Comments

57 responses to “VOCABULARY OF SETTLEMENT PATTERN”

1. 

   Anonymous

   January 20, 2009

   EMR – thank you for providing this additional information. But we are still dealing basically with a foreign language. It would be very useful to use some types of references to more familiar terms when using your terminology. This could be done with appropriate explanations of differences where exact comparisons cannot be made.

   With repetition, it is quite likely that most of us will pick up on the vocabulary over time. I would not argue that today’s familiar terms are necessarily appropriate for a discussion of change, but for the breakthrough in discussion, I think we need more repetitive and illustrative tools to learn the vocabulary and to know what comparables in today’s language mean.

   For example, until a few years ago, I was not familiar with the term FAR or Floor Area Ratio. Until I saw it used with appropriate references several times, the term was not understood and usable by me. But after seeing references of various FARs their visible displays, I can follow the discussion. I am sure that I am not alone.

   But thank you for taking a useful step. Please consider going farther.

   TMT

   Log in to Reply
2. 

   Anonymous

   January 20, 2009

   “To refresh your memory the residents of North Lake Cluster live at 30 persons per acre – yes even with that great view of the lake and the Openspace from the windowns and decks. “

   Is that gross or net, 30 persons per acre? That is does it include all the open space? If so what is the actual density that they occupy?

   RH

   Log in to Reply
3. 

   Anonymous

   January 21, 2009

   and to know what comparables in today’s language mean.

   Yep we need a rosetta stone. I’ll bet EMR is going to sidestep this. He will tell you that because the common terms are so confusng and meaningless, that there is no one to one mapping.

   Or, he’ll say go lookin the glossary.

   RH

   Log in to Reply
4. 

   Larry G

   January 21, 2009

   “At 1/19/09 12:49 PM, Groveton said…
   EMR makes a good point. The legal entity known as the County of Arlington has a population density of just under 8,000 per square mile. The legal entity known as the city of Alexandria has a population density of 8,400 per square mile. Meanwhile, the legal entity known as the City of Richmond has a polulation density of 3,200 per square mile. So, from the important perspective of population density, the “city” of Richmond is much more of a suburb than the county of Arlington.”

   ” First, EMR has written one Tome and working on a second.

   But more important, when reading this post do you not recall seeing the 10 Person Rule [10 Persons per Acre at the Alpha Community scale] at least 50 times in last two years? “

   TMT said: “EMR – thank you for providing this additional information. But we are still dealing basically with a foreign language.”

   so… let’s talk about Tysons – and Balanced Communities in plain ordinary English and EMR can put in parenthesis the appropriate “vocabulary” to use with respect to discussions about how a place like Alexandria and Arlington got way the heck more than 10 persons per acre – and are still considered “balanced communities”

   … and how.. (nor not) Tysons might …. and why…

   or does Fundamental Transformation just not apply to Tysons (and places like it) and, in fact, there are places like Tysons that have no hope of achieving a “fundamental transformation”?

   batter up – EMR

   do your thing or get off the pot.

   Log in to Reply
5. 

   Anonymous

   January 21, 2009

   The Census Bureau defines “urban” for the 1990 census as
   comprising all territory, population, and housing units in
   urbanized areas and in places of 2,500 or more persons outside
   urbanized areas. More specifically, “urban” consists of
   territory, persons, and housing units in:

   1. Places of 2,500 or more persons incorporated as cities,
   villages, boroughs (except in Alaska and New York), and
   towns (except in the six New England States, New York,
   and Wisconsin), but excluding the rural portions of
   “extended cities.”

   2. Census designated places of 2,500 or more persons.

   3. Other territory, incorporated or unincorporated,
   included in urbanized areas.

   Territory, population, and housing units not classified as
   urban constitute “rural.”

   http://www.census.gov/population/censusdata/urdef.txt

   Those definitions have ontinued mostly unchanged since the 1950s.

   Works for me.

   RH

   Log in to Reply
6. 

   Anonymous

   January 21, 2009

   EMR claims many rural uses are actually urban. The census bureau covers that, too.

   “In the 100-percent data products,
   “rural” is divided into “places of less than 2,500” and “not in
   places.” The “not in places” category comprises “rural” outside
   incorporated and census designated places and the rural portions
   of extended cities. In many data products, the term “other
   rural” is used; “other rural” is a residual category specific to
   the classification of the rural in each data product.

   In the sample data products, rural population and housing
   units are subdivided into “rural farm” and “rural nonfarm.”
   “Rural farm” comprises all rural households and housing units on
   farms (places from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products
   were sold in 1989); “rural nonfarm” comprises the remaining
   rural.

   The urban and rural classification cuts across the other hierarchies; for example, there is generally both urban and rural territory within both metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas.”

   RH

   Log in to Reply
7. 

   E M Risse

   January 21, 2009

   TMT:

   Thank your thoughtful response.

   EMR has struggled with the issue of Vocabulary for decades. We hope to be able to take another step forward with TRILO-G including Chapter 26 and the expanded GLOSSARY as well as the new Vocabulary Supplement to the fourth printing of The Shape of the Future.

   Thank you for mentioning FAR. For years (you may have still been in grade school or high school at the time :>) EMR attended and chaired meetings of the League of Woman Voters (Board Member), Committee of 100 (Cochair Program Committee), Tysons Task Forces (there were many, EMR chaired one sponsored by the ULI), Chamber of Commerce (Bd member and Cochair Transportation Committee) and explained terms like FAR, Bulk Plain VMT, Level of Service, etc.

   You will soon run into terms like “Link Node Ratio” and “Street Network Density” calculations that will rewrite most of the assumptions of private vehicle safety upon which VDOT and municipalities are building Roadways. (This breakthrough comes just when humans will no longer be able to rely on private vehicles for most of their Mobility and Access.)

   But FAR and Street Network Density are NOT the problem. The problem is “common” words that are used to describe and confound understanding of human settlement patterns. Words like ‘suburban,’ ‘rural,’ ‘exurban,’ ‘local,’ ‘sprawl,’ ‘city’ and even some like ‘middle class.’

