ONE MORE NOTE ON SKETCH COMMENTS

It is nearly inconceivable to EMR why otherwise intelligent humans continue to intentionally confuse themselves about the basics of human settlement patterns.

In comments on TWO NOTES ON SKETCH COMMENTS

Groveton says “facts are stubborn things.”

Facts ARE stubborn things and the facts Groveton presents appear to be correct.

However, as applied these fact are IRRELEVANT. With respect to human settlement patterns and other complex systems, a Comprehensive Conceptual Framework and a robust Vocabulary are essential to understand and apply facts.

MUNICIPAL BORDERS ARE IRRELEVANT AND PROFOUNDLY CONFUSING IF ONE IS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HUMAN SETTLEMENT PATTERNS as the comments on TWO NOTES ON SKETCH COMMENTS document very clearly.

EMR has found that only a Comprehensive Conceptual Framework based on the organic structure which reflects the actual economic, social and physical activities of humans – and not arbitrary lines that reflected profoundly different conditions 250 years ago – is useful.

The serious consideration of human settlement patterns does not require use of the New Urban Region Conceptual Framework (NURCF). A scholar can develop a new framework if they invest the effort. But those concerned with achieving a sustainable trajectory for civilization should not delude themselves that they can make any progress without Comprehensive Conceptual framework.

In addition to the NURCF, the only other framework widely referred to in current discussions is the much more simplistic “Transect” developed by proponents of New Urbanism. New Urbanism is a well articulated design philosophy championed by founders and members of The Congress of New Urbanism and is only tangentially related to the work of SYNERGY/Planning.

As luck would have it, Groveton lives within a few miles of a place – Greater Reston – that has examples of most of the human settlement patterns components – Unit, Dooryard, Cluster, Neighborhood, Village and Community – that are the foundation of the NURCF. The developers, managers and many residents of Reston use the NURCF Vocabulary for all the components except “Dooryard” which is often neglected. The same is true for Burke Centre where the largest component is of Village scale. The Dooryard turns out to be very important both historically and in contemporary social and physical interactions. Dooryard was added to the Vocabulary after Burke Center and Fair Lakes were planned, designed and developed.

Greater Reston is still a Beta Community but, as is the case with The Woodlands, TX, Peachtree City, GA, Irvine, CA, Columbia, MD and other Planned New Communities (PNCs), if one understands what they are looking at they can understand the rudiments of the NURCF and thus of human settlement pattern functions. When one tries to apply these understandings to whole NURs – especially very large Urban agglomerations such as New York NUR, Paris NUR, Berlin NUR or even Stockholm NUR or Toronto NUR it is difficult without a firm foundation and an understanding of the scale of components. Groveton has traveled the world and says he has not seen the light, yet.

Those who have read EMRs columns and posts to this blog should have no trouble applying the concepts outlined in GETTING TO A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE – A SKETCH or in TWO NOTES ON SKETCH COMMENTS.

For those who want to catch up, a reading of STARK CONTRAST including a review of the Mid-Atlantic (Washington-Baltimore NUR to Central Carolina NUR) map that accompanies that essay and ‘reading’ the PowerPoint “New Urban Region Conceptual Framework” (both contained in PART FOURTEEN of TRILO-G) will answer every question and clarify every misunderstanding raised in the comments on TWO NOTES ON SKETCH COMMENTS.

EMR has stated that he does not have time to go back and repeat what he has already written, however, he will add a few notes from memory which should erase any lingering questions.

Reston and The Woodlands are the closest places to those who commented on the post so EMR will refer to them. (NB. The Woodlands follows the component Vocabulary of Columbia, MD – when The Woodlands was laid out the primary planning consultant, the firm for which EMR was VP for Planning and Design, was headquartered in Columbia. Community and Village are similar to Reston but “neighborhood” is applied to Cluster scale components and there are no Neighborhood scale components. This was also done in Franklin Farm, VA for ‘sales’ purposes over EMR’s objections.

The overall density of Reston is 13 persons per acre EXCLUDING the 1,100 acres + / – in the office / commercial area and EXCLUDING the Town Center. Cluster density ranges from 6 to 70 persons per acres. Over half the residential Clusters in Reston have over 30 persons per acre.

At the Neighborhood scale density ranges from 10 to 50 persons per acre. That includes the Common OpenSpace WITHIN Neighborhoods.

The Village Center Neighborhood of Lake Anne Village has the highest density and the greatest mix of uses.

As Joel Garreau pointed out in Edge City, NO ONE thinks Reston (or The Woodlands) are ‘high density’ yet that is the base number for STARK CONTRAST based on development between 1960 and 2000. With the end of cheap oil, the base density might have to be doubled to support more extensive use of shared-vehicle systems. This fact was pointed out in SKETCH. Even at twice the density at the Cluster scale, few would find the density ‘high.’ See READ IT NOW review of Green Metropolis. This increase in density would mean a one third reduction in the amount of land needed for Urban fabric even if the OpenSpace area remained the same. This is also noted in SKETCH.

Reston Town Center which is outside the 13 persons per acre (PRC) zoning (TNT Please Note) has Clusters that exceed 100 persons per acre. If the Town Center had a METRO station platform under Market Street and all the vacant land were built out at the current FARs within half a mile of the platform, Reston Town Center would be a prototype Village-scale station area and would have residential densities in the 80 to 130 person ranges and COULD achieve a relative Balance of J / H / S / R / A.

