Great American Small Towns
Feb. 25th, 2009 09:10 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
At the doctor’s office yesterday, I picked up a copy of Ideal Living magazine and started flipping through. A couple of headlines had caught my eye: Great Walkable Cities and American Small Towns. Wow! Was this a magazine that actually got it? After a little research later, I learned that it was a magazine for “the second half of life.” Great! Living in a walkable community means that seniors still have the freedom of mobility even after they stop driving.
Turned out that the walkable cities article was aimed solely at vacationers, not at people looking for a place to live. The article did stress the health benefits of walking, but mostly of strapping on your sneakers and going out for exercise, nothing about the natural amount of movement you would get simply by being in a diverse and vibrant urban environment. Not bad, but not what I was hoping. Next article?
The highlighted blurb pointed out that people have been more interested in Main Street lately, since all of the Main Street/Wall Street discussion last fall. Funny they should say that. :-) In any case, it was a nice article about the virtues of many southern “small towns”, including places like Charlottesville, VA, for example. These weren’t small towns in the sense of everybody knowing everybody, but more accurately small cities that had good downtowns and established neighborhoods, cafes, good civic life, public events, markets, etc.
I did notice the ads. The ads on the facing page were for high-end developments somewhat proximate to these small towns. “Estate-sized” lots, golf course, every home comes with a standard spa, “you don’t need a horse to enjoy blah blah blah acres”, gated community, HUGE new homes. These ads had nothing to do with living in a small town.
And then came the end of the article. For each town, they had a list of communities that you would want to live in, that offered “Amenity Living”. Now, since this was a magazine for seniors, I can imagine that it might mean communities geared towards seniors, but combined with the ads, it struck me that amenity meant things more like gated neighborhoods and a spa in every house*. And really, does a place like Charlottesville have six or eight senior communities in the nearby area?
In other words, “Come! Visit our small town, which is nice enough to drive into and go antiquing, but you’d really want to live someplace else.”
Doesn’t that just destroy the whole point? Isn’t one of the grand things about a vibrant town, that you have everything that you need right there? Within walking distance? Is nobody willing to live in a mixed community anymore? No, let’s move all of the rich seniors out of town, where they can’t walk to anything that they need, and are stuck when they lose the ability to drive safely. Instead of a corner store or deli or bakery where people of all ages and income levels can have casual contact on a regular basis, these communities have unused clubhouses and senior centers that just don’t fulfill that basic need.
Don’t get me wrong – I’m all for people choosing where they live. If they want to live on a golf course, that’s fine. If they want a community where you can have a horse, great. But it seems to me that the only communities that we value anymore are these sorts of places. Why isn’t this magazine extolling the virtues of actually living within these small towns? Don’t they recognize it?
As a somewhat related aside, I’ve been reading The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs. Thanks to some of you for the recommendation. I’m not that far in – I tend to only get through a few pages each day while drying my hair, but it’s fascinating. I find myself wondering about the places she’s referring to. The book was written in the 60s, and while it’s somewhat dated, many of her points are timeless.
The current chapter discusses the sidewalk life of a diverse city neighborhood. She makes an interesting point that living in a city neighborhood with a lively sidewalk environment actually affords people *more* privacy than living in a suburban neighborhood. Simply put, you can have frequent, but casual contact with many people, without having to get close to anybody that you don’t choose. When there is an active public sphere, you can have acquaintances, human contact, yet not have to invite anybody into your private space, physically or metaphorically, if they’re not people that you actually want to get closer to. This makes perfect sense to me. Even when we had neighbors, we never saw them or spoke to them, because we had very little opportunity for casual contact. If we’d wanted to have any contact, it would have involved entering into their private space, or inviting them into ours.
It would be nice if we, as a society, valued real towns as a place to actually live and work, instead of just a place to visit on the weekend. A street lined with antique shops filled only on the weekends is just a shell of the real community that it should be.
*Never mind, to Ideal Living, an “Amenity Community” has nothing to do with senior-specific facilities: “If you are searching for your ideal home in your ideal destination, look no further. Master-planned communities changed the housing market when they began to be developed more than 50 years ago. The most popular and desirable new homes today are being built within master-planned communities. Tour top amenity communities in the Southeast and Southwest in the following pages. Whatever your desire, you’re sure to find it here.”
These include: “Resort like amenities include tennis, swimming, walking trails, health club, clubhouse and a playground.” Or “full-service marina, on-site restaurant, private helipad”. And most especially, they all have golf. Nothing wrong with golf, but why is it so much more important than everything else? Oy.
Turned out that the walkable cities article was aimed solely at vacationers, not at people looking for a place to live. The article did stress the health benefits of walking, but mostly of strapping on your sneakers and going out for exercise, nothing about the natural amount of movement you would get simply by being in a diverse and vibrant urban environment. Not bad, but not what I was hoping. Next article?