   Our solution is to not use them. For the science based reason see the discussion of “neural linguistic framework” in Column # 72 and discussion of Vocabulary in Column numbers 71, 72, 74 and 74)

   Human settlement pattern is not rocket science, it is far more complex. The problem is that in space science or genetic spicing the experts can retreat and communicate in their own language. Human settlement patterns are created by and can only be made functional by citizen actions in the voting booth and in the market.

   Steven Pearlstein said it well this morning is summing up the economic challenges ahead by paraphrasing President Obama:

   “The reason we keep getting the wrong answers, he says, is that we keep asking the wrong questions, TALKING ABOUT THEM WITH THE WRONG LANGUAGE and limiting ourselves with false choices. (Emphasis Added).”

   That was the message we were tying to get across in the passage we cited in Chapter 26 in the comment on Peter’s post.

   EMR

   Log in to Reply
8. 

   E M Risse

   January 21, 2009

   Larry:

   Yes, EMR did not include the word “Minimum” in the 10 Person Rule. But you should have been able to figure that out for yourself instead of creating another Strawperson.

   As you know, EMR is trying to finish a book. There is no time for going over again and again items that have been covered before.

   In today’s mail we received the following:

   “My name is Professor _________. I am based at University College London and am currently conducting research on the past and potential future growth of Tysons Corner as part of a major international study covering the US, China, Russia and Europe.

   “I am writing as _________________suggested that you wold be a very good person to speak to to get an overview of the nature of planning in Fairfax over the years.

   “I have conducted 33 interviews so far but would greatly appreciate your further input as I would like to get a further historical sense of why things ended up the way they did, the role of individual developers and perhaps even how Fairfax compares to neighbouring counties in terms of its planning approach.”

   I am sure you can understand that if I have no time to help Professor ___________, I will not have time to help you AGAIN.

   When you have carefully read the material we have written on Tysons Corner and on Balanced Communities – which has been cited over and over – we will be glad to answer your questions.

   There is always the alternative of you hiring yourself a research staff to prepare briefing papers to make your work easier.

   EMR

   Log in to Reply
9. 

   Anonymous

   January 21, 2009

   EMR,
   Thanks for your explanation and I see the point about lacking good definitions. However, I was kidding when I made my comment and didn’t intend to be taken too seriously

   Peter Galuszka

   Log in to Reply
10. 

    Larry G

    January 22, 2009

    I still think that a discussion about Tysons, in the contest of Fundamental Transformation and Balanced Communities could be useful to a lot of readers here (who may not have benefit of knowing where to go find all of EMR’s previous articles)

    as well as be useful to the folks who are currently concerned about the Tysons proposal – and for them, as a result of a better understanding gained here – to be able to more effectively participate in the dialog about how Tysons should proceed.

    In general – discussions about specific things that citizens might advocate for – in any community that is growing… and putting together plans and proposals for growth and “smart growth”.

    In the end, as EMR has said, we won’t get change until citizens participate and they cannot be effective at participation if they don’t know what to advocate for and what to be opposed to – and why.

    BR presents an opportunity to do that – IMHO.

    Log in to Reply
11. 

    Anonymous

    January 22, 2009

    Emr et.al.
    A few more thoughts on suburbs. I was hoping we’d get more a response on the cultural importance of suburbs vis a vis “Revolutionary Road.
    What is being depicted is a very traditional, railroad commuter train-specific suburb that emerged in the late 19th century. In many ways, this pre-dated the giant, auto-centric upheavals that started in the 1940s and 1950s that in many ways were the result of racial, inner-city polities and dmeographic shifts. The movie and the 1961 novel on which it is based don’t really differentiate between the two but there has been plenty of whiny artwork on the vapid nature of suburbs (John Updike’s novels come to mind). What’s interesting is that Leonardo and Kate play early form radicals for rejecting the status quo which itself became mainstream by the 1960s (more my generation). They were following the late 1940s and 1950s “outlaws” such as bike gangs and beat poets who came back from World War II disillushioned with the Norman Rockwell, Walt Disney vision of hwat American life should be and that suburbs represented its epitome. So, they started rebelling (I guess in many was the 1950s were more rebellious than the more open 1960s).
    Anyway, I’d be interested to get more thoughts on this historical and cultural aspect of suburbs (or whatever defintion).

    Peter Galuszka

    Log in to Reply
12. 

    Larry G

    January 23, 2009

    I think in order to understand [modern] suburbs, one has to understand roads.

    The very first ‘sprawl’ suburbs happened when a viable way to live beyond the outskirts of a city – became possible.

    ironically – it was rail that started it.

    it was only after rail was built – and used – to carry freight – that people realized than those same vehicles – and tracks could carry people.

    and this:

    ” The growth of suburbs was facilitated by the development of zoning laws, redlining and various innovations in transport. “

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suburban

    God Forbid – that we cite Wiki here for delving into all sorts of those dratted core confusing words….

    “The word is derived from the Old French subburbe and ultimately from the Latin suburbium, formed from sub, meaning “under”, and urbs, meaning “city”. In Rome, important people tended to live within the city wall on one of the seven roman hills, while the lower classes often lived outside of the walls and at the foot of the hills. “Under” in later usage sometimes referred variously to lesser wealth, political power, population, or population density. The first recorded usage, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, comes from Wycliffe in 1380, where the form subarbis is used.”

    oh oh. I see trouble brewing here… by pulling the Oxford Dictionary into this etymological jungle…

    Log in to Reply
13. 

    E M Risse

    January 23, 2009

    Larry said:

    “I still think that a discussion about Tysons, in the context of Fundamental Transformation and Balanced Communities could be useful to a lot of readers here (who may not have benefit of knowing where to go find all of EMR’s previous articles)

    Thank you for the Capitals, Larry!!! It does make a difference.

    EMR’s columns are, at least for now, still available here:

    https://www.baconsrebellion.com/oldsite/Wonks_Risse.php.

    And they will be on the TRILO-G DVD.