The requirement for a sustainable trajectory — the objective of SKETCH — is sustainable NURs made up of Balanced (Alpha) Communities. That means inside the Clear Edge agglomerations of Alpha Communites that look a lot like Reston plus some that look like North Arlington, South Arlington and Federal (Monumental) Core.

Accurate is in ‘the business” so he can translate all this to The Woodlands. By the way, while in the Woodlands, check out the same-house, same-builder data for houses in The Woodlands vs ones in scattered “subdivisions” west, north and east of the Centroid of the Houston NUR.

Back to Groveton, EMR has noted over and over that Fairfax County includes all or part of 11 Beta Communities. The comment on payment to Fairfax County is meaningless.

Net and Gross densities can be confusing. OpenSpace is often credited both within a component and to the next highest component for any given area of Urban fabric. Making this allocation clear is one of the is one benefits using the New Urban Region Conceptual Framework.

So that there is no confusion:

As clearly stated in STARK CONTRAST, The five persons per acre density is the GROSS density INSIDE Clear Edge around the Core of the NUR. It is assumed that there is 50 percent OpenSpace (water and land) inside the Clear Edge in the STARK CONTRAST calculations. That leaves 50 percent of the area in Urban fabric with a gross density of 10 persons per area AT THE COMMUNITY SCALE. (See note above concerning the impact of increased density.) Within any Alpha Community there would be from 30 to 50 percent OpenSpace made up of Community, Village, Neighborhood and Cluster scale serving land. All of the Planned New Communities (PNCs) listed above have around 40 percent OpenSpace within the communities.

Finally, Larry:

EMR understands the enormous scope of the education process necessary to erase generations of Myths. You may have heard of PROPERTY DYNAMICS? Any additional suggestions you have will be welcome.

But first to get the web site done.

EMR


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

44 responses to “ONE MORE NOTE ON SKETCH COMMENTS”

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    We know EMR will not bother to respond to perpetual hecklers so I will point out that in TRILO-G, Professor Risse makes a very clear, and I believe correct, analysis of why “peer review” is useless in breaking out of the ‘silos’ in which academic research is now stacked.

    The system of peer review that has become set in stone over the past 50 years protects those who rule the silos. The have and control tenure and manage academic publishing.

    Some of the minor problems of the silo system were exposed in ‘climate gate.’

    As anyone who has read The Shape of the Future knows, Risse’s work is devoted to Consilience:

    New Conceptual Frameworks, more robust Vocabulary (and most recently topography that translates across media protocols ) to break down the silos.

    This is because human settlement patterns are the foundation for ALL the silos that impact human economic, social and physical existence.

    In TRILO-G, Risse also notes why his career path has prevented him from accumulating peers and acolytes.

    AZA

  2. Larry G Avatar

    AZA .. it could be said that good ideas spread quickly when they are peer-reviewed.

    the words spreads.. more people buy into it…

    good ideas – deserve sunshine.

  3. Groveton Avatar

    "Any additional suggestions you have will be welcome.".

    I suggest that you spray WD40 on your keyboard's shift key. It appears to be sticking resulting in random words being capitalized throughout your posts.

  4. Groveton Avatar

    Did I read it right? EMR's new web site? First a 2,500 page book then a barrage of posts and now a new web site? Are you Stephen King?

    I look forward to seeing your new web site. I'd make three suggestions:

    1. You don't like municipal boundaries or zip codes as the basis for statistics. However, they seem to be the only way that public statistics are kept. I think you should take pains to show the reader how your ideas on human settlement can be analyzed with real data. For example, you say half of the clusters in Reston have densities of more than 30 people per acre. Given that Reston is a very vaguely defined area I wonder how you would know that to be true. Is there public data available at the cluster level?

    2. Links are nice. You often reference newspaper articles and prior material you have written. However, you never use hyperlinks. Most web site design (and blogging software) allow for embedded links within posts. I think that would be helpful on your new site.

    3. Some web site / blogging software allow for definitions to be shown in small pop-up windows when you allow your cursor to hover over a word with an associated definition (supplied by the webmaster). This might help people better understand your conceptual framework / vocabulary.

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "As luck would have it, Groveton lives within a few miles of a place – Greater Reston – that has examples of most of the human settlement patterns components – Unit, Dooryard, Cluster, Neighborhood, Village and Community – that are the foundation of the NURCF. The developers, managers and many residents of Reston use the NURCF Vocabulary for all the components except 'Dooryard' which is often neglected."

    Yes, this is absolutely true. I spoke Monday evening at an association meeting in Reston and heard those terms used multiple times during the meeting. No one talked about Dooryards though.

    "The overall density of Reston is 13 persons per acre EXCLUDING the 1,100 acres + / – in the office / commercial area and EXCLUDING the Town Center."

    I was told at the same meeting that the "13 persons per acre standard" was for all of Reston, but that densities varied around area and were much higher in some locations and, obviously, much lower in other locations. The big fear I heard universally expressed what that the developers would try to have the overall cap lifted, which no one seemed to want. The would be damn fools to give it up voluntarily. If it is changed, it should be sold to the developers for the present value of the difference in value of the developers' properties with the current restriction and without it.

    "If the Town Center had a METRO station platform under Market Street and all the vacant land were built out at the current FARs within half a mile of the platform, Reston Town Center would be a prototype Village-scale station area and would have residential densities in the 80 to 130 person ranges and COULD achieve a relative Balance of J / H / S / R / A."

    This one I don't yet buy. I don't see the evidence that there would likely be a high correlation between Reston residents and Reston jobs. I was told that a very high number of Reston-based jobs were held by residents of Loudoun County and points west. I considered the sources of this statement and tend to believe it.

