Home » Suburban Sprawl »Urban Renewal » Currently Reading:

Community or Die!

July 15, 2009 Suburban Sprawl, Urban Renewal 88 Comments

The key to inner-city rejuvenation is the establishment and invigoration of communities. Without coherent social structures empowering, educating, and energizing individuals cities tend to fall apart. The worst aspects of modern infrastructure planning involve the isolation, division, and starvation of communities. The resulting individual atomization ends in isolation and dehumanization.

Humans need communities, they need them just as much as they need families and friends. How else do they come by these? Per chance? From the masses of strangers that surround us we select our friends, our lovers, our mates. From thence we find love, happiness, and identity. Without that, what are we? The struggle for community is a struggle for the bonds which hold all of us together. It is the basic unit upon which our country is built on. Even the family wouldn’t exist without a community to support and encourage mate selection, and what family could do without the vast educational and social support of the greater society?

Suburbia is perhaps the most horrific example of dehumanization through the lack of community. The obvious Lack of intellectually-stimulating diversity is not the most damaging consequence of moderate-density life. Suburban Americans suffer from relative detachment from the rest of the population. The immediate population! It is not unusual for someone in O’Fallon to have no idea who their neighbors are. From five houses down to next door. Television, fences, the internet, motor vehicles, and corporate malls have allowed people a relative mental detachment from everyone else.

This is far from the “good ‘ole days” complaints of our grandparents. The isolated existence of suburbanites results in sociological catastrophes. Many of our socio-economic problems arise directly from the collective choices of millions to live in a most abnormal manner. Global Warming, cultural depreciation, educational lagging, Wal-Mart, Garth Brooks, Republicans; the most daunting problems of the 21st century find their root in freshly trimmed, identical lawns.

Great men and women, great ideas, great projects; these all rise from the cities and dense villages of the world. From communities.  If we are to generate those geniuses and a culture to rally behind them we must regroup and recommit to each other on a local level.

To put it plainly, every suburban sprawl zone must be evacuated and leveled. For the sake of our people, for ourselves individually, and for the future of our country. This is not necessarily an extreme program, people must voluntarily leave their yard gnomes and three car garages behind. There must be a grand national campaign to bring the people back to the cities and town centers, leaving the razed ground to return to nature. Our cities and towns must develop in a humane and socially-oriented manner. Our cities must be welcoming places; places of peace, prosperity, ingenuity, art, and diversity. The best of the Urban must be magnified and the worst must be diminished to negligible proportions. Crime, poverty, educational atrophy, and prejudice need to go the way of the dinosaur.

What have we to lose? Should we allow catastrophe to occur? Most importantly, do we have hope and faith that such important and integral policies can be implemented successfully?

In future installments I will identify what the former suburbanites will return to, current examples of strong communities and community centers. Additionally, methods and tactics for community-building will be enumerated and left to public debate. By working together we can create an Urbia attractive and enticing to the lonely denizens of the counties. Your lowly idealist (myself) will strive to present alternatives and methods for establishing them.

This will be a series much like what Brick By Brick will become.

– Angelo Stege

 

Currently there are "88 comments" on this Article:

  1. Bill says:

    I’m not completely disagreeing, but…do you even have any kids?

     
  2. anon says:

    Bill, what in the world are you implying?

     
  3. john says:

    Properly addressing these problems requires efficient and effective governance. In older urban environments it means upgrading what is in place but to suburbanites it means starting anew. Both Les and Steve have pinpointed obvious problems and explains why the area continues to fall behind. Honesty, goodwill and sincerity are needed but what do we have here?
    – –
    As Les Sterman explains in a PD interview: “Illinois officials are really good about pulling together on big projects. That’s something I like about them, something you don’t see in Missouri. I think the political environment, the way people act toward one another, is different. Honestly, one of the reasons I took this job is because I like working with elected officials in Illinois. They’ve been wonderful to me. They’ve been honest and straightforward in ways I don’t see everywhere.”
    – –
    As Steve has explained: “So the local bike community is… dependent upon on money from the big box and afraid to do anything about it. It really is sad that an organization that purports to improve the region for bicyclists is afraid to speak out against a company that is arguably one of the worst offenders in the St. Louis region. Credibility goes in the trash once you’ve been bought.”

     
  4. Name (required) says:

    Please provide the contact for your drug dealer… those must be some REALLY GOOD drugs.

    I like my isolation and I live in the City. There are a lot of people out there exactly like me: I don’t like strangers, sorry if that bothers you–it really shouldn’t as it’s MY LIFE, NOT YOURS!

    Pssst…

    “…the internet… have allowed people a relative mental detachment from everyone else.”

    You wrote this article for the internet.

     
  5. TimB says:

    This post was a little over the top. Evacuate and level suburbia? Lack of intellectually stimulating diversity?

    I for one prefer an urban setting…. but seriously, to each his own.

     
  6. St. Louis Neighbor says:

    The past few comments are missing the point.

    to John, government does not build community, neighbors do. Places noted for progressive government policies (western states especially), have nowhere near the sense of community of St. Louis.

    to Name (required), people can choose to be isolated from their neighbors, but this post isn’t addressed to you. You choose a lifestyle apart from your neighbors. Too bad. This post is about building community. Write your own post about how great it is to be isolated in your house. Steve is looking for contributors. Go for it!

    to Tim B, over the top, maybe, but using dramatic examples is a good way to illustrate a point and stimulate discussion. The discussion is about building community and I agree with Angelo.

    By building community, we improve educational outcomes, we reduce crime, we beautify neighborhoods and we become better people. Neighborhoods that need the most help would be well served by building up their human capital first. Without committed neighbors, none of the rest of things happen.

     
  7. Jane says:

    I agree with Bill. I live in the suburbs, and my husband and I would LOVE to move to the city. We even look for houses and have even toured a few. We are completely serious about it and dream of moving to the West End, but we have kids. And until the schools improve, we can not risk it. I know there are magnets, but that is not a guarantee and we can’t risk our kids education. We both are huge supporters of public schools. But at what cost to our kids is our dream?

    I am very interested to see what the author has to say about education. Although the article was a bit strong, I do not disagree!

     
  8. St. Louis Neighbor says:

    Sorry Jane to hear of your plight. We parents in the city have two options. Public/charter or private/parochial. Lots pay for private/parochial. It costs alot, but we gain in being part of the community. We can afford it because we only have one child.

    Let’s not turn this thread into a debate about the public school system. Given, it works for some, not others. The other thing is, let’s not turn this into a debate about the city, because almost 90% of our region lives outside the city limits.

    Jane, why don’t you talk about the sense of community where you live now, how it works and doesn’t work. Maybe after considering the pros and cons, you might want to move somewhere more supportive of “community”.

    Granted a good education is key to future success. But so is growing up socialized by neighbors with good values of community. If your kid gets good grades at a suburban school, then sits at home the rest of the day playing video games or watching television, that’s not so good. They get fat and anti-social. They may get into a good college, but they’re also boring and unattractive.

     
  9. john says:

    Oh I see now StL Neighbor, government has nothing to do with school districts, streets, sanitation, law enforcement, zoning, ordinances defining neighborhood associations, etc…. all critical to community. I wonder then where all my real estate, personal property and sale taxes are going, can you explain? “Government does not build community, neighbors do” and I suppose your neighbors don’t vote?

     
  10. Community IS what you make of it. I am part of several communities, some neighborhood or city-based, and some not. I agree with the idea that “suburbia” has, more often than not, been poorly planned and even more poorly zoned:

    * Houses disconnected from the neighborhood;
    * Residential neighborhoods disconnected from stores, businesses, and workplaces; and
    * Transportation/movement/access infrastructure that has been designed exclusively for the comfort of automobiles.

    All true. However, first for some that’s actually where they want to be, and in a market-based economy that option should be available -the rest of us shouldn’t be subsidizing it, that’s all. Too often our state and federal transportation departments are focused on building new in response to sprawl.

    One of the most surprising effects of a street re-paving or sidewalk improvement project is the rehab spin-off it can have in a neighborhood, especially a mixed-use business/residential area like many of our historic neighborhoods. If the basic human assets are still there (business owners and/or residents that have a stake in the neighborhood), a repaving or infrastructure improvement project can be a signal that the municipality is investing in the future of the area, and they should too!

