would be up Tony's alley for sure, although he might be scared to enter the fray on this subject.

 

[rfarren]

Sandy however, is the epitome of sprawl. It's full of strip malls and subdivisions.

You, sir, are the master of sweeping over-generalizations. =D>

Seriously, is this really an over-generalization? Are you actually claiming that sandy isn't sprawled out? Are you claiming that Sandy is not in the mode of a traditional suburb?

Maybe I'm wrong, but I've been there many times. It's not like I've not seen it or been there. I mean, is it really different than lets say Hicksville Long Island?

I'm not claiming it's evil or anything, or that there is anything wrong with it, but to say Sandy isn't sprawled out... What you would you define as sprawl then?

 

[Marc_C]

I'm sorry Marc, but I would way prefer to live in your place in connecticut. That is truly rural beauty. Sandy however, is the epitome of sprawl. It's full of strip malls and subdivisions.

That's Wallingford CT. It's not rural, it's the epitome of suburban CT living. There's a small downtown area, but the majority is strip malls and developments. In fact at the time to get from Rt 15 to my house, I passed no less than 10 subdivisions. And the closest stores were at least an hour's walk, so we had to drive everywhere for everything. Wallingford was considered a suburb of New Haven, Hartford, and even the Fairfield county gold coast, accessible by Metro North from New Haven. IOW, it had/has all the aspects for which you denigrate Sandy.

And just to be clear, I'm not defending where I live, just trying to keep down statements borne of ignorance. Nor do I particularly care where you would and would not like to live. You were the one who brought up all this defensive pissing and moaning about Park Slope.