    Also, one of the main goals of the Reston residents with whom I met was to keep more vehicles off Reston streets as they interfere with the residents' commute. I took that to mean many of them worked elsewhere.

    I assume people who live in Reston generally want to live there, but they may or may not find, have, or keep a job that is located there. That's where I part company with EMR on this one. I don't see a stable enough job market where people expect to hold a the same job for considerable periods of time. Thus, while one might live and work in Reston for a period of time, the odds favor finding the next job far from Reston.

    TMT

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    steroSure, according to EMR, peer review is useless because virtually everybody else, including renowned plaqnners educators and economists are ignorant idiots or worse.

    RH

  7. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I second Groveton's comment nmuber one. EMRs vague and unsupported or unsupportable data leave his conclusions open to suspicion.

    Caqll it peer review of data.

    RH

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I'll bet EMRs website does not allow comments.

    RH

  9. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "If it is changed, it should be sold to the developers for the present value of the difference in value of the developers' properties with the current restriction and without it."

    Absolutely, and when property is downzoned the owner should be paid for the present value of the difference.

    RH

  10. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "Yes, this is absolutely true. I spoke Monday evening at an association meeting in Reston and heard those terms used multiple times during the meeting. No one talked about Dooryards though."

    What is so strange about people using the terms unit, neighborhood, village and community? Or town or city, for that matter? These are all inclusionary terms that one can identify with.

    But who thinks of thmeselves as part of a cluster? What are we, oysters? Who thinks of themselves as part of a dooryard?

    RH

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    That's where I part company with EMR on this one. I don't see a stable enough job market where people expect to hold a the same job for considerable periods of time.

    Agree with TMT on this. It take time to build good settlement patterns and that will require more stable jobs. Employment at will and the decline of labor unions has destabilized the job market at the same time it created many new opportunities (although maybe at lower pay and less benfits).

    I moved three times to follow my job, which I was able to do by upgrading and capitalizing on my previous home (speculating, some would call it). Since then job changes have taken me farther from and then closer to home.

    RH

  12. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    If the Town Center had a METRO station platform under Market Street

    If all the land were built out

    Then Reston COULD achieve balance

    [If there were enough jobs and

    If people who could afford to live in Reston wanted those jobs and

    If the job market was perfectly efficient.]

    ================================

    This is classic EMR speak: the kind of incomplete conditional prophesy that no one can argue with. The statement is perfectly true and highly unlikely.

    If the gravitational fields align perfectly we COULD be obliterated by an asteroid in the next hundred years.

    RH

  13. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry:

    You are very right about the spread of peer reviewed ‘ideas’ and that is why conventional wisdom has such a monopoly on thinking. You need to read what Dr. Risse has to say about it.

    There are too other aspects of the communication issue related to human settlement patterns:

    First, in a competitive society ideas spread fast if there is someone who will make money from the adoption of a new idea. You know this from your reading vis a vis ‘green greed.’

    Conservation – especially conservation of all resources at a massive scale that is the potential of functional human settlement patterns – does not ‘make money’ especially for speculators as the constant heckler demonstrates.

    Second, what Dr. Risse has to say is not pessimistic or fatalistic – in fact it is optimistic (there is a path from this unsustainable trajectory) – but it is not what many what to hear. That is especially true for those who have made decisions based on ignorance and myth.

    They want to continue to do just what they have been doing because they still believe it is in their best interest.

    AZA

  14. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I'm glad to hear that conventional wisdom has a monopoly on thinking.

    I would really hate to see what would happen if what Dr. Risse passes off as thinking became a monopoly.

    I gotta hand it to you: your attempt to pass "conventional wisdom" off as a pejorative was almost smooth.

    RH

  15. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    First, in a competitive society ideas spread fast if there is someone who will make money from the adoption of a new idea.

    Right. That's why EMR is selling his CD.

    What a world it would be if no one made money from their ideas.

    I hear Erno Rubik is enjoying his retirement immensly.

  16. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Conservation – especially conservation of all resources at a massive scale that is the potential of functional human settlement patterns – does not ‘make money’ especially for speculators as the constant heckler demonstrates.

    Here is a truly spectacular demonstration of environmental economic ignorance.

    We all agree that conservation has value. If, then, conservation does not "MAKE MONEY" this is an example of market failure. It is an unpaid externality, just like any other.

    The reason conservation does not make money is that those that wish to have it are unwilling to pay what it costs. The usual current path is to enact various forms of regulation that subsidise consumers of conservation resources at the expense of providers.

    When we agree on a way that allows speculators to make money on conservation, we will have a lot more conservation.

    RH

  17. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "…they still believe it is in their best interest."

    Because it is. When people believe that a car pool, for example, is worth what it costs, we will have more car pools. That is why we have a current program to actually PAY people to car pool.

    rh

  18. Larry G Avatar

    pretty good commentaries…

    re: " in fact it is optimistic (there is a path from this unsustainable trajectory) – but it is not what many what to hear."

    well there you go…

    but if the leaders in settlement pattern-ology are in some kind of unison.. eventually even people who smoke cigarettes, don't wear seatbelts and eat too many McD's will start to listen IF you present a BETTER alternative vision.

    Telling people – "bad bad bad"… bad boy…. ain't going to do it…

    they' just listen even less…

    you have to show a path.. or else if you will not or cannot, you have to ask yourself what exactly are you trying to accomplish with your efforts.

    I presume that everyone who put time and effort into something has a Maslo need but I'm come to the conclusion that for many folks .. building things with Popsicle sticks is satisfying enough.. even if those precious constructions get put into a dumpster the week after you die and your kids clean out your house.