    For example, a small repaving/sidewalk project in my hometown ten years ago resulted in a cascading series of business investments and home repainting projects along the route. The effect is still evident today in a more vibrant neighborhood and business district.

    We need to push our elected representatives to invest our transportation dollars in our urban infrastructure. Nothing will do more to signal that our urban neighborhoods are a better option than the hinterlands for those looking to move into our communities.

     
  11. St. Louis Neighbor says:

    “Building Place” makes a good point of the role of government in providing a safe and sound infrastructure. On the other hand, some people place way too much faith/emphasis on the role of government. John for example. Government has no role in the formation of neighborhood associations. Neighbors do.

    Of course government is stupid if it does not support the efforts of neighbors working together, but that is hardly the case in St. Louis. City government is one of the community’s biggest supporters. Want to hold a neighborhood meeting? City department heads and elected officials sometime outnumber neighborhood residents in attendance.

     
  12. ME says:

    This article is terrible. I prefer Steve-posts only if this is what we’re going to be subjected to.

    Republicans and Garth Brooks? Come on man. Are you trying to put off every single reader?

     
  13. W Kruse says:

    I, for one, am not a big fan of living in the suburbs. I choose not to. However, this post isn’t quite accurate on all fronts. I do have some family who live in St. Peters, and they and their neighbors are all quite friendly. They go over to each other’s homes, and watch each other’s kids. They are quite a “community”, if you ask me.
    One the subject of schools. I recently moved from Soulard to Dogtown, and have neighbors that send their kids to private school, and to public school. They live next door to one another, and other than the amount of money being spent on the schooling, I can not tell an immediate difference in the way the children act, speak or interact with their neighbors and friends. While I can’t say that this would be true of every household, this SL public school child seems to be doing quite well, and is getting the benefit of a much more diverse set of classmates.

     
  14. cole says:

    Republicans? how can you blame republicans for this, that is an absurd argument?
    Garth Brooks? not a fan of his music or his actions, though I would say he is most likely a staunch supporter of communities

    “Great men and women, great ideas, great projects; these all rise from the cities and dense villages of the world.” HUH?
    My closest neighbor lives 1/4 of a mile away, I have seen some great ideas, some noble projects, and many outstanding men, women and children. Some of us idiots have a community garden, great dinners with each other, and grand parties. These people are a beautiful and diverse mixture of artists, farmers, blue collar workers, executives et cetera. If prejudice must go the way of the dinosaur, then go on my friend.

    The first two sentences of your argument make perfect sense, though the rest of this piece is completely off base.

    Communities, as you define them, exist all over the world. They exist in dense urban areas, rural areas (in which my own community is included), and yes, they also exist in suburbia. Suburban sprawl is often done wrong, though your assumption of them being absent of community is plain wrong.

    You do not succeed by demonizing your enemy. You fight for your cause.

    I leave you with a beautiful quote by Kurt Vonnegut

    What should young people do with their lives today? Many things, obviously. But the most daring thing is to create stable communities in which the terrible disease of loneliness can be cured.

     
  15. St. Louis Neighbor says:

    It’s funny how so little of this thread talks about the hows and why of building community, while so much more is about defending one’s own corner of the world. Angelo posited a notion about building community, and most of the thread is sounding defensive. Angelo, here’s a question for you….

    You’re a Cherokee person, correct? So that’s smack dab in the middle of the Dutchtown/Gravois Park world. What can you tell us about community building projects there (not counting the stuff on Cherokee). Let’s focus on the residential blocks abutting the commercial district.

    For example, does anyone there organize block parties? I’ve never heard about it. What else is going on? Neighborhood watch? Community gardens? Tool sharing? Help to seniors? Is most of it being done through the Dutchtown South Community Corporation?

    If so, getting back to “John’s” point, DSCC is indeed funded by the city of St. Louis, however, if not for the volunteer efforts of its board of directors, the organization would not exist. Those St. Louis neighbors made the organization happen, the city supports them.

    A few years back, there was the whole “Imagine Virginia” effort, and the work to block the Our Lady’s Inn from tearing down the Virginia Mansion. What about more ongoing little stuff? There needs to be constant effort by neighbors working in the positive direction.

    One nice thing about living in the suburbs, since most folks have decent jobs and take care of their own yard fairly well, things seem easier to maintain, at least in terms of appearance.

     
  16. bridgett says:

    So hard to read humor into faceless internet postings. Ah well.

    Jane: I live on a block of 26 children under the age of 12. A few attend magnet schools or charters; the rest go to private/parochial. What’s your property tax? I’ve found many suburban dwellers don’t realize the difference between their tax and mine is about the cost of parochial school (your mileage may vary of course).

    I live on an awesome block filled with people who care about each other and where they live. I grew up in suburbia all over the country. This was simply not true there. Well manicured lawns aside.

    We built community by meeting each other. We do have block parties; we vacation together and camp in the summertime. I know we have something a bit out of the ordinary, but it came out of our own hands. We did this. Tower Grove East NEighborhood Association didn’t do this; city government didn’t do this. Our alderman shoooor didn’t do this.

    I don’t think everyone should abandon their homes and move to the city. I just think…they should pay the real cost for living there. And if they are unhappy, they should consider their location as perhaps part of the reason why.

     
  17. St. Louis Neighbor says:

    Well, there’s one person who gets it!

     
  18. I will not shop at Wal-Mart, but I think that the problems with Wal-Mart have less to do with suburbanization and more to do with the problems of the larger consumer economy. We have lots of consumers with less disposable income than their parents because they have service-sector jobs and their parents had factory jobs.

    I know many city residents who shop at Wal-Mart and would love it if Wal-Mart opened up in the city. There are Chicago aldermen who have fought to get a Wal-Mart built on the West Side, and that store is doing very well with an urban shopping base.

    Also: Fundamentally, what is the difference between Wal-Mart and Ikea other than personal taste?

     
  19. Adam says:

    to each their own, to an extent. considering that the world-population is not exactly dwindling, having children is not a selfless act. children generally result from lack of responsibility or a desire for self-fulfillment. if anyone were to tell me they had children as a gift to the world i’d have to laugh. thus, using children as an excuse to continue a trend that wastes enourmous amounts of resources is, IMO, attempting to rationalize a selfish decision. once all the farmland is paved for shiny new houses (while the old ones are neglected, of course) bad schools will be the least of our worries. pavement doesn’t revert back to farmland overnight.

     
  20. St. Louis neighbor says:

    “children generally result from lack of responsibility or a desire for self-fulfillment.” Whoa! This thread sure has brought out the loons! Adam, get a grip. Having children is the most selfless act of sacrifice a person can do.

    Having no children is a choice for sure, but if anything, it’s the more selfish choice. More money for me. More freedom for me. More vacations and fancy cars for me. More parties for me. Who cares who sustains the community after I’m gone? Not me. It’s all about me, me, me! That’s all that matters. Sheesh. How pathetic and sad.

     
  21. Name (required) says:

    neighbor,

    This is a public blog and, considering that I’m a member of the public, it is addressed to me in the same way it is addressed to you. Now, if Steve would like to make a required log-in for this site, then the blog would be addressed to the members only. I choose to ignore most of my neighbors due to the South City neighborhood that I live in. The majority of the population in St. Louis City is black (1) and my neighborhood is no exception. They would be classified as the n-word before they would be classified as black, if you catch my drift.

    Let the populous live their lives. I’ll never be able to figure out why people are so concerned about what others do/don’t do. Condoning leveling the outlying communities to promote “city life” is one of the most asinine things that I’ve ever heard. Campaigning to curb smoking in establishments is almost as lame.

    Did someone piss in your Cheerios this morning? Just what I want to do, go across the street and ask the neighbor how many bags of crack he sold the night before. Or maybe I should go help the kids shoot off illegal fireworks after the Fourth of July. Kind of hard to promote an orderly and friendly neighborhood when some of them ought to be either in jail or at least in North City somewhere.

    (1) “As of the census of 2000 … The racial makeup of the city of St. Louis (as separate and distinct from St. Louis County and the rest of the MSA) was 51.20% African American, 43.85% White, 1.98% Asian, 0.27% Native American, 0.03% Pacific Islander, 0.80% from other ethnic groups, and 1.88% of two or more ethnicities.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Louis,_Missouri#Demographics

     
  22. Fenian says:

    I have been a long time reader, but I after never felt compelled to post before.