    “as well as be useful to the folks who are currently concerned about the Tysons proposal – and for them, as a result of a better understanding gained here – to be able to more effectively participate in the dialog about how Tysons should proceed.

    “In general – discussions about specific things that citizens might advocate for – in any community that is growing… and putting together plans and proposals for growth and “smart growth”.

    “In the end, as EMR has said, we won’t get change until citizens participate and they cannot be effective at participation if they don’t know what to advocate for and what to be opposed to – and why.”

    Larry, you are RIGHT on all counts here.

    There is, however, only one EMR

    “BR presents an opportunity to do that – IMHO.”

    EMR believed that with the Original Bacons Rebellion Ezine and with Jim Bacon leading and monitoring the BR Blog, the “BR” sphere did provide the opportunity you describe.

    That was then,

    This is now.

    You can see for yourself, Larry, how much time has to be spent whacking moles and defending our understandings from those who have mangy, dogs-in-the-manger in the fight (to agglomerate metaphors).

    These are not “bad” people, it is just that in the Blog context there is no incentive to try to learn or understand.

    It is far easier just to attack and have fun than to reconsider individual past decisions that seemed to be the right thing to do.

    And more importantly, consider the cumulative impact of billions of well-intended decisions.

    Gladwell in Outliers has some important things to say about hard work.

    There is not yet any incentive to work hard in the Blog context, especially with respect to human settlement pattern.

    In fact that is one of the root causes of the demise of MainStream Journalism.

    From day one journalists are taught that they must write so readers will not be turned off, so they will buy the paper, read the magazine, recommend the book and of course READ THE ADVERTISING.

    Make it easy, use words that are “simple” and that readers recognize. It turns out they are confusing and lead to bad decisions in the voting booth and in the market.

    Larry, you would do more for the overarching goals upon which you and EMR seem to agree more than disagree by doing your homework and then writing about what you have learned in ways that make other think they too should make the effort.

    Keep up the good work.

    EMR

    Log in to Reply
14. 

    E M Risse

    January 23, 2009

    Peter G. said:

    “Emr et.al.”

    (Peter may have meant EMR.)

    “A few more thoughts on suburbs. I was hoping we’d get more a response on the cultural importance of suburbs vis a vis “Revolutionary Road.””

    Peter: EMR thought he was doing well to know what Revolutionary Road was! Entertainment as a category is not EMR’s thing. The last movie EMR recall’s seeing was “Roger and Me” and before that it was “Henry the V.”

    [Entertainment is great if you do not have a lot to do. When I want to unwind I go for a long walk in the woods and take notes on what I hear and see. But I do not hold it against others who do go to movies. It is just that movies and plays are entertainment, not reality. Not to say you cannot learn from non-reality, it is just an extra layer one must deal with. A lot of work. But when you talk about settlement pattern and the economic, social and physical impacts of alternative patterns and densities of land use… now that is interesting, and real.]

    “What is being depicted is a very traditional, railroad commuter train-specific suburb that emerged in the late 19th century. In many ways, this pre-dated the giant, auto-centric upheavals that started in the 1940s and 1950s … that in many ways were the result of racial, inner-city polities and demographic shifts.”

    The first part is very true. As to the second part, most now agree there was an equal role played by the NonUrban areas that were Urbanized. It was not all push from the inside. There was national economic policy invested in the pull. But for the decision about the location and number of interchanges and what could happen around them, the US of A would look a lot more like the EU. There was the buying up of Interurbans and the politics and economic impact of locomotive leasing. Railroads could get loans to buy diesels but not to buy coal fired locomotives.

    “The movie and the 1961 novel on which it is based don’t really differentiate between the two but there has been plenty of whiny artwork on the vapid nature of suburbs (John Updike’s novels come to mind). What’s interesting is that Leonardo and Kate play early form radicals for rejecting the status quo which itself became mainstream by the 1960s (more my generation). They were following the late 1940s and 1950s “outlaws” such as bike gangs and beat poets who came back from World War II disillusioned with the Norman Rockwell, Walt Disney vision of what American life should be and that suburbs represented its epitome.”

    This is a good description. EMR is a little older than Peter and can still name people who fit these roles in California and in Montana between 1946 and 1956.

    “So, they started rebelling (I guess in many way the 1950s were more rebellious than the more open 1960s).”

    Yep. EMR was vice-president and then president of the student body at the Univ of Montana from 1957 thru 1960 and we revolted then in a much more effective but far less publicized way than Berkeley 1964. (EMR was a law student at Berkeley from Fall 1961 to Spring 1965.)

    “Anyway, I’d be interested to get more thoughts on this historical and cultural aspect of suburbs (or whatever definition).”

    Here we part ways because unless you define what you are talking about it is impossible to generalize. Levittown was a lot different that a 20 lot subdivision of a wheat field outside Kalispell.

    EMR

    Log in to Reply
15. 

    E M Risse

    January 23, 2009

    Larry said:

    “I think in order to understand [modern] suburbs, one has to understand roads.”

    Lets say “Mobility and Access” and “human settlement patterns”

    “The very first ‘sprawl’ suburbs happened when a viable way to live beyond the outskirts of a city – became possible.”

    Well, not really. The city (when there were cities) had a clear edge, a wall. The “outskirts” were “suburban” as you point out later in this post.

    “ironically – it was rail that started it.”

    Well, not really. Kenneth Jackson in “Crabgrass Frontier” claims that the Persian ambassador to Babylonia lived in a “sub” urban place and has a letter from the ambassador’s wife to prove it.

    “it was only after rail was built – and used – to carry freight – that people realized than those same vehicles – and tracks could carry people.”

    Well, not really. The very first rail vehicles built and assembled in the England and then disassembled and shipped to the US of A included passenger cars.

    “and this:

    “The growth of suburbs was facilitated by the development of zoning laws, redlining and various innovations in transport. “

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suburban

    Very true, see EMR’s earlier note on Peters post.

    “God Forbid – that we cite Wiki here for delving into all sorts of those dratted core confusing words….”

    No, follow EMR’s earlier note to Larry and get busy to straighten them out, that what Wiki is all about. You can improve the definition and the discussion.