    Moral of this story: either get in the game and help find a path… or buy a lot of Popsicle sticks.

  19. Larry G Avatar

    13 persons to the acre eh?

    lets see 4 detached homes on a acre – 1/4 acre each with 4 people per household.

    1/2 or more of the 60,000 residences in Spotsylvania may qualify for this standard – though the average household size is about 2.5.

  20. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Useful points have been raised by commentors concerning this post. EMR will try to be brief – BUT RECALL, ‘short stories are by definition, fiction’ and short non-fiction books are not much better.

    PART ONE

    Groveton said:

    “I look forward to seeing your new web site. I'd make three suggestions:

    “1. You don't like municipal boundaries or zip codes as the basis for statistics…”

    It is not that EMR does not LIKE them, it is that they result in irrelevant and misleading conclusions. As noted below there are several other ways to skin this cat.

    “However, they seem to be the only way that public statistics are kept. I think you should take pains to show the reader how your ideas on human settlement can be analyzed with real data.”

    Great idea!

    Groveton should not be surprised to learn EMR has done that to the extent clients would pay for that work to be done. EMR has also contributed to the work of others to achieve useful results:

    For example in the mid-90s, a colleague on the UVA faculty Prof. William H. Lucy (Bill served as Planning Dept Chair, as Associate Dean of the School of Architecture and as Directory of the Northern Virginia graduate planning program) stopped by SYNERGY’s Fair Lakes office to share the results of a new and complex economic analysis of housing based on the 1990 census developed by Lucy and David L. Phillips.

    EMR pointed out that the data was interesting but misleading because of the diversity of building types and Household configurations within each of the census defined components used. Lucy went back to the drawing board and came up with a more fine-grained analysis based on Census components that are of Alpha Neighborhood scale.

    The ground breaking book based on this work of Lucy and Phillis was published in 2000 as “Confronting Suburban Decline.” (Contributions by EMR noted in the Preface and in the text.) The work of Lucy and Phillips gives substance to the ‘Next American Slum’ popular literature which has followed and which has been noted on this Blog.

    The work of Lucy and Phillips was carried forward in a subsequent book published in 2006. The book had an original working title of “Metromorphosis.” Under pressure from the publisher that title was changed to one which is so bad that EMR refuses to repeat it in polite company.

    The point is that the DATA is not the problem, the problem is aggregation by geographic units that have nothing to do with the organic structure of human settlement pattern. Analysis based on municipal jurisdictions – especially large ones – is IRRELEVANT as noted in the post. On the other hand analysis based on 9 digit zip code data could be very useful.

    To date no one has presented data based on fine-grain analysis that conflicts with Regional Metrics or the New Urban Region Conceptual Framework. The same is true for contradicts with the Five Natural Laws laid out in The Shape of the Future.

    It is also important to note that Census, Zip Code and municipal tax map data COULD be aggregated into meaningful categories if governance practitioners believed it would be in their interest to do so.

    EMR

  21. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    PART TWO

    Groveton goes on:

    “For example, you say half of the clusters in Reston have densities of more than 30 people per acre. Given that Reston is a very vaguely defined area I wonder how you would know that to be true. Is there public data available at the cluster level?”

    Several points here:

    First you caught EMR in sloppy differentiation of territory.

    The Greater Reston Beta Community includes area outside the original 7,500 acres that Bob Simon purchased. It is this larger area that meets the 10 Person Rule. “Reston Proper” falls (or it did the last EMR knew) into three zoning categories.

    The majority of area of Reston Proper (excepting the Town Center and the 1,100 acres on both sides of the DAAR) falls in the Planned Development Community PDC zone (13 persons per acre). To achieve this density in the residential areas, the developer (Reston Land) created Clusters that were 1 / 4 SHD, 1 / 2 SHA and 1 / 4 Multi. (Burke Centre achieve this by a 1 / 3, 1 / 3, 1 / 3 distribution which was similar to Columbia. EMR used the 1 /2 SHA distribution to come up with the ‘half’ quoted.

    As to published data, since Reston was designed by Cluster, it is likely that data can be disaggregated by Cluster but EMR has not attempted to do that.

    “2. Links are nice. You often reference newspaper articles and prior material you have written. However, you never use hyperlinks. Most web site design (and blogging software) allow for embedded links within posts. I think that would be helpful on your new site.”

    Groveton is right. Jim Bacon has been after EMR for years to include links. One, EMR does not know how to do that in all formats because he has not taken the to learn, and, two if he did know, it would be more work. Besides, if someone wants to find something Google does a fine job.

    Groveton’s suggestion will be passed on to EMRs website designer / developer. As a matter of fact that skill / feature was one EMR asked about in designer / developer interviews because the current S/PI web site just takes one to the front page of a site, not the specific text page.

    “3. Some web site / blogging software allow for definitions to be shown in small pop-up windows when you allow your cursor to hover over a word with an associated definition (supplied by the webmaster). This might help people better understand your conceptual framework / vocabulary.”

    EMR was not aware of this and will pass this on as well.

    Thank you Groveton.

    EMR

  22. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    PART THREE

    TMT said about EMR’s reference to the use of specific Vocabulary in Reston:

    “Yes, this is absolutely true. I spoke Monday evening at an association meeting in Reston and heard those terms used multiple times during the meeting.”

    Thank you.

    “No one talked about Dooryards though.”