    I do agree with some of the author’s sentiments. However, the post as a whole loses its message with the unnecessary generalizations and specious logic. Perhaps the Republicans reference was tongue-in-cheek, but before we forget, urban decay has happened under Democratic watch in our City, as in most other urban areas. I do not mean to politicize his thread, but I take umbrage at the generalizations in this post. As a conservative non-profit worker, I am trying to break the mold, you know?

    I live in Webster Groves. I love it. I can walk to the grocery store, to numerous restaurants and I know all of my neighbors. I did look at Lindenwood Park and St. Louis Hills, but made the choice based upon schools and local services. I personally waited 20 minutes for the police in the City when I was being threatened. That is unheard of in my community.

    Angelo may not be referring to all suburbs, but specifically the sprawl that exists outside of 270. I am not a fan either. However, much of the his post was way off base and not conducive to the cause of Urban renewal.

     
  23. St. Louis neighbor says:

    What great discussion. No, “name required”, no one “pissed” in my cheerios this morning. But thanks for your concern! From the way you describe things, maybe you’d be happier moving to North City? Most areas there are quieter than what you’re describing.

    Terms I detest? “Urban pioneers” and “urban renewal”. Suburban labels at their finest!

    The city majority black? I’m hearing that’s changing – and fast. Some predict majority white in the next census and trends continuing in that direction (growing white and declining black percentages in the city).

    White flight was the story of St. Louis in the 60s-80s. Black flight is the story of the 90s and the 2000s.

    Oh, and Angelo, where art thou? All this discussion stemming from your post. Let’s hear some feedback from the original poster! You’ve got lots of ‘splaining to do!

     
  24. Adam says:

    St. Louis Neighbor,

    “Having children is the most selfless act of sacrifice a person can do.”

    so people have children because they long for sacrifice? sorry, i don’t buy it. anyway, why couldn’t i make the same type of sacrifice by adopting one of the many children in need of a loving home rather than creating more? seems the more selfless route to me.

    “Having no children is a choice for sure, but if anything, it’s the more selfish choice. More money for me. More freedom for me. More vacations and fancy cars for me.”

    it’s only more selfish if i actually DO all those things you mentioned (but less selfish than if i HAVE children AND do all those things). what if i DON’T make lots of money, take fancy vacations, and buy fancy cars? it’s actually more selfish to bring mouths into the world without considering how providing for those mouths will effect others around you.

    “Who cares who sustains the community after I’m gone?”

    i don’t know, maybe one of the other 7 billion people on the planet could sustain the community after you’re gone? please. there’s no shortage of people, and the population just keeps growing!

    what’s pathetic is your suggestion that having children is sacrosanct and outside the realm of discussion. are you religious by any chance?

     
  25. Adam says:

    “The city majority black? I’m hearing that’s changing – and fast.”

    please elaborate. sources?

     
  26. St. Louis neighbor says:

    You don’t have to biologically bring children into the world, to have a child. Your idea of adoption is a great one! Then you still “have a child” and make the same sacrifice. Religion has nothing to do with it. The sacrifice comes in the form of financial, personal time, individual freedom, responsibility, and it lasts for life.

    Let’s see what comes out in the 2010 census in terms of population trends. Look for a higher percentage black in St. Louis County, and a lower percentage black in St. Louis City.

     
  27. miranda says:

    What an insane rant. What makes it really insane is that some small bit of logic and information is used. Then…SPLASH – off the deep end. If this is what’s going to written here, I’ll stop reading.

     
  28. Adam says:

    by the way, St. Louis Neighbor, i don’t disagree with your other posts. however, calling me a “loon” for questioning peoples motives is not a reasonable response. i realize i’m a little off topic from the “community building” theme (as are most of the other comments) but i’m tired of the “children = just have to move to the suburbs” argument. mass exodus from a community destroys the community.

     
  29. St. Louis neighbor says:

    Well Adam, we certainly agree on your observations about having kids means moving out of the city. That is absurd, excuse making.

    It’s like the person who says “I’ll move to the city as soon as they fix the schools”. When I hear that I’m thinking…”Next!”

    It’s their way of sounding “progressive” and “urbane” when in fact having absolutely no intent whatsoever on moving to the city limits. Yawwwn. Heard that a million times before. Next!

     
  30. Adam says:

    i thougt it was clear, but let me clarify: by “have” children i meant to create new children.

    also, i agree that all of those sacrifices are involved in raising children, but you are not acknowledging the emotional and social benefits. if children were all sacrifice and no reward nobody would have children, except by accident. you would have to PAY people to have children just to keep the species from dying out.

     
  31. Adam says:

    ok sorry i’m done. i was still typing when you posted your last response.

     
  32. Angelo says:

    Hello everyone. I apologize for not getting here sooner. I’ve had a terrible ear infection….and I didn’t expect such a huge response within hours of the post being made public.

    I will try to craft some responses to comments and questions as soon as I get some food and medicine in me.

     
  33. Fenian says:

    Angelo-

    Hope you feel better. Ear infections are miserable.

    On a side note, the misplaced words in my previous post are terrible. Oh well.

     
  34. G-Man says:

    I agree with some of the ideas in this post, but the rest comes off like self-parody.

     
  35. Dennis says:

    Everybody should please consider the fact that sprawl here is worse than most cities. There is still plenty of open land space just outside the limits of the old city. So even if you don’t move all the way back into the city you could help end the sprawl.

     
  36. Angelo says:

    Okay, let’s see here:

    As many are well-aware, this post was chock full of humor. The basic ideas espoused, however, I do stand behind with all seriousness.

    I will make a few distinctions rather quickly: The term “suburb” has many contextual meanings given the time period and location. The South City neighborhood I live in is technically a “suburb”, but is part of the inner-city fabric.

    Outlying towns, such as downtown Saint Charles, are not considered suburbs. However, the surrounding strip mall and sprawling residential, single-family developments most certainly are (and they have an extremely negative impact on the properly planned town center…canceling out its benefits).

    Suburban sprawl and suburban sprawl culture are specifically targeted. I say with all seriousness that I do believe these sorts of developments should be abandoned or completely reconfigured (abandonment would be far less costly and more easily accomplished). Additionally, given the unusually inefficient and economically doomed nature of suburban sprawl, I feel it will be necessary to do this no matter what. Either consumers will be compelled by their financial situation to do so or we will create a policy that will convince them.

    To the conservatives who are offended by my post: you’ll have to understand that people disagree with you and will utilize humor and arguments against your ideology. I’m a leftist, and I watch Comedy Central programming (online) daily. That will be reflected in my personality and statements. Take it in stride and good humor.

    There is also a serious background to my post:

    Isolation in suburban environments had a personal and problematic impact on me growing up. I grew up in Saint Charles and O’Fallon, and suffered considerable isolation and harassment. Being a homosexual is tough in non-diverse environments….(and being a nerdy homosexual is even worse)….I was on the receiving-end of abuse, death threats, and violence. I dealt with this and the lack of a community to identify with through college (I went to college in Saint Charles)…..and it wasn’t until moving to Saint Louis that I really felt comfortable in my neighborhood. It is hard to deal with prejudice when you don’t have anywhere or anyone to turn to.

    While I am having a hard time finding county-level data on suicide, it seems apparent that the denser a state’s population is, the lower the suicide RATE:

    http://www.suicidology.org/web/guest/stats-and-tools/statistics

    The further people are spread out from each other, including rural spreading, the more likely they are to kill themselves. Interesting, non?

    If you are a white, middle-class, straight male who’s pretty much like everyone else you probably won’t feel as isolated in suburbia. (Even if you actually are). Minority groups and unusual personality types feel the effects worse than others. In a city you can have thousands of people to identify with, in the suburbs, unless you’re part of the majority group, you may be lucky to have 100 near by….and even luckier to find a dozen (or any).

    So, I will preempt accusations of bias by stating: Of course I am utterly biased against the suburbs due to the horrendous experience I had. I do feel, however, that my statements are backed up by facts and not just the anecdote of what I lived through.

     
  37. Angelo says:

    Also, my future posts are going to be mostly constructive analysis and examples of community and community-building projects. South City is a perfect location do be interested in these sorts of things, especially when you’re active in the neighborhood.