    “The word is derived from the Old French subburbe and ultimately from the Latin suburbium, formed from sub, meaning “under”, and urbs, meaning “city”. In Rome, important people tended to live within the city wall on one of the seven roman hills, while the lower classes often lived outside of the walls and at the foot of the hills. “Under” in later usage sometimes referred variously to lesser wealth, political power, population, or population density.”

    All true. And you will agree there were no railroads between the hills of Rome at that time?

    “The first recorded usage, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, comes from Wycliffe in 1380, where the form subarbis is used.”

    You could have saved yourself a lot of trouble by reading EXACTLY that same passage on page 709 of The Shape of the Future. It is in APPENDIX TWO – CORE CONFUSING WORDS under the heading “Suburb and Suburban.”

    “oh oh. I see trouble brewing here… by pulling the Oxford Dictionary into this etymological jungle…”

    No need to be melodramatic. You are right. Those who live outside the wall (outside the Clear Edge now that gunpowder has made the wall ineffective for defense) are “suburban.”

    That is just how EMR would use that word if he were to use it. Less than urban.

    Those people who the citizens (the word means residents of the city) did not trust inside the walls at night or when under siege had to live in “suburbia.” They were prostitutes, pick pockets, spies from other city-states, etc.

    EMR

    Log in to Reply
16. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    “ironically – it was rail that started it.”

    Actually the first railcars wer for passengers not freight, and theywere horse drawn.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
17. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    “In Rome, important people tended to live within the city “

    But they also had country villas, ans I remember reading one Ropman author who cooed about the lack of noise and dirt in “the suburbs”.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
18. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    “And more importantly, consider the cumulative impact of billions of well-intended decisions.”

    Adam Smith wrote about that and he concluded that what was best was the sum of what was best for individuals. That no central panning could do a better job considering the millions of variables at work.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
19. 

    Larry G

    January 23, 2009

    re: viability of suburban sprawl

    I’m talking about not hauling a few folks on a horse-drawn rail car or even a small open-air railcar that can go a few miles.

    I’m talking about modern commuter rail where hundreds/thousands of people can be taken 50-100 miles beyond the clear edge…

    …and then subsequently… replication of this capability – when major freeways and interstates were built.

    In fact, suburban sprawl (as opposed to urban sprawl) – came to the fore – after the interstate highway system was built (like the rails were – to originally moves goods) …to “connect” cities – i.e. mobility and accessibility for cities.

    At the time the Interstates were built – developers saw a tremendous opportunity to provide stand-alone single family residences in relatively crime-free locales including safer schools.

    Thus became the flight of people from the cities to the suburbs.

    There is no better example of this that the Fredericksburg Area which had virtually no commuters to NoVa/DC …UNTIL I-95 was finished in 1963.

    Now… the Fredericksburg Area – which used to be 45 thousand people is 300,000+ people – with perhaps more commuters than the original population.

    Without I-95, this scope and scale of suburban “sprawl” would never have happened and the clear edge would have remained in a much more firm form than now – which it is literally a line that someone like EMR arbitrarily draws on a map to basically delineate where it “should be”.

    So.. interstates became commuter rail – on steroids – automobiles; the ultimate in personal mobility and convenience.

    Live where you want and work where you want and go back and forth per your work schedule – not a multi-passenger vehicle schedule.

    I think it is important to understand how “sprawl” currently “works” – the fundamentals that power it if we want to talk about Fundamental Transformation -because we need to know what it is that is that Fundamental Transformation – seeks to change – and WHO wants this kind of change and why.

    For instance, folks who currently live in the Fredericksburg Area and work in NoVa are not going to lobby their elected officials for the kind of Fundamental Change that would, in essence, ask their elected officials to pass laws to force them to move back to NoVa.

    Hardly.

    So.. exactly what should folks who live in the Fredericksburg Area lobby their elected officials to do ?

    I tend to think – not much.

    Why would a commuter to suburbia lobby their elected officials to outlaw suburbia that would force them to move back to… say a place like Tysons where they work?

    This is where the “Fundamental” part of “Transformation” starts to lose it wheels IMHO.

    but methinks it worthy of discussion… especially in the context of how a place like Tysons might be configured such that it would convince – some commuters – that living in Tysons might be better than living in Fredericksburg – and commuting to Tysons.

    Log in to Reply
20. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    Larry’s last point is well taken. For a long-term change in behavior from suburban sprawl to whatever, the whatever needs to be attractive to people. Urban whatever must satisfy the basic needs and desires of the potential customers. Affordable housing with appropriate amenities; good schools; safe; affordable transportation; parks, recreational facilities and open space; etc.

    Of course there are trade-offs. One cannot expect to have a 5000 square foot house on a half acre lot and a 15 minute commute. But absent urban whatevers offering satisfaction of the consumer’s basic needs and wants, why would anyone expect urbanism to sell.

    NMM’s point of sometime ago is still valid. Urban is great, until the couple becomes a family with children, who need access to good schools.

    So far, I’ve seen nothing that addresses this market reality from the supporters of smart growth, etc.

    TMT

    Log in to Reply
21. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    “I’m talking about not hauling a few folks on a horse-drawn rail car or even a small open-air railcar that can go a few miles.”

    I understand that, but the horse drawn rail cars were the start, and they creeated the first commuter suburbs.

    Everything after that was more of the same.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
22. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    I agree with TMT.

    Except I did have a 3000 sq fto house on an acre and a half lot with a two mile commute. In the suburbs, nine miles from the monument.

    Until my job moved to the exurbs. Which are now the suburbs.

    That experience has convinced me that what Fredericksburg residents should be doing is lobbying AGAINST what is happening in Tysons.

    They shoudl argue that rail to Dulles should be just that, and if Tysons whats rail, they can build a loop spur. that won’t happen, of course, and the result would be to speed up the time when jobs move to F’burg and not so many people have to travel so far.

    But, to make or remake the urban areas to be truly attractive is going to take huge amounts of money: reinvestments in every thing from the water and sewer mains on up. And it is going to take a lot more space, if nothing else to provide the mental sanity people need, just as much as rats do.