    As noted, that is not a term that has yet gained widespread use but it is important. EMRs recent field work suggests that once citizens understand that they live in a Dooryard, it becomes a convenient locational aid. For some ‘Cluster’ is harder to get used to but if it is in ones deed and title documents, they acclimate quickly.

    TMT quoted EMR as saying "The overall density of Reston is 13 persons per acre EXCLUDING the 1,100 acres + / – in the office / commercial area and EXCLUDING the Town Center."

    “I was told at the same meeting that the "13 persons per acre standard" was for all of Reston, but that densities varied around area and were much higher in some locations and, obviously, much lower in other locations.”

    See above. EMR would be very surprised to find that this had changed since he last had occasion to check on this. (PDC was also the zone used in Burke Centre (it does not include employment uses beyond Village Centers), EMR helped amend the ordinance many times from 1975 to 1988 and lived in Reston from 1980 to 1988.) It is somewhat complicated and one can excuse those at a public meeting for being confused.

    “The big fear I heard universally expressed what that the developers would try to have the overall cap lifted, which no one seemed to want.”

    This too is more complicated that it may appear. There is no ‘developer’ as defined in the Comp Plan and the zoning ordinance. For information on why it is important to sort out this issue, call Patrick Kane.

    “The(y) would be damn fools to give it up voluntarily. If it is changed, it should be sold to the developers for the present value of the difference in value of the developers' properties with the current restriction and without it.”

    Some truth in this overview but again it is not that simple. The place to start in the replanning of Reston is with a Wright Plan as noted in the original SKETCH post. Again Patrick Kane is an invaluable source on this topic.

    EMR

  23. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    PART FOUR

    TMT again quoting EMR said: "If the Town Center had a METRO station platform under Market Street and all the vacant land were built out at the current FARs within half a mile of the platform, Reston Town Center would be a prototype Village-scale station area and would have residential densities in the 80 to 130 person ranges and COULD achieve a relative Balance of J / H / S / R / A."

    “This one I don't yet buy. I don't see the evidence that there would likely be a high correlation between Reston residents and Reston jobs. I was told that a very high number of Reston-based jobs were held by residents of Loudoun County and points west. I considered the sources of this statement and tend to believe it.”

    TMT is absolutely right. “COULD” is capitalized in the quoted material. There is little current understanding by the citizens of Reston of what would be most beneficial to them. They, like many others, want to have maximum ‘choice / freedom’ but do not want to pay the cost of locational dysfunction. Now if they had to pay the full cost…

    “Also, one of the main goals of the Reston residents with whom I met was to keep more vehicles off Reston streets as they interfere with the residents' commute. I took that to mean many of them worked elsewhere.”

    Right again for the same reason.

    “I assume people who live in Reston generally want to live there, but they may or may not find, have, or keep a job that is located there.”

    Right again. See above.

    “That's where I part company with EMR on this one. I don't see a stable enough job market where people expect to hold a the same job for considerable periods of time. Thus, while one might live and work in Reston for a period of time, the odds favor finding the next job far from Reston.”

    Unless all the costs are fairly allocated.

    Back to Groveton who had one more suggestion:

    “I suggest that you spray WD40 on your keyboard's shift key. It appears to be sticking resulting in random words being capitalized throughout your posts.”

    Funny, but no cigar. Groveton knows those Capitals are not ‘random.’ Note the use of Capitals in the word “COULD” above.

    If Groveton has another typographic protocol that translates across formats and platforms, let EMR know. Bold does not do it, italics do not do it, underline does not do it, punctuation marks do not do it, the use of French or Greek words is confusing. The basic problem is that the English Vocabulary is badly used – including the Core Confusing Words but not limited to them – there must be a better way to reflect inflection, emphasis and specific definitions about human settlement patterns.

    And finally for Larry:

    AZA is right about EMRs view of the role and impact of peer review.

    Machiavelli said it best about Fundamental Transformation. He was only talking about one “new order of things,” EMR is talking about three Fundamental Transformations. The education problem is enormous.

    EMR

  24. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Larry:

    You calculations for Spotsy (50 percent) may be about right.

    The number for the NVPDC for 1980 to 2000, as you know, was 87.5 percent. 2000 to 2010 took it down. (WSH, WL)

    Inside R=22 it is about 90 percent.

    EMR

  25. Larry G Avatar

    the reason I say EMR is an academic and not very focused on implementation is that zip codes are divided up into carrier routes which is a highly evolved discipline used by mass mailers.

    Here – take a look for Fredericksburg – 22401

    http://www.melissadata.com/Lookups/CartZip.asp?Zip=22401&submit1=Submit

    note you can access things like average income, how many residential average property values.

    here – look at Grovetons' Great Falls Zip – 22066

    http://www.melissadata.com/Lookups/CartZip.asp?Zip=22066&submit1=Submit

    I strongly suspect that EMR's future/existing (?) website could be – with the use of carrier routes a veritable geographic tour-de-force of settlement pattern-ology.

    I'll bet that AZA guy and co-conspirators could gin up such a site – lickity split.. eh?

    seriously – in the settlement pattern world – 1000 of your word thoughts could be instantly and forcefully conveyed to anyone capable of gazing a map….

    These carrier route maps already exist and are for sale.

  26. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "Thus, while one might live and work in Reston for a period of atime, the odds favor finding the next job far from Reston.”

    Unless all the costs are fairly allocated."

    Huh?

    How does cost allocation change where I might find my next job?

    Are you saying that if costs were allocated fairly I would be living in aplace that has more jobs? More jobs increases the posiibility that I will find one I could do and could get, but it says nothing about the desireability.