     
  38. Jimmy Z says:

    “Places noted for progressive government policies (western states especially), have nowhere near the sense of community of St. Louis.” Huh? Any data? One of the poster children of the urban movement, Portland, Oregon, is in the west! One of Denver’s strengths is its recognition of self-selected neighborhood groups. Here, people want to know what high school you went to and which parish you belong to!

    Community takes many forms, including physical neighborhoods, social groups, ethnic groups, age groups, church groups/parishes, political groups, where you work, etc., etc. Is a fundamentalist christian church in St. Charles County any less of a community than the gay and lesbian community in the city?! Personally, I wouldn’t be very comfortable in either one, but I recognize that both address the needs of their members.

    “Suburbia is perhaps the most horrific example of dehumanization through the lack of community.” I disagree. Suburbia has many faults, but it’s far from “the most horrific example of dehumanization”; Abu Gharib, slavery in America and the Holocaust would all be far worse examples. Nobody is holding a gun to someone’s head and forcing them to move to Cottleville! Isolation is separate from one’s environment – it’s a personal choice. If you to choose to socialize, you can do it in Soulard, Wellston, O’Fallon or in a small town in Montana. If you choose to isolate yourself, it’s probably easier to disappear in the heart of town (and perhaps why the homeless gravitate to urban areas).

    You can blame a lack of opportunities, not fitting in or being discriminated against, but the reality is if you don’t fit in, is it the fault of the community? Is it realistic to expect everyone to be totally and completely prejudice free and willing to welcome anyone and everyone into their circle? Would we even have circles? As you correctly note, “If you are a white, middle-class, straight male who’s pretty much like everyone else you probably won’t feel as isolated in suburbia. (Even if you actually are). Minority groups and unusual personality types feel the effects worse than others.” Well, yeah, that’s the very definition of being “different”!

    My grandparents immigrated to the US a century ago and settled into an ethnic, Lithuanian neighborhood in Chicago (much like how the Bosnians have settled into Dutchtown here). Were they discriminated against? Yes! Was it “fair”? No, but it was and is reality. Was there safety in numbers and a sense of community? Yes! Do times change? Yes!

    I’m old enough (56) to remember a lot less acceptance of homosexuality, in any community, so the question becomes one of has the greater acceptance of the gay lifestyle been a result of a change in attitudes by the larger community? Or, has changes in our physical environment had that big of an impact? Gays may be more visible on Castro Street, but they’re living in every community, including suburbia. If you were twenty years younger, would you still be on the “receiving-end of abuse, death threats, and violence”, to the same extent you experienced growing up? Or, have, we, as a larger community, evolved (and are continuing to evolve)? Forty years ago, smoking was acceptable in a lot more places, blacks were still expected to “know their place”, and “homos and queers” were mocked and persecuted . . .

     
  39. Angelo says:

    Jimmy Z, I am disgusted by your lack of intellectual honesty.

    Your quote:

    “Suburbia is perhaps the most horrific example of dehumanization”

    The full sentence:

    “Suburbia is perhaps the most horrific example of dehumanization through the lack of community.”

    You might as well have taken this : 1+1+1=3

    And quoted this: 1=3.

     
  40. Angelo says:

    Anyways, the rest of what Jimmy Z has stated is completely beside the point. He takes pieces of what I’ve stated and ignores everything else.

    Let me make a few very simple statements regarding most of what he’s said:

    A Bosnian in the inner-city can find a community….because there are thousands Bosnians that are easily identified. A Bosnian in O’fallon is out of luck…..and at significant risk (mentally and emotionally especially).

    I will also state that everyone, even majority populations, are relatively isolated in suburban environments. So to single out my statements about minority groups and ignore the rest of what I’ve stated is intellectually negligent, or dishonest.

    This is the worst example of completely misunderstanding or ignoring the totality of my contentions and reasoning:

    “You can blame a lack of opportunities, not fitting in or being discriminated against, but the reality is if you don’t fit in, is it the fault of the community? Is it realistic to expect everyone to be totally and completely prejudice free and willing to welcome anyone and everyone into their circle?”

    I don’t need to really respond to it, just reread my past statements until you identify the sentences where this has already been refuted or rendered inconsequential. Indeed, just reread the statement itself and identify the glaring contradiction. As if when a community discriminates against an individual it is not the community’s fault, oh goodness me.

     
  41. Kevin McGuire says:

    What an amazing dialogue. Here is what I have learned:

    1. Having children is bad. Who needs future generation for humanity.

    2. People don’t understand that charter, magnet, and parochial schools are not for everybody.

    3. You can only have friends and fit in if you live in the city.

    4. If you wrestle if the idea of moving to the city, but haven’t done it yet, than existing residents would like to give you the finger.

    Does that sum it up?

    I’m pretty sure my rural friends who live miles from neighbors would argue with the idea that a person needs to live in a little urban neighborhood to have a “community”.

     
  42. St. Louis neighbor says:

    Angelo, now that you’re giving some feedback, can you tell us if the neighbors on the blocks crossing through the Cherokee strip between Jefferson and Gravois ever organize block parties or other community projects?

    Please save Cherokee-specific efforts to a different post. A business group or commercial district sponsoring community projects is different from the residents of the adjoining blocks.

    As an outsider to the area, my impression is there’s not much going on, while “name required” gives the impression it’s all drug dealing and illegal fireworks. He makes it sound like the “good people” are afraid to come out their houses.

     
  43. Jimmy Z says:

    Angelo, you obviously felt totally isolated in suburbia. If everyone else felt the same way, then yes, suburbia should go away, and it would of its own volition. And yes, I am being intellectually honest – “Suburbia is the most horrific example of dehumanization”, with or without the addition of “through the lack of community” is an extremely strong statement. I simply disagree that suburbia is the most horrific example of anything. There are many, many people who obviously choose the blandness, the regimentation, the sterotypes and the expectations suburbia offers. Does that make them wrong? Evil? Misguided? Mind washed? Perhaps, but it works for THEM, as their definition of a community. Obviously, you think that your chosen community paradigm is the ONLY right answer for everyone. I disagree – there are many shades of gray, many “right” answers. And while I do not condone any of the “abuse, death threats, and violence” you experienced growing up, how is what you’re advocating any different? You want to impose your values on everyone else! You may have found suburbia to be dehumanizing; I find today’s soccer mom/cell phone/texting culture to be much more dehumanizing, whether it’s in the CWE or O’Fallon. Yes, I grew up in suburbia, and I have fond memories of hanging out at the pool with my friends, as well as riding my bike to the mall and riding the yellow school bus every day, and I choose to live today in the relative suburban uniformity of the Lindenwood part of SW City simply because it’s comfortable. It may not work for you, but it works for me and my neighbors (who I know) – which of us is more right?!

     
  44. Brian S. says:

    I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

     
  45. Angelo says:

    St. Louis Neighbor: There is an interesting aspect to your question…..an assumption that a lack of block parties signifies a lack of community. You also stated that Cherokee-specific and business oriented activities do not count.

    Let me say a few things: Special events do not a community make, they can be an example of community organization….but many areas have special events without any real community. Large groups of people are actually not the best form of community cohesion…and can be isolating in fact. Stand in the middle of 100 people and try to feel connected. Crowds are not communities.

    This statement should help clarify further:

    A community is a daily interactive experience. It is not the sum total of special events….even once-a-week church or PTA meetings. It is a sense of connection to those around you….which must be nearly constant.

    If you go to “events” as the main source of social connection there is a major problem right there. You should be able to feel connected and energized by the people around you on a day-to-day basis. Community “flow” if you will.

    Anyways, as for the commercial stuff: When someone lives and works in their community, or even lives and works in the same building (as I do) there is a breakdown of that commercial-community barrier. Main Street businesses are certainly of a completely different character than strip mall businesses.

    In fact, the best communities are integrated commercial and residential districts with diverse populations. The Cherokee Street strip is one of the best developing examples of this.

    This is the complicated nature of the issue. Community power rests on economic power, a purely residential “community” is difficult to organize and difficult to connect within. Especially seeing as humans tend to connect with each other in commercial settings: bars, clubs, coffee houses, restaurants, clubs and places of work.

    It is extremely difficult for me to convey the totality of the issue in a single blogpost, even harder when people like Jimmy Z do their best to isolate sentences and paragraphs from the rest of what I’ve typed.

    To help alleviate any confusion I’ve caused let me make it clear that my understanding of a truly functional community is this:

    A walkable social district that contains commercial, residential, and some government/social institutions. That is even a little vague and requires qualification.