    Log in to Reply
23. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    “Now… the Fredericksburg Area – which used to be 45 thousand people is 300,000+ people – with perhaps more commuters than the original population.”

    It fascinates me that when we talk about the externalities of automobiles we hold this kind of development as a negative, but we count development like Ballston or Tysons as a positive when it comes to rail.

    VRE has had two fare increases this year, and plans another one, plus a parking deck at the masssas airport station – to support more cars.

    I see heavy rail devolvng into longer distance routes with shorter routes becoming light rail. As the disadvantages of light rail become apparent, they will devolve into bus rapid transit, and BRT will devove to Jitneys-on-demand, which will provide semidirect, relatively convenient door-to-door service.

    Think of taxis on steroids or sluglines everywhere.

    But there is two problems that shared vehicles always have, which is that they need a paid driver, and they have the return empty sysndrome which seriously affects their costs per passenger mile.

    Private vehicles, for all their other problems, solve those two.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
24. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    “A Couple Reasons California Isn’t the Energy Efficiency Utopia it Claims to Be”

    http://climateerinvest.blogspot.com/2009/01/couple-reasons-california-isnt-energy.html

    RH

    Log in to Reply
25. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    Settlement patterns may change in response to jobs.

    "Ten Best Green Jobs for the Next Decade "

    http://www.fastcompany.com/articles/2009/01/best-green-jobs.html?page=0%2C0

    Top two green jobs for th enext decade?

    Farmers and Foresters.

    "I never thought I would see farmers at the top of any list.

    America has only two million farmers, and their average age is 55. Since sustainable agriculture requires small-scale, local, organic methods rather than petroleum-based machines and fertilizers, there is a huge need for more farmers — up to tens of millions of them, according to food guru Michael Pollan. Modern farmers are small businesspeople who must be as skilled in heirloom genetics as marketing.

    Schools: University of Vermont: Center for Sustainable Agriculture; Stone Barns Center For Food & Agriculture in New York State; University of Oklahoma: Kerr Center for Sustainable Agriculture; Evergreen State College: degree in Sustainable Agriculture.

    Related careers: urban gardener; farmers market and CSA coordinator; artisanal cheesemakers; and other food producers. "

    I think smal;l scale organic methosd will have to adapt to largescale organic methods,usning a lot more machines. Maybe robots that can mechanically identify and pick bugs off of leaves.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
26. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    Why would California ask for tighter tail-pipe standards when they are close to bankruptcy?

    Ten days remain before California will begin defaulting on its obligations.

    “The state is spending so much money that Governor Schwarzenegger could fire every single California civil servant and still not come close to balancing the budget! Even if he also fired the other 149,000 legislative aides and people who work for the state’s courts or university systems (people not directly under the state’s control), he still couldn’t eliminate the deficit.

    Environmental regulations increase costs. That may not be a bad thing, if the benefits of decreasing the environmental impact exceed those costs. But many of those benefits are nonmarketed benefits: that is, nonrevenue generating. Doesn’t that undermine the more immediate goal of fiscal solvency for the state? ”

    http://www.env-econ.net/

    Log in to Reply
27. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    EMR,
    When you were a student in Montana in the 1950s were you ever a member of a motorcycle club that terrorized small Western towns on weekends a la Marlon Brando. I mean, were you a “Wild One?”
    It would be so cool if you were.

    Peter Galuszka

    Log in to Reply
28. 

    E M Risse

    January 23, 2009

    Peter:

    Terrorizm is never cool.

    EMR never owned a motorcycle. He did own a Vespa when he attended the University of Hawaii.

    Sometimes when is rained and you were going 45 MPH, that was cool.

    Does that count?

    EMR

    Log in to Reply
29. 

    E M Risse

    January 23, 2009

    Upon review of the qualifying comments in this string since our last post, there appears to be only one that address the topic of this post, attempts to make a serious point and avoids using Core Confusing Words*:

    TMT said, in part:

    “NMM’s point of sometime ago is still valid. Urban is great, until the couple becomes a family with children, who need access to good schools.”

    TMT:

    Why does a parent have to leave “Urban” to find “good schools?” NMM (and you) are jumping to conclusions about Urban and bad schools.

    No question some municipalities have poor schools, but that has nothing to do with settlement pattern or density. See Gladwell’s comments in Outliers re schools in Urban areas.

    This is a prefect example of how even with a useful word vis a vis human settlement patterns, if the wrong assumptions are tied to it, there is a failure to communicate.

    While we are at it, another misconception that is often tossed up vis a vis “Urban” is that one must avoid “Urban” to have a suitable “place to raise kids.” Please read Column # 20 “A Yard Where Johnny Can Run and Play.”

    In a Village Scale component of human settlement (the Village scale would be served by a high school and supporting pre-schools, primary schools, intermediate schools and special schools) it is a physical impossibility for more than 25 to 30 percent of the Households to have Single Household Detached Dwellings (SHD) with private “yards.”

    A monoculture of SHD units and no common Openspace is a dysfunctional settlement pattern for raising children. The physical impact of dispersal required to have primarily SHD dwellings, precludes many of the spacial relationships needed for raising children.

    One person who posts at this site says they agree with this but that it takes two to raise children and this person’s partner is adamant that they must have “a big yard.” They have agreed that they will move back to a more amenable place to live when they become empty nesters.

    Further to the issue of Wrong Size House in Wrong Location, even if for some or even most Households raising children a “big yard” is a desirable idea, there are already far too many SHD dwellings. Professor Arthur Nelson (formerly at VA Tech, now at U of Utah) has provided interesting numbers on this. Wrong Size House in Wrong Location means a loss of value in the long term due to oversupply.

    * In order to limit the amount of wasted effort, EMR will no longer respond to comments using Core Confusing Words.

    EMR

    Log in to Reply
30. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    “No question some municipalities have poor schools, but that has nothing to do with settlement pattern or density. “

    It does if the poor schools drive people elsewhere. Isn’t that the point?