    Are you saying that if costs were allocated fairly more jobs would be located near where I live? Same problem again.

    What you are suggesting is that merely allocating costs according to [your] idea of fair will resolve literally millions of other variables.

    As it stands now, those costs are already being absorbed by millions of people, one way or another. We may disgree about how the distribution is handled, and agree that there is some misappropriation of costs vs value.

    But a "fair allocation of costs" still only represents shifting the burden from some to others. First I'd suggest that since the burdens (and the opportunities) are already shared by millions the real, net, available savings to each individual are small. Mostly what we are talking about is cost shifting, not cost savings.

    Second, to achieve the correct balance you talk about is going to have enormous costs of its own. And, certain areas will benefit far more than others, so there is another cost equalization that must take place.

    In short, I don't think you have the foggiest idea of what the transaction costs of achieving a "fair alloation" will be.

    Even you would not suggest that it is fair for one person to absorb $100,000 in [previously legal] costs in order to save a million people ten cents each.

    If the savings amounts to ten cents each for 2 million people then they can eaqsily kick in five cents each to make the lose whole – if you can get a two million people to "agree" to losing five cents they might othwerwise get.

    This assumes you can manage the transaction for 5 cents apiece and that the costs are currently equally divided amonng the two million. And this is one example, in fact, you would have to maqnage tens of thousands of such transactions to get anywhere near a "fair allocation".

    We may not like the fact that some of us "take unfair advantage" or "game the system" in a way that costs their neighbors a few cents, but that system is probably no less expensive overall than what you propose.

    In short, your argument of "IF" all costs are faily allocated falls in the same category as the argument that "IF" everyone had the same gene pool we could avoid the costs of genetic illnesses.

  27. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    One more example of nvesting or speculating on conservation:

    Is carbon capture the solution?

    "My company, Vattenfall, has invested around 300 million dollars in the development of carbon capture and storage. We are arguably the world leader in the development of the technology as it will be used in the power industry."

    "Carbon capture and sequestration is neither a magic bullet nor hype. It is an option, but only one, in the portfolio of potential actions for reducing emissions"

    —————————–

    OK, Carbon capture is not the same as conservation by reducing emissions. And synthetic carbon capture is not he same a natural carbon capture. But it is the difference between synthetic banana flavor and natural banana flavor: they are exactly the same chemical.

    Either way, what you are doing is increasing the "natural" aborption capacity of the environment. That artificial increas has it's limits, too, so it does not buy you the ability to increase combustion indefinitely.

    But the point here is that either way, someone is going to absorb costs (make an investment, speculate) and they won;t do it unless they see those costs being recovered with a profit.

    You can elect to avoid this whole problem and take the opposite approach: avoid or reduce combustion. That is going to have costs, too, and those taking the costs will expect to make a profit on their investment. And, just like sequestration, that approach has limits which we cannot overcome.

    There is no way to get conservation, or avoid the consequences of not having it, without spending (investing) money wich tthe investors will expect a return on. One consequence of that is that you cannot spend more than the consequences cost, the other is that you will have to make the investments pay.

    You can avoid those two rules, for a while, by making vague generalized claims about betterment of the common good. But whne people find they are worse off (costs more than benfits or returns) they will stop working for you.

    RH

  28. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The following is a quote from someone who calls himself RH:

    "Thus, while one might live and work in Reston for a period of time, the odds favor finding the next job far from Reston.”

    “Unless all the costs are fairly allocated."

    “Huh?”

    “How does cost allocation change where I might find my next job?”

    Is there not some way to just delete the inane comments by RH. RH has demonstrated he is smart enough to have figured this out by this time. Why is he allowed to “Huh?” and insult those that post and those that comment? If RH cannot figure out the connection, perhaps he should take up some other pastime.

    R. J. Sommers

  29. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    PART I

    Larry said:

    [NB the order of the sentences and phrases has been altered in some cases to facilitate response while retaining the context of the original comment.]

    “the reason I say EMR is an academic …”

    EMR is not an ‘academic’ in any sense of the word. If he were, he would cover you up with peer review tripe. He did hold a tenure track faculty position – in 1969 – and was offered an Associate Professor ship 1972 9 (eligible for tenured after three years in the position) but he is not an academic for reasons outlined in Chapter 51 of TRILO-G.

    “… and not very focused on implementation …”

    So far as can be determined from the comments, EMR is the ONLY person that posts or comments on this blog that has actually planned, designed and managed the implementation of human settlement pattern components from Cluster to Community. Tens of thousands of citizens now live, work and seek services and recreation in these components in 11 states.

    “… is that zip codes are divided up into carrier routes which is a highly evolved discipline used by mass mailers.”

    And “mass mailers” are to be relied on for information on settlement patterns because????

    “Here – take a look for Fredericksburg – 22401"

    “http://www.melissadata.com/Lookups/CartZip.asp?Zip=22401&submit1=Submit”

    “here – look at Grovetons' Great Falls Zip – 22066"

    “http://www.melissadata.com/Lookups/CartZip.asp?Zip=22066&submit1=Submit”

    EMR

  30. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    PART II

    First, thank you Larry for providing the URLs.

    Second after looking at this site and reviewing the maps of six zip codes where EMR has planned or managed development, here are some observations:

    NOW it is clear where the cartographers who gerrymander Congressional and state legislative districts work between Census redistrictings.

    There is surely SOME logic to the mapped configurations for curb delivery of mail by postpersons in right-hand-drive vehicles but beyond that…

    Relevance:

    The territories identified have no relationship to the organic components of human settlement, even in places like Reston and Burke Centre where the settlement pattern was palnned, desighed and built to reflect that structure.