    Small towns have these districts, cities have these districts….suburbs do not.

    Am I making sense here?

     
  46. Angelo says:

    To Jimmy Z:

    ““Suburbia is the most horrific example of dehumanization”, with or without the addition of “through the lack of community” is an extremely strong statement. I simply disagree that suburbia is the most horrific example of anything.”

    Give me a worse example of dehumanization through lack of community. Otherwise you are just being contrary. Also, I didn’t hear an apology for accusing me of saying suburbia is worse than inhuman torture.

    As for the rest of what you’ve said:

    Forcing my vision on everyone else by convincing them I am correct? Again, you’re choosing to go with a convenient understanding of what I am saying instead of what I am actually saying. Very typical of your rhetorical style.

    Everyone doesn’t have to feel isolated to:

    A) Be isolated
    B) Condemn the suburbs for a general isolating effect.

    If 78% of suburbanites feel the *effects* of isolation then I am pretty sure things will still have to change.

    Additionally, not everyone needs to understand why they feel this or that way, or experience this or that negative effect to be harmed by suburbia’s isolating tendencies. Many people have a tendency to accept bad social conditions and blame themselves instead. Partially because they are convinced by people like YOU Jimmy, who like to place all blame and responsibility on the individual for circumstances beyond their control.

    Homosexuals have a better grasp of this problem than most people; we internalize prejudice and isolation and end up with higher suicide rates (as well as other self-destructive tendencies and mental disorders).

    Again, minority groups are NOT the only ones who feel these effects; it is simply more acute in these groups.

    Some people will manage no matter what the environment, people do live in the northern wastes of Alaska, after all. However, it is safe to say that most people should not live in the Alaskan tundra……and if lots of people are (to their detriment) there should be policies to convince them to leave….and assist them in doing so.

     
  47. St. Louis neighbor says:

    Angelo – You’ve taken my question and changed it a bit. I’m not saying that Cherokee doesn’t count – clearly it does. What I’m interested is learning more about are the things that emanate from the St. Louis neighbors living on the cross streets.

    There are lots of situations where commercial/business district interests work at odds with those of the neighbors next door. The conflicts between residents and the proliferation of bars is a good example.

    So while I understand you are based on Cherokee, what I’m wanting to hear about is what’s going on in the dozens, or literally hundreds, of blocks that saddle all around Cherokee.

    Are those folks doing stuff? And don’t discount block parties. They take months of effort by a group of people – generally all block residents and neighbors – to make successful.

    Good comparison…Cherokee can have a street fest. There, lots of resources to draw upon to make it happen, even corporate sponsors, politicians, real estate developers, etc. Meanwhile, the 3500 block of Oregon, just a block or so away, might feel totally isolated, with no community activity at all.

    Having a beer and a taco and buying a piece of handmade art on Cherokee is something for some people. What about the family living upstairs in a four family a block or two away?

    Getting away from the hipness on Cherokee, what can be said about the neighboring residential blocks in terms of community work? Again, “name required” likened it to an outdoor drug emporium with hoodlums running the streets. Hopefully there is more to the story than that.

     
  48. Richard Pointer says:

    Angelo,

    I must disagree with your diagnosis and prognosis.

    Diagnosis – Suburbia: If one were to use an equation to estimate the influence of building patterns on social life what percentage would you give it. Your post seems to say close to 100%. Unfortunately, it fails to recognize why most of those people moved out there in the first place. It wasn’t suburbia causes people to shun difference, it was people who shun difference flee to suburbia.

    Prognosis – Urban-Life: Your solution is to drag all those willfully ignorant people into the place you care most about. I grew up in University City. I have been to St. Charles maybe twice in my life. If I grew up there I might have had a different opinion of it, but from my point of view, growing up there would have been hell, and boring. I think the focus should be on the city. Forget O’Fallon.

    Maybe I misunderstand your proposed solution. I am glad that I can escape those people who don’t share my enthusiasm for city living. Yes, St. Louis City deserves and needs help. But voluntary improvement means just that. Keep fighting the good fight, but focus on the city. Suburbanites that like what you help to create will flock to the invigorated core. But I can see that most people don’t see the city as an alternative worth considering vis-a-vis the suburban ring – even the tolerant, cool ones. Put into a larger context, why would someone move to the city, if other urban cores in other states are thriving already? Oh, and they have jobs, and good schools, and safe streets.

    All that said. I look forward to your discussion of community-building.

     
  49. Angelo says:

    Let me make a final statement:

    Even the white, straight, male majority has to deal with the negative effects of suburban isolation. Even if they don’t understand the root of the problems, or even recognize the effects as problems….they still suffer.

    Even if you are gleefully playing with your friends on a suburban playground or enjoying your television programming; you are being effected by the problem (and in many cases helping to cause it). There are micro and macro effects; and both are harmful in direct and indirect ways.

    Economically, educationally, socially, individually, environmentally….suburbia is causing a huge amount of problems. If one problem doesn’t phase you another one certainly will.

     
  50. Joey says:

    I used to hate the suburbs and everyone who lived in them, then I had an awakening. I remained in the city and plan to do so, AND I am a Republican – thanks for isolating me.

     
  51. Angelo says:

    Richard Pointer; here’s an interesting conundrum:

    The majority of people living in the suburbs did not move there; they were BORN there. The White Flight movement occurred generations ago….and the children of those flighters are thoroughly more progressive and understanding than their parents (or parent’s parents). Even if I am wrong about that at the moment, a couple of decades and it will most certainly be the case.

    Also, prejudice is not inherited….and I intend to work towards convincing, not forcing, suburbanites to move to the city. People who live in suburbia are not a different type of human than you or I (I was myself was born in suburbia after all)…..it’s all a matter of breaking down the remaining anti-urban bias and fixing the problems our cities face.

    To be plain: We must emphasize and advertise the greatness of our cities (and make them as great as possible). We should not allow this bizarre and artificial divide between town/city and suburb to remain. It is not healthy and not a long-term solution that is even economically viable, much less socially.

     
  52. Angelo says:

    Oh, and of course, if you don’t like cities I find dense towns perfectly acceptable!

     
  53. Adam says:

    “However, it is safe to say that most people should not live in the Alaskan tundra……and if lots of people are (to their detriment) there should be policies to convince them to leave….and assist them in doing so.”

    the issue is not that people WANT to live in the suburbs, or in the “wastes” of alaska. all things being equal, people should be able to live where they want. the problem is that all things are NOT equal, and generally those who continue to build in and move to far-flung, car dependent regions consume disproportionate amounts of resources as compared to those who live in dense, established, urban communities. by all means, if somebody wants to live in the wastes of alaska and can do so self-sufficiently then more power to them. the biggest problem is that, as michael allen alluded to earlier, our consumer-driven economy doesn’t stop to consider the shear amounts of resources being wasted. it simply builds new houses and highways on farmland and then lures people away from established communities in order to fill them, ad nauseum.

     
  54. Angelo says:

    I agree with you Adam, 100%.

     
  55. Amber says:

    St. Louis Neighbor,
    Yes, there is a lot going on off the beaten path of Cherokee – we have 3 community gardens within our group – which started out as a block link group and has become more over the past few years.
    We meet as a block unit every month, and meet twice a week to maintain gardens. We also close off a block every year for NNO and have a block party. We are trying to meet and have potlucks at parks instead of meetings sometimes as well. We also have two alley cleanups a year – check out our blog http://www.westcornercommunity.blogspot.com
    Most of it is centered around the gardens, but to answer you Yes, there is a lot going on, and we’re just one group.

     
  56. Angelo says:

    St. Louis Neighbor:

    Let me help you to understand the strange nature of the surrounding blocks:

    When I said that I considered a community to be economically mixed I was serious. The surrounding blocks are mostly residential….so they are either integrated into the nearby commercial districts or I consider them to be broken communities with underdeveloped social connections.

    The area you mentioned, between Jefferson and Gravois, is mostly residential. So, the residents are either connected to Cherokee Street or a nearby small-business commercial area (I’d say the strips on Jefferson but they aren’t developed enough and are divided by the huge street) or they are not connected properly.

    If the surrounding commercial areas were properly developed the residential section you described should be divided between community centres along Cherokee, Gravois, Jefferson, and even Grand. However, because the city is still recovering these centres are not fully functional. (also, bear in mind that the residents between Gravois and Jefferson were connected to the commercial districts by street car…..satisfying the walkability requirement).