The highlighted blurb pointed out that people have been more interested in Main Street lately, since all of the Main Street/Wall Street discussion last fall. Funny they should say that. :-) In any case, it was a nice article about the virtues of many southern “small towns”, including places like Charlottesville, VA, for example. These weren’t small towns in the sense of everybody knowing everybody, but more accurately small cities that had good downtowns and established neighborhoods, cafes, good civic life, public events, markets, etc.
I did notice the ads. The ads on the facing page were for high-end developments somewhat proximate to these small towns. “Estate-sized” lots, golf course, every home comes with a standard spa, “you don’t need a horse to enjoy blah blah blah acres”, gated community, HUGE new homes. These ads had nothing to do with living in a small town.
And then came the end of the article. For each town, they had a list of communities that you would want to live in, that offered “Amenity Living”. Now, since this was a magazine for seniors, I can imagine that it might mean communities geared towards seniors, but combined with the ads, it struck me that amenity meant things more like gated neighborhoods and a spa in every house*. And really, does a place like Charlottesville have six or eight senior communities in the nearby area?
In other words, “Come! Visit our small town, which is nice enough to drive into and go antiquing, but you’d really want to live someplace else.”
Doesn’t that just destroy the whole point? Isn’t one of the grand things about a vibrant town, that you have everything that you need right there? Within walking distance? Is nobody willing to live in a mixed community anymore? No, let’s move all of the rich seniors out of town, where they can’t walk to anything that they need, and are stuck when they lose the ability to drive safely. Instead of a corner store or deli or bakery where people of all ages and income levels can have casual contact on a regular basis, these communities have unused clubhouses and senior centers that just don’t fulfill that basic need.
Don’t get me wrong – I’m all for people choosing where they live. If they want to live on a golf course, that’s fine. If they want a community where you can have a horse, great. But it seems to me that the only communities that we value anymore are these sorts of places. Why isn’t this magazine extolling the virtues of actually living within these small towns? Don’t they recognize it?
As a somewhat related aside, I’ve been reading The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs. Thanks to some of you for the recommendation. I’m not that far in – I tend to only get through a few pages each day while drying my hair, but it’s fascinating. I find myself wondering about the places she’s referring to. The book was written in the 60s, and while it’s somewhat dated, many of her points are timeless.
The current chapter discusses the sidewalk life of a diverse city neighborhood. She makes an interesting point that living in a city neighborhood with a lively sidewalk environment actually affords people *more* privacy than living in a suburban neighborhood. Simply put, you can have frequent, but casual contact with many people, without having to get close to anybody that you don’t choose. When there is an active public sphere, you can have acquaintances, human contact, yet not have to invite anybody into your private space, physically or metaphorically, if they’re not people that you actually want to get closer to. This makes perfect sense to me. Even when we had neighbors, we never saw them or spoke to them, because we had very little opportunity for casual contact. If we’d wanted to have any contact, it would have involved entering into their private space, or inviting them into ours.
It would be nice if we, as a society, valued real towns as a place to actually live and work, instead of just a place to visit on the weekend. A street lined with antique shops filled only on the weekends is just a shell of the real community that it should be.
*Never mind, to Ideal Living, an “Amenity Community” has nothing to do with senior-specific facilities: “If you are searching for your ideal home in your ideal destination, look no further. Master-planned communities changed the housing market when they began to be developed more than 50 years ago. The most popular and desirable new homes today are being built within master-planned communities. Tour top amenity communities in the Southeast and Southwest in the following pages. Whatever your desire, you’re sure to find it here.”
These include: “Resort like amenities include tennis, swimming, walking trails, health club, clubhouse and a playground.” Or “full-service marina, on-site restaurant, private helipad”. And most especially, they all have golf. Nothing wrong with golf, but why is it so much more important than everything else? Oy.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 02:39 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 03:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:Just a guess...
Date: 2009-02-25 03:00 pm (UTC)Because if you play golf, then you go there every day? You can cook at home, have a home gym, shop only a few times a month, etc...
Re: Just a guess...
Date: 2009-02-25 03:40 pm (UTC)Why don't we shop every day? Why don't we buy fresh bread or decent fruits and veggies in a market every day? What is the purpose of isolating yourself from anybody who doesn't have the same socio economic status as yourself? Why does our every need have to be met within our individual homes, instead of in public spaces? Why should we all have to have home gyms, restaurant quality kitchens, spas, big yards so we never have to see each other? Where is the public space? Why is the public space so ugly, making it *necessary* to have such an extensive private space?
These are big questions, necessitating a long, subtle, and varied discussion, not something I can address well in a short comment. Certainly, I can't, nor would want to, fault anybody for living where they want. But it seems to me that society only values one way, and not the other.
Re: Just a guess...
From:Re: Just a guess...
From:Re: Just a guess...
From:Re: Just a guess...
From:Re: Just a guess...
From:Re: Just a guess...
From:Re: Just a guess...