    Scale:

    the majority of the Zip Codes have the scale of a small Village and most Carrier Routes have the scale of a small Neighborhood – five or six Clusters. That is not fine-grained enough to do anyone much good because the typical Carrier Route covers two Clusters from one Neighborhood, two from another and then one or two from a completely different Village. That is apparently a convenient way to distribute mail according to USPS.

    Accuracy:

    How up to date are the Carrier Routes? The carriers in Warrenton (20186) are not using these routes today. Someone delivers the mail but not via these routes. Since moving to the current address in 20186, SYNERGY has observed four route and/or sequence changes. The most recent two weeks ago.

    Household income values? Income data comes from the Census and that is now almost exactly 10 years old. In addition to being out of date Census data is self reported. Enough said.

    How about property values? Do these numbers reflect changes over the last two years? A quick survey suggests the answer is no. So the numbers may be off by 25 to 40 percent. The decrese is no uniform. The decline is far greater at R=65 than at R=6.

    “note you can access things like average income, how many residential average property values.”

    Does not every residential property have a value and every group of residential properties an ‘average’?

    EMR

  31. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    PART III

    The data is supplied by Melissa Data, a for profit Enterprise. For the purposes most would buy the data, even the above noted accuracy is probably sufficient. (“I want to buy 50,000 addresses for a special mailing to horse owners Northern Fauquier” or “I want to buy 100,000 addresses for those who could afford a new Jaguar.”)

    There are three Carrier Routes in Zip Code 20186 that include the most expensive Dooryards in the Town of Warrenton BUT these same routes also include all or part of three very poor Clusters. So the ‘average’ is down a little and some people get mail touting goods and services they can only dream of affording but for advertising purposes it is not a bad investment…

    The reference in the earlier comment was to nine digit Zip Codes. There is no indication how these Carrier Routes relate to nine digit Zip Codes. Do you have a map of NINE digit Zip Codes?

    For those interested in the larger picture, the problems with Zip Code data are spelled out in Chapters 9 and 16 of The Shape of the Future. Some of the shortcomings were also posted two + / – years ago when Larry championed Zip Code data as a way to refute EMRs positions on human settlement pattern characteristics.

    Larry goes on to say:

    “These carrier route maps already exist and are for sale.”

    Actually the maps are free, it is the address labels that cost the money.

    “I strongly suspect that EMR's future/existing (?) website could be – with the use of carrier routes a veritable geographic tour-de-force of settlement pattern-ology.”

    At what cost and who will pay?

    “seriously – in the settlement pattern world – 1000 of your word thoughts could be instantly and forcefully conveyed to anyone capable of gazing a map….”

    EMR wishes it was that easy. First one has to convince a majority that it is worth doing… PROPERTY DYNAMICS, anyone?

    R. J. Sommers:

    Help is on the way. Comments that are intended to insult, belittle and disrespect the post or commentors will be deleted.

    EMR

  32. Larry G Avatar

    well – at least you looked.

    while the data is not quite a granular as you might prefer, I think it does get past the zip code dilemma and I find it interesting that someone has melded/fused income and wealth data to end up with a geographical distribution.

    so maybe not academic nor implementation .. I dunno.. but it sure looks like data that could form a better basis for looking more closely at actual settlement pattern attributes.

    I wonder what would be the things that would need to be looked at in particular?

  33. Larry G Avatar

    Here's a gift for you EMR:

    " CNT has updated our Housing + Transportation Affordability website to now cover over 330 metros in the U.S. with expanded and improved data. And our analysis shows that only two in five American communities—or 39 percent—are affordable for typical households when their transportation costs are considered along with housing costs."

    http://www.cnt.org/news/2010/03/23/expanded-h-t-index-most-comprehensive-snapshot-of-neighborhood-affordability/

  34. Larry G Avatar

    continued:

    The Housing + Transportation Affordability Index is an innovative tool that measures the true affordability of housing based on its location.

    http://htaindex.cnt.org/

  35. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "Why is he allowed to “Huh?” and insult those that post and those that comment? If RH cannot figure out the connection, perhaps he should take up some other pastime."

    That's pretty adult. If you cannot argue the ideas, attack the originator. Invite him to go someplace else, just as some elected officials have done.

    What's next, threats, like what happened to my Father?

    ——————————–

    Sorry, I thought it was a legitimate question.

    I fail to see how "If costs are fairly allocated" [according to an unknown criteria] will gurantee that jobs will be any closer to where people live.

    On the other hand:

    "Many local cities are focused on bringing jobs to the area, leaders noted. That way, homeowners could find a home in their price range, but not consume gas and their personal finances traveling to other cities to work.

    In Corona, for example, city officials chose to encourage certain employers to move to their city, Councilman Eugene Montanez said. To piggy-back on a boom in warehouse building, city leaders required a higher percentage of office space to accompany the sprawling storage buildings developers wanted to erect."

    Represents a concrete effort by one community to do just that. And it makes no mention of "Allocating" costs.

    What EMR doesn;t seem to understand is that there are all kinds of external costs. We all pay these costs, and it may well be that the distribution is unfair.

    If we internalize those costs, it is the same "we" that pay them. The only difference is that the immediate costs get shifted to the customers of the enterprises in question. This raises THEIR costs and they transfer them down the line, etc.

    In this way, the "market" makes the allocation of costs. However, there is NO reason to set rules that internalize external costs in such a way that the internalized costs are GREATER than the externalized ones.