    As we all know, Saint Louis needs to experience some re-development. We have plenty of isolating pockets that need to be re-urbanized and returned to mixed-use.

     
  57. Todd says:

    Interesting and provocative polemic (in the positive sense).

    I do think Angelo errs in suggesting that the socially disconnected suburban mindset is necessarily connected to physical suburban environments. Yes, suburbs do likely foster the ills Angelo describes more than cities, but it’s quite possible to live in a dense urban apartment and not know your neighbors. I’ve lived in the urban cores of cities my entire adult life, and I’ve often hardly known my neighbors, though I did grow up in the burbs, so the truly doctrinaire could argue I’ve been forever tainted. Likewise, some suburban folks do break the mold and aren’t socially isolated automatons.

    My objection to suburbs has always been more aesthetic than political. They’re ugly and dull, and you can’t walk to buy groceries or get drinks with friends. But, the average American has never been accused of having good taste…

    As far as policy goes, I do think there are steps that governments can take to offset some of the negative environmental outcomes created by suburban sprawl and to curb it somewhat. A carbon tax comes to mind immediately, as does more mass transit funding and more equitable distribution of funds for education, which seems to be the major reason why middle class folks with kids in metro St. Louis avoid the city: poor public schools (I’m new to the area, though, so do correct me if I’m wrong on this).

     
  58. Jimmy Z says:

    Hey Angelo, I’m not questioning everything you’re saying, just the parts I, respectfully, disagree with. If you’d prefer, I could simply say that everything you’re putting out is wrong, but that WOULD be intellectually dishonest.

    You may be surprised, but I agree with the first two paragraphs of your original post, and I agree that “A community is a daily interactive experience. . . In fact, the best communities are integrated commercial and residential districts with diverse populations.” Where we disagree, apparently, is whether or not the “best” answer should be the only answer. In a perfect world, we could all live “above the store”, sing Kumbaya and make enough to survive by selling our organic, locally-grown wares to our immediate neighbors. But, as you well know, we don’t live in a perfect world. And I’ll repeat, community takes many forms – whatever works for you is the best answer for you, just not necessarily for everyone else.

    “The most daunting problems of the 21st century find their root in freshly trimmed, identical lawns.” No, our most daunting problems come from an ever-increasing world population, more than a few psychos bent on worldwide destruction, limited resources and a national economy based on the consumption of products produced halfway around the globe.

    “Give me a worse example of dehumanization through lack of community.” That assumes that I agree that suburbia offers absolutely no sense of community – I don’t. If you want to view that as “just being contrary”, so be it – I disagee with your basic premise.

    As the leftist you claim to be, I’m not surprised that you think that “Forcing my vision on everyone else by convincing them I am correct” is the right path for you to take. I prefer to make persuasive arguments, not to threaten anarchy.

    Am I “choosing to go with a convenient understanding of what [you are] saying instead of what [you’re] actually saying”? Huh? I try to take what you say literally, and try not to read anything else into what you’re saying (which is why I quote what I question) as in:

    “Everyone doesn’t have to feel isolated to:
    A) Be isolated – agreed
    B) Condemn the suburbs for a general isolating effect – disagree

    “[You] like to place all blame and responsibility on the individual for circumstances beyond their control.” – No, I expect people to be responsible for their actions, and there are few circumstances that are truly “beyond their control”. When you’re eight and your folks live in suburbia, the circumstances ARE beyond your control. When you’re eighteen, you’re free to choose where you want to live. If you don’t like the ‘burbs, just move!

    “Homosexuals have a better grasp of this problem than most people; we internalize prejudice and isolation and end up with higher suicide rates (as well as other self-destructive tendencies and mental disorders).” – I don’t know enough to question your assumptions and/or information, but I would expect that the same would hold true for soldiers facing PTSD or illegal immigrants. It is interesting, however, that you’re willing to equate homosexuality with higher rates of mental illness.

     
  59. Angelo says:

    Jimmy Z:

    “Hey Angelo, I’m not questioning everything you’re saying, just the parts I, respectfully, disagree with. If you’d prefer, I could simply say that everything you’re putting out is wrong, but that WOULD be intellectually dishonest.”

    The problem is, you are questioning what I am NOT saying. You remove the context and disagree with a point I am not trying to make. Do you not understand this?

    I say: 1+1+1=3.

    You say: 1 does not equal 3!

    “As the leftist you claim to be, I’m not surprised that you think that “Forcing my vision on everyone else by convincing them I am correct” is the right path for you to take. I prefer to make persuasive arguments, not to threaten anarchy.”

    You are not surprised that I plan to convince people that I am correct, which I sarcastically referred to as a form of force? You believe this is threatening Anarchy? Your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired, my good sir.

    “It is interesting, however, that you’re willing to equate homosexuality with higher rates of mental illness.”

    I stated that discrimination against and isolation of homosexuals increases rates of mental illness in that population. Again, your reading comprehension is lacking.

    This is the last response to your statements, Jimmy. You’ve proven yourself to be, once again, utterly (and unapologetically) contemptible. Until you’ve gained some reading comprehension skills I don’t see the point in arguing with you. I implore you to enroll in English courses at a local University or Community College.

     
  60. john w. says:

    Wow. That was really not called for, and I’m usually the one flaming people in here. Good discussion, but as all-too-often happens in here, the thread devolves into needless (and lame) attempts to condescend to and ridicule a previous comment… wait… I’m describing myself!!! OK, I’ll shut up now.

     
  61. cole says:

    Its fairly sad to see someone bitch and moan about how their life was such a drag due to the torment and prejudice they have endured and then in the same sentence use an intense level of prejudice and harassment towards others. It’s quite a shame to see, in all intellectual honesty.

     
  62. Angelo says:

    “…..intense level of prejudice and harassment towards others.”

    I think being a complete bitch (which I most certainly am) in a debate doesn’t really qualify as “intense” prejudice and harassment. Especially when the evidence is my unrelenting sarcasm and snide comments.

    I will admit I am most certainly prejudiced against people who constantly misrepresent statements and refuse to engage in worthy debate/discussion. Just as I am prejudiced against axe murderers and people who chew gum with their mouth open.

    As for harassment; snidely asking someone to attend English lessons is an interesting interpretation of the term. Perhaps you should have said the following with the same applicability:

    “….intense level of prejudice and forced starvation towards others.”
    “….intense level of prejudice and murder towards others.”
    “….intense level of prejudice and affection towards others.”

    It’s always humorous to see people compare my being attacked with physical violence with something as “intense” as telling someone to educate themselves on the internet. Actually, I take that back….it’s infuriating.

    All I can really say is: Don’t piss off someone with a really bad ear infection. They get reeeeeeeeeeeeeeally bitchy.

     
  63. syd says:

    Off bright and early to the Varsity Lakes Community Garden to get my plot ready for some spring veges

     
  64. Jimmy Z says:

    Unfortunately, sarcasm is hard to convey in written form – it’s much more effective when spoken, when the tone can be heard. Words have meaning, and writing for a broader audience, it’s always best to assume that they will be taken literally.

    Steve has worked hard to create a forum where divergent opinions can be explored. Will we always agree on everything everyone posts? Absolutely not. If we always did agree, we’d be mindless sycophants and the site would be really boring, and would likely whither and die. As long as the discussion remains respectful and focuses on the issues that we all find to be important (living in St. Louis and hopefully improving our city and region), the site will continue to grow. And, as most of us know, urban issues are complex – if there were just one, single, easy “answer”, we wouldn’t be facing the multiple challenges we’re facing today, nor would we be having these complex discussions.

    Getting back to the original post – how does/would New Town St. Charles fit into the discussion? It’s a community, it’s dense(r), it has mixed-use structures and a neighborhood retail district. In my mind, physically, it’s a Stepford Wive’s recreation of what Chreokee Street was, and is, but has a completely different vibe as a community. Which gets back to my original position, “community” is made up of people, and their environment is secondary. The real question then becomes why do people choose Cherokee over NTSC, or vice versa? New versus old? Price/value? Proximity to employment? Who your neighbors are/might be? Schools? Shopping? Politics?