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 03:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 11:41 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 03:27 pm (UTC)Your post really mirrors my frustration in finding what I want as we age. I really don't think that the developers get what people want...and I think the people themselves have not thought it through. Playing golf may seem like fun when you are sitting in the office imagining what you would do, but I'm finding that if you didn't do something before you retire, you probably aren't going to afterwards, either.
I have never golfed. Why do they think I want that now? Really, what percentage of the population golfs? A lot of golf courses won't even LET you walk, so where is the health benefit? Where are old hippies going to go when they age if everyone thinks they are building old folks homes for the Eisenhowers? Why are they piping in big band jazz for people who listened to the Doors all their lives? Not everyone can move to Asheville, you know?
I don't want to live in a senior community. The last thing I want is to have no one to talk to who is not broken, dying or boring as all hell. I want to be part of a real community with kids, young adults, the woiks. Don't cordon me off to wait for my inevitable decline, thank you very much. Yes, having appropriate services is good, but why can't a dentist see me and a 12 year old in the same day?
I WOULD like a spa bathroom, but why are they also giving me giant houses on multiple floors with multiple bedrooms and baths and walk in closets for all the teenagers who moved out long ago? A lot of people my age are trying desperately to sell their big houses because they don't want those kids moving back in with them when they get divorced or laid off!
I don't want a kitchen that I could prepare food for an army in? 99% of the time it's just the two of us. I WOULD like someone to think about the ergonomics of cooking when you have arthritis and other limitations. My idea about cabinets and counters changed a lot in the last few years.
I want luxury on a small scale and that does not seem to exist. You either get an 'estate' or you get a starter home for breeders. I don't want to maintain the estate and heat it and clean it! Nor do I want the lack of amenities in a starter home.
I would like to have a guest suite were I could TURN OFF all the heating and water and shut the door on it. So it is not a drag on my budget when no one is visiting.
I would love to be able to walk to a little village with grocery, butcher, pub, dry cleaner, etc. as you can do in Europe. Farmers market on Wednesday and Saturday morning, antiques on sunday afternoon. Not the suburbs where everything is a long drive away and parking and nobody knows anyone.
I've pretty much decided that I will have to build what I want.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 03:46 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 04:43 pm (UTC)Ditto...
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 03:30 pm (UTC)Also, smooth, uncarpeted, low maintenance, easy to clean flooring. Old people can't get up and down on the floor.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 04:02 pm (UTC)What the developers NEED is to hire architects with training in geriatric and disability issues, and not simply install spec. housing wherein the designer has not taken the changing needs of an individual as he/she ages or becomes less able-bodied into account.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 03:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 03:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 07:51 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 05:03 pm (UTC)Craft and wood shop area would either be in a day light basement or his and hers outbuildings.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 11:59 pm (UTC)In my parents' old house, the master suite was on the main floor, and once we moved out, they had no reason to go upstairs on a regular basis. They were able to leave it essentially unheated, except for what rose from the first floor.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 05:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 06:06 pm (UTC)I'm sure that the being in everyone's business will happen with our street, but the house is only 6 months old so far and some are still being built...
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 07:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 06:02 pm (UTC)Thus far, we have been quite happy with the education Luke is getting in his urban kindergarten. His class is evenly split black/white with a smattering of other ethnicities, and he's learning to read--in kindergarten. Yet to hear some people talk, you'd think urban schools were hell on earth. We get lots of unsolicited advice about private schools from all kinds of people.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 06:41 pm (UTC)True--although if one is weighing the balance between Cost of Living and Quality of Life, it might turn out to make more sense to buy in an urban area and send one's offspring to private school. And in my [urban residential] neighborhood, there are families who do just that. (It is worth noting, however, that the families sending their kids to yeshiva probably wouldn't consider a secular public school no matter how highly-ranked).
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-26 12:05 am (UTC)We've been looking at the public schools around here, admittedly rural, not urban. It's not the quality of education that's a problem, but the other logistical issues! I just posted much more about that... But there's one reason that the private Christian schools in this area don't appeal to me - there's a complete and total lack of diversity. And considering that some of them ban certain popular ethnic hairstyles, among other things about this area, I wouldn't be surprised that there's a big element of racism behind it.
I'm utterly fascinated by your neighborhood, and I always enjoy your perspective in these discussions!
(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 07:19 pm (UTC)as i look for houses, i try to find something like that. all i'm finding is huge cookie cutter houses on decent lots (but the house takes up all the room) or tiny houses on tiny lots. it seems as there is no in-between here....
i wish i could move back north....
(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 10:16 pm (UTC)Lots of new housing in suburbs went to higher density lots in the 1980's and 1990's. More house per lot = more money for developers and more property to tax for the county. In recent years, however, highly populated counties such as Fairfax have changed their regs. to slow down the growth a bit. They finally figured out that a higher population = more strain on services and utilites. Hve you considered an older (i.e. 1970's or earlier) single family home?
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-25 08:06 pm (UTC)God, I miss that place.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-02-26 12:11 am (UTC)