    As soon as that happens, we all pay more than necessary to eliminate externalities, and that means we cannot afford to reduce as many.

    This is a key fact that he shades of EMR like AZA and Sommers miss while they are busy picking on me instead of comprehending the ideas. Good conservation makes money and bad conservation doesn't.

    Here is another key fact: you will never eliminate all the externalities. If you simply impose a tax or discharge fee for some pollutant without reducing the pollutant, you still have the same external costs on top of the new "inetrnalized" costs. The only way this works is if you use the tax or discharge fee to REDUCE other costs in the form of taxes paid.

    This is why it is utterly stupid to claim that whater resource board fees only pay for the water resource board.

    RH

  36. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry, I don't doubt the general gist of the data shown, but that website has a predisposed position.

    Somehow I doubt we are seeing the whole picture. average American household allocates nearly 20 percent of its total expenditures for transportation. But in North Dakota it is only 11%.

    Not because they travel less, but because they charge some of their transportation costs to the farms operating budget.

    But the website only allocates 15% for transportation, and therefore the avrage person that spends more than that automatically falls in the unaffordable zone.

    Also, we know that a major reason transportation costs are higher in suburban nrighborhoods is because they drive larger vehicles. The website apparently assumes that all transportaion costshave the same utility, which simply isn't true.

    Neither is there any apparent cosideration of the amount of income avaialbel or the desirabilty of different locations.

    RH

  37. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry, I don't doubt the general gist of the data shown, but that website has a predisposed position.

    Somehow I doubt we are seeing the whole picture. average American household allocates nearly 20 percent of its total expenditures for transportation. But in North Dakota it is only 11%.

    Not because they travel less, but because they charge some of their transportation costs to the farms operating budget.

    But the website only allocates 15% for transportation, and therefore the avrage person that spends more than that automatically falls in the unaffordable zone.

    Also, we know that a major reason transportation costs are higher in suburban nrighborhoods is because they drive larger vehicles. The website apparently assumes that all transportaion costshave the same utility, which simply isn't true.

    Neither is there any apparent cosideration of the amount of income avaialbel or the desirabilty of different locations.

    RH

  38. Larry G Avatar

    " spends more than that automatically falls in the unaffordable zone."

    no, actually not true because they're also looking at the monthly housing mortgage cost relative to their income.

    so if you go look at their maps.. you'll see that the affordability index is good in Spotsylvania, in effect, because the housing costs relatively to the income is good …good enough that even the additional transportation costs don't make it unaffordable however.. the cost of the infrastructure (an externalality is not included.

    If someone needs 10 miles of road to commute verses someone who needs 50 miles to commute then there are different costs there.

  39. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    no, actually not true because they're also looking at the monthly housing mortgage cost relative to their income.

    ==============================

    You miss the point. Looking at the maps central city areas are deemed affordable; having low combination housing and transportation costs.

    They have low costs because they are poor; they have no car. The goods they are getting are not equal, not even relative to their [lower] incomes.

    Likewise in the suburbs those with high costs (even relative to their income) can easily afford the higher cots and still have more slack in their budget than a poor inner city resident.

    In fact, they may have more slack in their budget (even though they are living unaffordably) than a city resident has income.

    Loudoudn county has the highest income in the nation, but according to the map that entire county is "unaffordable".

    I don't think we are seeing the true picture, just a vague image.

    RH

  40. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    If someone needs 10 miles of road to commute verses someone who needs 50 miles to commute then there are different costs there.

    ================================

    First, this isn't necessarily true, and it depends on how many people are using that ten miles vs that fifty miles. Ten lane miles in Arlington cost a lot more than ten lane miles in Kansas.

    But the real falsehood here is more disingenuous. The idea is to accept your argument (which may be wrong) and then extend it to everyone a la EMR ("see qhat we could hypothetically achieve!").

    In fact ,if you eer tried to set up a system in which EVERYONE needed only ten miles of commuting road, you would find out that system was far more expensive, just as Arlington is more expensive than Kansas.

    More expensive to build, to maintain, to govern, and to restore when needed.

    The subconcious message of this site is that we could save a lot, when probably we cannot.

    RH

  41. Larry G Avatar

    it depends on the capacity of the road.

    and how long each car is using that capacity…

    you can prove this pretty easy by charging tolls. The guy that goes twice as far is going to pay twice as much since you are charged for your per mile use.

  42. Larry G Avatar

    10 miles in Arlington is going to cost more than 10 miles in Spotsylvania – true enough but you need all 50 miles to get to NoVa..not just the 10.

    and worse than that.. even if you add extra lanes for more cars in Spotsylvania… there won't be more lanes available for them in NoVa.

  43. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    You are an idiot, Larry.

    It depends on the capacity of the road and the utilization of the road.

    I'm not even going to argue toll roads with you anymore, they are generally a dumb idea, and anyway I have already won that arguement.

    Youy don;t need all fifity miles if you are only going ten or twenty. Those fifty mile commuters are only about 1% of the traffic.

    The only thing you are correct about is that there will not be anymore lanes available in NOVA. Therefore the only rational solution is MORE PLACES.

    Move the jobs and not the people. It is way cheaper than a toll road.

    RH

  44. Larry G Avatar

    so…… only 1% of the traffic …overflows the NoVa roads?

    good thing the other 99% gets off before NoVa…eh?

    so 60,000 ADDITIONAL cars gets on I-95 in the Fredericksburg Area and all but 1% exit in less than 50 miles and the 600 cars that don't get off – overload the NoVa roads?

    ha ha ha .. you're a a real STITCH Ray!

Leave a Reply