    I would also contend that the automobile and central air conditioning have had a much more profound impact on how people live their lives than the growth of contemporary suburbia. Cherokee Street grew up as a commercial strip supporting its adjacent residential areas. 100 years later, Highway K is growing up as the commercial strip supporting its adjacent residential areas. When Cherokee Street was developed, people walked to the streetcar and hung out on their porches in the summer. Today, we’re ensonced in our single-occupant vehicles and we retreat into our air-conditioned abodes. Community today is less accidental – we search out people with similar interests over a much wider geographic area, simply because we have less daily contact with those living immediately around us. And community today is much more tolerant than it was years ago – if you were African American or Mexican, and tried to shop on Cherokee Street 75 years ago, you would not have been welcomed as you are today, even though many of the buildings have changed very little . . .

     
  65. Angelo says:

    You say this:

    ““community” is made up of people, and their environment is secondary.”

    then this:

    “I would also contend that the automobile and central air conditioning have had a much more profound impact on how people live their lives than the growth of contemporary suburbia.”

    Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm? Two major environmental changes (such as increased mobility and a technology that alters the environment) are more important than environmental changes? (*sarcasm*)

    Please state a non-environmental example that is more important to our society than an environmental example. As of now, you’re backing up my viewpoint.

    At any rate, you can’t have the sort of community I am talking about (which is extremely specific) without geographic proximity. If I am standing 1 foot away from someone in an open field….I can establish a relationship. If I am standing 1 foot away from someone, separated by a 1 foot thick wall, 700 feet high, and 1 mile long, and completely impenetrable/sound proof….that changes the relationship completely.

    If I am standing in a school, a hospital, the middle of the highway, a river, in the sky, in the amazon, in France…..things are quite different. The nature of the relationships I can form are different. In other words; it is obvious that environment plays a huge role here.

    “if you were African American or Mexican, and tried to shop on Cherokee Street 75 years ago, you would not have been welcomed as you are today, even though many of the buildings have changed very little . . .”

    The civil rights movement, and most progressive movements, originated in dense populations. I’ve yet to hear of a Suburban zone contributing greatly to any significant forward-thinking movement. The battles, and the victories, always start/focus on major towns and cities. Organizations/movements take root in dense populations and then expand.

    Without dense populations advancement in any sphere is difficult. From the beginning of civilization (rising out of the permanent villages of our barbarian ancestors) to now…..we come up with the best ideas when we live closely together.

    Also, I am sure an African American would have had a harder time out in Saint Charles than South City in the 40s. This is all relative, after all.

    “Getting back to the original post – how does/would New Town St. Charles fit into the discussion? It’s a community, it’s dense(r), it has mixed-use structures and a neighborhood retail district.”

    This should explain my opinion:

    An amusement park Train Ride is to Amtrak Passenger trains as New Town’s community is to Cherokee Street’s community.

    A toy train, the train at Six Flags, and a national rail line are all classified as “trains”….but they are not exactly the same thing. Same goes for the term “community”.

    “When Cherokee Street was developed, people walked to the streetcar and hung out on their porches in the summer. Today, we’re ensonced in our single-occupant vehicles and we retreat into our air-conditioned abodes. Community today is less accidental – we search out people with similar interests over a much wider geographic area, simply because we have less daily contact with those living immediately around us.”

    Let me reconstruct the statement above with less flattering terms:

    “When Cherokee Street was developed, people interacted with many human beings on a regular basis, and spontaneously. Today, we isolate ourselves into single-occupant vehicles to get from place-to-place. We isolate ourselves again by remaining in our homes alone or with people we’ve already established relationships with. Community today is less accidental, we have to travel long distances to find someone we can interact with because we are isolated from everyone immediately around us.”

    If I let you go on I think you’ll end up writing your own “Community or Die” segment.

    If we were talking about the horrible cultural trend in food consumption you might as well have stated this:

    “Things change. We used to eat lots of fruits and vegetables. Now, we eat nothing but pizza and burgers, washed down with a glass of sugar.”

     
  66. Adam says:

    real quick:

    JimmyZ, i don’t think Angelo was equating homosexuality with mental illness. however, demographically gay people are more at risk to develop addictive behaviors and commit suicide as a result of marginalization.

    Angelo, in terms of respecting others (though not necessarily agreeing with them, which is his prerogative) JimmyZ is probably the LEAST contemptible contributor to this forum. i honestly don’t see how he is twisting your words like you claim.

     
  67. Angelo says:

    Adam,

    Here are some examples then:

    “You want to impose your values on everyone else!”

    which was followed by

    “And while I do not condone any of the “abuse, death threats, and violence” you experienced growing up, how is what you’re advocating any different?””

    “As the leftist you claim to be, I’m not surprised that you think that “Forcing my vision on everyone else by convincing them I am correct” is the right path for you to take. I prefer to make persuasive arguments, not to threaten anarchy.”

    “It is interesting, however, that you’re willing to equate homosexuality with higher rates of mental illness.”

    “I disagree. Suburbia has many faults, but it’s far from “the most horrific example of dehumanization”; Abu Gharib, slavery in America and the Holocaust would all be far worse examples.”

    So, you think Jimmy was properly representing my point of view when he makes statements inferring:

    I am espousing violence.
    I am trying to impose my will on everyone through force.
    I am equating homosexuality with mental illness.
    I am equating suburbia with slavery and torture.
    I am threatening Anarchy.

    Really? At least once per post he does this…and then proceeds to debate these made up points of view. Wouldn’t that wear on YOUR nerves? And…this happens every time.

     
  68. Jimmy Z says:

    Ceasar Chavez came to prominence and led the United Farmworkers movement in the 1960’s from rural, primarily-hispanic, migrant camps, not from the urban barrios: http://www.ufw.org/_page.php?menu=research&inc=_page.php?menu=research&inc=history/01.html

    I guess I was a bit confused by your closing statement in the original post: “Additionally, methods and tactics for community-building will be enumerated and left to public debate. By working together we can create an Urbia attractive and enticing to the lonely denizens of the counties. Your lowly idealist (myself) will strive to present alternatives and methods for establishing them.”

    I would view this forum as the first step in the public debate . . .

     
  69. Angelo says:

    “Ceasar Chavez came to prominence and led the United Farmworkers movement in the 1960’s from rural, primarily-hispanic, migrant camps, not from the urban barrios:”

    From the article:

    “He moves his wife and eight small children to the dusty little Central Valley farm town of Delano and dedicates himself full-time to organizing farm workers. Dolores Huerta and others later join him.”

    Town and city, town and city, town and city…..how many times must I tell you that dense towns and cities are preferred models of socio-economic organization? I am not favoring just heavily populated urban environments, but dense towns and villages as well (which are located in rural regions).

    Saint Charles’ old town, designed for density and mixed-use, is just as lovely as the Cherokee Street neighborhood.

    So, Cesare Chavez didn’t just organize in dense urban environments, he organized instead in dense town environments.

    “Additionally, methods and tactics for community-building will be enumerated and left to public debate.”

    “….methods and tactics for community-building….”

    Of which you’ve offered none.

     
  70. Jimmy Z says:

    “Community takes many forms, including physical neighborhoods, social groups, ethnic groups, age groups, church groups/parishes, political groups, where you work, etc., etc. Is a fundamentalist christian church in St. Charles County any less of a community than the gay and lesbian community in the city?! Personally, I wouldn’t be very comfortable in either one, but I recognize that both address the needs of their members.” As for specific “methods and tactics for community-building”, they obviously vary with your audience and their interests. Part of it is making people aware of the group, what they stand for, and why new people should participate. Part of it is being open and welcoming, not secretive. And part of it is focusing on moving forward, creating positive changes.

    Where we obviously differ is in the need for a cohesive, local, specific, higher-density urban paradigm for a community to thrive. While I believe that a more open and accessible physical environment helps, I’ve seen plenty of examples of community that have thrived in less-than-ideal physical surroundings. On the high plains of Colorado, Wyoming and Montana, where population densities are well below one person per square mile, there are strong rural communities, spread over dozens of square miles. Before my mom moved in with my sister, she lived in an assisted-living community. And for 16 years, when I had a home-based design business, I had the flexibility to be very involved in many communities that weren’t right outside my door.

    And, since I tend to focus on precision, I see a big difference between a community and a district. To me, a district (or a neighborhood) is the physical area, while the community is the people, with most people being parts of multiple communities. It’s like when a church burns down and the pastor reassures the congregation that physical things can be replaced, it’s the people that create the true church. Physically, except for its newness, NTSC isn’t that much different than Cherokee Street or Old North or Morgan Ford or Soulard (scale, density, massing, parking). What IS hugely different are the people who choose to live in each neighborhood.