    RH

    Log in to Reply
31. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    “A monoculture of SHD units and no common Openspace is a dysfunctional settlement pattern for raising children. The physical impact of dispersal required to have primarily SHD dwellings, precludes many of the spacial relationships needed for raising children.”

    Maybe, but I got the holy c__P beat out of me a few times, being the only one in my class who hadn’t stayed back a few times.

    It was always on common property and never in my own yard. One time it was as an adult, and strangely enough it one of the same perpetrators!

    RH

    Log in to Reply
32. 

    Anonymous

    January 23, 2009

    I have anew word for EMR’s Glossary

    Agnotology: Culturally constructed ignorance, purposefully created by special interest groups working hard to create confusion and suppress the truth.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
33. 

    Anonymous

    January 24, 2009

    Urban areas generally deliver poor quality services, which discourages settlement by the middle class; put interests of public sector unions over the public; and foster more corruption generally. They are not perceived generally as good options by middle class families. The very wealthy can afford to ignore the problems and the poor are often just stuck. But the middle and upper middle classes have choices; they vote by living in localities surrounding central cities (how’s that EMR for not using “suburban”?)

    Competition forces suppliers to focus on the needs and desires of the customers, instead of focusing primarily on producer desires. Governments tend to be and think like monopolies. Urban areas especially do, be they Washington, D.C. or the landowners at Tysons Corner.

    TMT

    Log in to Reply
34. 

    Anonymous

    January 24, 2009

    TMT:

    Well said.

    Winston and Shirley have a whole chapeter on how management affects the utility of transit systems, and how patronage plays a role.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
35. 

    E M Risse

    January 24, 2009

    TMT said:

    “Urban areas generally deliver poor quality services, which discourages settlement by the middle class; put interests of public sector unions over the public; and foster more corruption generally. They are not perceived generally as good options by middle class families. The very wealthy can afford to ignore the problems and the poor are often just stuck. But the middle and upper middle classes have choices; they vote by living in localities surrounding central cities (how’s that EMR for not using “suburban”?)

    Not bad re “subruban” but you did use “city” and you badly misused “Urban.”

    You seem to think “Urban” and “City” are the same. They have not been for over 200 years.

    As Jim Bacon tells you over and over, we agree with you on how badly the Tysons Corner replanning has been managed.

    I believe Jim Bacon would also agree with you and I that many municipal Agencies are badly managed. We live in one that is not badly run inspite of the dysfunctional context in which it exists.

    The primary responsibility for badly managed municipalities is the complete failure of the federal and state Agencies to change the rules upon whicl municipal Agencies operated. The laws and charters of municipal governace structures do not reflect the transforming economic, social and physical reality.

    “Competition forces suppliers to focus on the needs and desires of the customers, instead of focusing primarily on producer desires.”

    Yes and “competition” is what created the tragic bubble and bust that today faces every citizen on the globe.

    “Governments [Agencies or the New First Estate] tend to be and think like monopolies.”

    Only if they are constituted like monoplies.

    “Urban areas especially do, be they Washington, D.C. or the landowners at Tysons Corner.”

    You lost EMR here.

    The Federal District of Columbia is not a municipality.

    The “landowners at Tysons Corner” are not a municipality either.

    You might try to write down an definition fo “Urban” that covers those two vastly different agglomerations of interest.

    In the meantime, VOCABULARY OF SETTLEMENT PATTERN seems to have come to a dead end.

    EMR

    Log in to Reply
36. 

    Anonymous

    January 24, 2009

    “You seem to think “Urban” and “City” are the same. They have not been for over 200 years.”

    See the census dept definition of urban.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
37. 

    Anonymous

    January 24, 2009

    EMR,
    I hate to be the one to tell you this but riding a Vespa in the rain is only cool if you are Audey Hepburn.

    Peter Galuszka

    Log in to Reply
38. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    EMR:

    I hate to tell you this but larer wheels offer more gyroscopic stability and they roll easier over bumps. You might have been better off with a Honda 90, 160, or 250.

    I drove a rusty old Honda ninety that I bought off the back of some yacht for $50 bucks. Put 20k miles on it: one of the best machines I ever owned, but it sure was ugly.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
39. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    “You seem to think “Urban” and “City” are the same. They have not been for over 200 years.”

    See the census dept definition of urban.

    RH

    One need go no farther than Virginia Beach to see how foolish RH again proves himself to be.

    One need go to only one of Professor Risse’s lectures to understand why political pressure has kept the Bureau of Census from evolving more rational definitions.

    Give it up and go cut some hay.

    Log in to Reply
40. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    Talk about foolish, hay cutting is over for the season. I did have the sawmill running today, though. Finished the rim on my new bathroom, and glued up a couple of more storm windows: all made from downed trees I cut a few years ago.

    However, the economy seems to be hurting me on hay this year, I’m way behind my usual sales. I believe some people may have given up their animals, so I may have to go buy some cows.

    I need only read a few of EMRs scribes to understand what agnotology is. I’ve heard bad reviews on his lectures, I think I’ll pass. It’s not like I havent enough to do.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
41. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    Hey, folks do not be so hard on RH.

    He must have been insulting people all his life. Have you noticed he takes attacks as complements?

    Log in to Reply
42. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    My clients pay me to toss Hay and Timber, not mud. Once in a while I’ll do a financial plan for a pretty big project.

    I just have this thing about being stuck in reality, and trying to actually build something durable and useful, and hopefully beautiful, preferably out of materials at hand, or recycled, rather than talking about it.

    I’m as green as the next person, trained and educated that way, and practiced in the field until I determined it was often a waste and a scam. But I do believe in the triple bottom line: Economy, Equality, and Environment. I believe their is, and has to be, a balance between those three. That balance probably won’t match EMR’s concept.

    Those nameless namecallers have not actually pointed out any errors that I know of, they just call me a fool, ignorant, etc. As I have said, most of my comments are recycled (and so noted) from others: I don’t invent this stuff.

    For example, the last poster claimed the census bureau definitions are not rational, but gave no reason why. I think they are rational, measurable, and official, which is more than I can say for EMR’s inventions. That is not to say that I don’t see EMR’s point when he complains that settlement patterns don’t happen to match jurisdictional boundaries.

    I just don’t think we need six or seven MORE layers of governmemt telling us what they think we should do or can do. It’s a recipe for never getting anything done: a good strategy if your only goal is conservation, and you don’t care about the triple bottom line.

    EMR’s message seems to boil down to the idea that everything will be perfect when the population is educated enough to believe as he does, and anyone who doesn’t is ignorant.

    I don’t find it particularly useful or entertaining. So I throw out the occasional idea (not mine) which EMR sees as inconveneint truths, apparently, because he chooses to ignore them, or dismiss them without explanation.

    Sometimes anonymously, I think.

    ————————–

    Actually, I have had some rather bad discussions with other bloggers recently, similar to the problem I have with Larry. They believe that ANY expense is allowable if it improves the environment. I just point out that you can only dump ALL your money on one crisis once, which elimiantes all your other alternatives.

    Like EMR they beleive we will be better off with fewer people consuming less. I just point out that if you have enough fewer people, then they can consume more. So it is a simple question of how many fewer and how much less, before it no longer makes a difference: before we reach a sustainable world.

    And then the next question is who gets fewered and who gets lessened. Seems pretty obvious to me, but I don’t get too many greens interested in pursuing it.

    It is too inconvenient to their ethic. So while they may not agree with me, my other blog friends don’t call me ignorant.

    I have a different view of automobiles than EMR. I think they are the shared vehicles, personal rapid transit, of the future. EMR is too wrapped up in what he percieves to be thier problems to see their many benefits, or how they can be improved and integrated with the total transportation system.

    True, they take a certain amount of space, and they also require the space they don’t use to be configured differently. But we are going to need more space anyway, in order to take advantage of renewable energy sources, and to absorb CO2, clean our water, etc.

    EMR thinks we are facing crisis and collapse. I think we are facing change which we will adapt to. If history is any guide, that adaptation may involve murder and warfare.

    Or, we can start thinking, start working with what we have, and stop flapping our hands, inventing new definitions, and berating everyone but ourselves.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
43. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    I take personal attacks unbacked by rational explanation as a compliment.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
44. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    If you have something to say, then I take it as a conversation. Just don’t expect me to take too seriously the idea of a mile square concrete slab over the Metro station, or confiscating advertising revenues to support our schools.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
45. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    Why does the census definition of urban not fit Virginia Beach?

    RH

    Log in to Reply
46. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    “I, and I suspect others, have been asked by Dr. Risse not to bother to respond, it only encourages RH.”

    Great, a boycott. That’s so mature, and so sixties hippie.

    I guess I’ll go cry in my beer. Homemade, naturally.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
47. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    Maybe this is my twenty minutes of fame: being intellectually boycotted by anonymouses.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
48. 

    Anonymous

    January 25, 2009

    What would a map of NoVA or Fairfax County look like if it used EMR’s terms instead of what terms are now used on maps and their keys now? And if this cannot be done, how can anyone expect the terms to be accepted and understood by the general public? If terms cannot be used and understood by the general public, how can any expect that they influence both public decision-making and private behavior?

    TMT

    Log in to Reply
49. 

    E M Risse

    January 25, 2009

    TMT said”

    “What would a map of NoVA or Fairfax County look like if it used EMR’s terms instead of what terms are now used on maps and their keys now?”

    See Column # 25 “The Shape of Ricmond’s Future” for a primer on how to draw that map.

    Also the new PowerPoint “New Urban Region Conceptual Framework” which is a companion to Chapter 27 of TRILO-G has a graphic, developed as part of SYNERGY’s work in Eastern Loudoun County.

    The map centered on the Centroid of the National Capital Subregion identifies the Cores of 9 (or as many as 11 depending on the evolution of infrastructure) potential Alpha Communites all or partially in Fairfax County (Greater Tysons Corner is one, Greater Fairfax Center is another, and so is Greater Reston).

    The plan for the original Fairfax Center in the early 80s lays out the components of the potential Alpha Community.

    “The Year 2000 Plan for the National Capital Region” is based on the same principles.

    The 1958 Comp Plan for Fairfax County is base on the same principles.

    The 1926 Wright Plan for New York State is based on the same principles.

    The last phase of the Eastern Loudoun work was the outline of a Four Alpha Communities inside a Clear Edge. Some participants in that effort are working to implement this strategy.

    Others think it is possible to just muddle through with “good people” and Business-As-Usual.

    The Eastern Loudoun graphics will evolve to become a post-TRILO-G PowerPoint. The existing one is an expansion of a 2003 presentation in Fauquier County.

    “And if this cannot be done, how can anyone expect the terms to be accepted and understood by the general public?”

    So it has been “done,” it is just a matter of a Critical Mass of citizens coming to understand that the process needs to be started.

    “If terms cannot be used and understood by the general public, how can any expect that they influence both public decision-making and private behavior?”

    See above, the “terms” can be understood and demonstrated in the real world. That is what the new PowerPoint is all about.

    The primary obstacle is not the “enemies of change” it is those who say “Yes, those are good ideas, but we do not need to go that far.”

    And those that say “Good ideas, but they scare some of our biggest supporters.” There is also those who say, “I agree but I could never convince the voters…”

    And the big one: “I can make more money in a short time by doing what I have been doing.”

    That includes MainStream Media. WaPo lost $4.4 Billion in market value in the last 12 months. E W Scripps lost $6.3 Billion.

    Business As Usual is not working folks.

    The time will come when there is a Critical Mass of support. The question is will it come too late when there are no resources to implement Fundamental Transformation?

    EMR

    Log in to Reply
50. 

    Anonymous

    January 26, 2009

    I don’tknow the vocabulary at issue here, but it seems to me that human settlement is driven today by the same two factors that have driven it since the Neolithic Period: the proximity of a desirable resource, whether that be a buffalo herd or a good job, and the subsequent–and frequently inefficient–path dependent exploitation of that resource. In thinking over the chicken v. egg of these two factors, I conclude that the desirable resource is the dominent of the two. For example, I don’t believe it would be possible to give rise to coal mining and a coal mining culture in an area where there is no coal. It seems obvbious to me that it is the tail of resource that will always wag the dog of human settlement. BKD

    Log in to Reply
51. 

    Anonymous

    January 26, 2009

    Thank you BKD.

    That is a good observation.

    We cannot move a coal mine, but we can move many other jobs. We do not have to have such a concentration of jobs in one place that we have to build (the inefficient portions of) mass transit in order to support it. We can choose to put jobs where people live (and want to live), and we can choose to do it efficiently.

    That might take up a little more space then EMR thinks we need, but we need the space for other things anyway.

    EMR argues (wrongly) that the market shows that people are willing to pay more per square foot to live in compact urban spaces. Your post points out that they are buying more than living space – they are buying the opportunity to make a living. They have to compete with lower living standards in order to do that.

    Government has the ability to fix that situation, but it does not have the financial incentive. Urban spaces give them more power, more patronage, more budget.

    (I wouldn’t worry too mch about the vocabulary, if you are talking about EMR’s glossary. I don’t predict it will be commonly used much.)

    RH

    Log in to Reply
52. 

    Anonymous

    January 26, 2009

    I do not have any idea what this converstion is about or what the words make sense to use but I have observed that it is hard to move a coal seam.

    Oh course, RH will agree, not because I make any sense but becuse it seems to disrespect EMR.

    Log in to Reply
53. 

    Anonymous

    January 26, 2009

    Anonymous doesn’t try very hard, either.

    It’s easier just to diss someone he imagines is dissing EMR. What a world to live in.

    I think some of EMR’s premises are sound. I think the conclusions he reaches from them are silly. I think it is a result of fuzzy thinking occluded by preconcieved notions and personal history, PhD. notwithstnding.

    But then, I’m just a lowly scientist. I think F=MA, the laws of Carnot and Gibbs stil hold, and they apply directly to the laws of economics.

    EMR apperently thinks we can get something for nothing if we just have enough governments powerful enough to steal it for us.

    I don’t know what anonymous thinks: he lets EMR do it for him.

    ————————

    I suggest that the gist of my comment is that we can achieve balance in more ways than EMR gives credit for. I beleive that is because, while he makes a good argument for balance, he has at the same time tilted balance far to the side of land conservation for its own sake.

    In the process he destroys his own arguments.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
54. 

    Anonymous

    January 27, 2009

    so here is a vocabulary word for fixing settlement patterns: lead.

    DC’s older neighborhoods are poisoning kids with lead in the water.

    Let’s tear them down and start over from the infrastructure up. That ought ot be a good economic stimulus.

    RH

    Log in to Reply
55. 

    Anonymous

    January 27, 2009

    “Using census data, including TIGER file variables that describe street patterns and transit and highway accessibility, we found that there are identifiable residential as well as workplace neighborhood types observable throughout the four major California metropolitan areas. We also found that many of these had consistent effects on commuting durations across the four areas. In most cases, neighborhood effects helped to explain a longer commute than could be explained by a generalized accessibility index. Many households trade off desirable neighborhood characteristics (at work and/or at home) for a longer commute. All things considered, jobs-housing “balance” is, apparently, not high on most people’s agenda.”

    “DO NEIGHBORHOOD ATTRIBUTES AFFECT COMMUTING TIMES?”

    School of Policy, Planning, and Development
    University of Southern California
    Los Angeles, California 90089-0626

    RH

    Log in to Reply
56. 

    Anonymous

    January 28, 2009

    RH has hit the bottom. He is quoting USC, the home of Business As Usual advocates.

    There is some truth to the quote because Institutions like USC, and Enterprises, especially the MainStream Media keep citizens in the dark about conceptual frameworks and the vocabulary to articulate them.

    Log in to Reply
57. 

    Anonymous

    January 29, 2009

    I quoted the source without comment. I leave it to the readers to draw their own conclusions as to whether USC is an acredited institution and what their biases may be.

    Of course they are free to do the same with anonymous entries or epinonymous ones from EMR.

    ————————-

    Frankly, I don’t see what the possible complaint could be with this quote, or how it is biased.

    It says they identified several neighborhood and workplace types that could be segregated strictly from the TIGER and Census data. This sounds like numerical distinctions, not highly susceptible to bias.

    Then it says these neighborhood types generated consistent commuting distances. And that accessibility does not explain all of the commuting habits.

    EMR or Anonymous might not like that. He might not like the data, or the people that wrote it. He might impugn their integrity with supposed biases or even monetary gain. All he has to do is presnt some different facts, if he has them.

    Let’s see what anonymous said:

    He said I am hitting rock bottom because I quoted a source that he says is home of Business As Usual.

    Even if that is true, it is insufficient evidence that I have somehow hit rock bottom.

    Then he says there is some truth to my quote because USC (and others) keep citizens in the dark about vocabulary.

    First, this is wrong because anonymous offers no evidence that USC works to keep me or anyone else in the dark. USC controls no ones freedom to seek information, so far as I know.

    Second, it is wrong because my quote concerns only the school of transportation at USC. Anonymous has dragged in Enterprises (unknown) and Main Stream Media (Also unknown) into this arguement gratuitously, just to muddy the water.

    He has not added anything useful to the conversation. Actually, he should be happy that the answer to the qestion posed in the article is “Yes, neighborhoods do matter.”, but he would rather launch a personal attack on me for bringing it up.

    Just because the way they matter might not correspond with his vision.

    ————————-

    The only thing in the quote that I think EMR would take issue with is the idea that access isn’t the sole reason people travel.

    As far as I was concerned that was the whole point of the quote. To point out that people do travel for other reasons than what is efficient or where is the closest Chinese food.

    EMR and Anonymous ought to be able to debate that point without calling me a reprobate, or taking on all of USC, MSM, and Any Other Enterprise, and acting as if we were somehow in secret collusion against the common man.

    RH

    Log in to Reply