    I also think you’re missing my point about SOV’s and central air – while both have very much driven the physical form of suburbia, they also have impacted how Cherokee Street (and other old retail strips) has evolved as a community. Yes, more people walk the sidewalks on Cherokee than do on Highway K, but, as you should well know, there are nearly as many folks walking in their cul de sacs as there are walking the sidewalks in our urban residential neighborhoods. And just like how many urban porches have become a lot more decorative as people are able to retreat inside to stay cool (instead of seeking relief outdoors), the tacked on porches in suburbia are vestiges of an earlier time.

    Finally, nearly as many people commute out of any city neighborhood as commute out of the subdivisions in St. Chuck, as they have for years. Cherokee Street originally served the streetcar commuters who worked downtown, in offices, factories and warehouses. So yes, while the mode of commuting has evolved from streetcar to bus to private vehicle in the older parts of St. Louis, the percentage of commuters has remained surprisingly consistent (although their work sites have obviously sprawled out geographically). Lucky you, you’re the exception to the rule – your commute is measured in feet, not miles. How many of your working neighbors can claim the same? Unfortunately, money talks, and most people are willing to commute to wherever they can make the most . . .

     
  71. St. Louis neighbor says:

    I think what Adam is trying to compare is an urban neighborhood with a suburban, sprawl based, auto dependent place like Fenton or O’Fallon, Missouri.

    “Yes, more people walk the sidewalks on Cherokee than do on Highway K, but, as you should well know, there are nearly as many folks walking in their cul de sacs as there are walking the sidewalks in our urban residential neighborhoods.”

    I don’t buy the above statement for one second. People don’t walk in the suburbs compared to urban neighborhoods because there is nowhere to walk TO. Sure, you’ll have the occasional jogger/exercisers, but they basically travel in circles.

    City neighborhood residents can walk to a business or a park or a church. Actual destinations are within walking distance. And then all of those chance encounters of people outside doing things and going places on foot in the public realm (which you seldom see on the cul-de-sac streets of Fenton or O’Fallon – except for doing yard work, washing cars, or emptying garbage) build community.

    In our city neighborhood, I have dozens of St. Louis neighbors every day pass my house walking to restaurants and parks. If I’m outside, many of them (whom I often know on a first name basis), stop and we visit for a while on the sidewalk. That’s not a lifestyle someone has in most of the suburbs. They drive to get places, not walk.

     
  72. St. Louis neighbor says:

    Sorry, should have said Angelo, not Adam. Apologies for the mixup.

     
  73. Adam says:

    Angelo,

    after re-reading i think you do make a point:

    “And while I do not condone any of the “abuse, death threats, and violence” you experienced growing up, how is what you’re advocating any different?””

    nowhere have you proposed “abuse, death threats, and violence” as a means to achieve your ideals.

    “As the leftist you claim to be, I’m not surprised that you think that “Forcing my vision on everyone else by convincing them I am correct” is the right path for you to take. I prefer to make persuasive arguments, not to threaten anarchy.”

    after reading this more carefully, FORCE through CONVINCING seems oxymoronic. convincing generally takes the form of persuasive arguments. however, i didn’t read “threaten anarchy” as “threaten violence” but rather “threaten that chaos will otherwise ensue”.

    “It is interesting, however, that you’re willing to equate homosexuality with higher rates of mental illness.”

    i’ve already commented on the second one in a previous post.

    “I disagree. Suburbia has many faults, but it’s far from “the most horrific example of dehumanization”; Abu Gharib, slavery in America and the Holocaust would all be far worse examples.”

    this comment doesn’t make sense in the context of dehumanization through lack of community (an idea that, hopefully, you will flesh out in a later entry).

    since at this point you’ve offered mostly opinion and little supporting evidence, the post does come off as pushy, so i’ll forgive the following:

    “You want to impose your values on everyone else!”

    anyway, i think we’re on the same page, and i look forward to reading more from you. based on JimmyZ’s history of respectful comments, i don’t think his intention was subterfuge. perhaps he skimmed a little too quickly – i’m certainly guilty of commenting without reading carefully…

     
  74. Adam says:

    oops. in my last post

    “i’ve already commented on the second one…”

    should instead read

    “i’ve already commented on this one…”

     
  75. john w. says:

    This is getting as long as the first smoking ban post several months ago.

     
  76. Jimmy Z says:

    Agreed. I also agree that there are far fewer places to walk to in sprawling suburbia. I was only speaking from my perspective of living in the Lindenwood Park (urban, SW city) area, where the vast majority of the people who are walking are doing so for exercise or to walk the dog. Few, if any, of them are walking to shop, and even fewer are walking to a bus stop, even though there are shops aand stops within three or four blocks of most everyone; it’s just easier to drive over and park, then drive back home. Is it stupid and lazy? Yes. If the old storefront a block away from me was still actually a store, instead of a chiropractor’s office, would I walk there? Maybe. And my assertion is the holds true on Cherokee Street. If a person lives more than two blocks away, most will choose to drive, and not necessarily two blocks. We/they will easily drive a mile or two, to our preferred retailer, not just the nearest one.

    And, to Angelo, my last thoughts – we agree on many points, we just disagree on one fundamental one, that the physical environment is a critical part of any community. To me, any community has three components, where they interact (a physical neighborhood, at work, online, etc.), how they’re selected (by common interests, by physical proximity or by coercion, as in being school or the military) and how they interact with each other (consensus, fear, domination). My experience is that how well people interact with each other defines how good a community will be. The physical environment does have an impact, but not nearly as much as the actions of the individual members.

    Did growing up in suburbia cause Kleibold and Harris to do the Columbine massacre? Or, did living in a fantasy world of video games, with little parental supervision? Did suburbia kill Matt Shepard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard)? No, a couple of rednecks did, out of pure hatred of gays. Locally, we continue to see too many young people dying, some not far from Cherokee Street, and many others further north, in similar, dense, mixed-use, urban neighborhoods. If there were a simple solution, this wouldn’t be happening. But the breakdown in societal values, easy access to handguns and drugs and a real lack of hope for the future all fuel a breakdown in community that, while different than the alleged breakdown in community in the suburbs, is just as real and destructive to urban areas. Bottom line, it’s not so much the buildings, it’s the people!

     
  77. St. Louis neighbor says:

    Bottom line, it’s not so much the buildings, it’s the people! Thanks, JZ. On that we can agree. Alot of people are all caught up with the “built environment”, but I’m with you that it is the people that make a place special. Cool buildings filled with rude, ignorant people are a turnoff.

     
  78. GMichaud says:

    Actually the built environment is a key component in human interaction. Without writing a major thesis on this subject, just look at the United States. Not just St. Louis, but most of the rest of the country is as poorly designed as St. Louis. The United States leads the world by a long shot in people in jail. The rest of the world isn’t even close, and, no surprise, for the most part the rest of the world has done a better job of utilizing classical city building principles.
    Even the example of the video games etc is wrong. People are driven into their own little worlds because the environment does not foster creative human interaction.

    To disconnect peoples lives from the environment they are in is absurd, it would be the same as saying people in jail will interact no different than people on a city street.
    Surely the relationship between humans and environment is complex, but to pretend that humans are floating merrily along irregardless of their surroundings fails to recognize the fundamental problems of the United States. This continual lack of understanding and recognition is in a large part the reason for the colossal problems America now faces.
    By handing urban planning over to moneyed interests, we have a country where the quality of life is much lower than other industrialized countries and even many so called 3rd world countries.

     
  79. Angelo says:

    Let’s see, where to begin?

    Columbine, the Shephard murder and other such instances of crime and prejudice do not occur randomly and outside of a social context. It was clear in the Columbine case that the boys in question were isolated from their peers and were not brought up in a positive social/familial environment.

    Crime doesn’t just HAPPEN, you know….and certainly not because of video games. If they allowed themselves to get too wrapped up in a fantasy world, it is merely emphasizing my points about television and other isolating technologies. In the most likely case, their social isolation caused them to withdraw into brooding, dark, non-reality.

    Also, to bring up inner-city crime is to bring up the indirect effects the shift to the suburbs has caused. The poverty of the inner-city is an indirect result of the mass-movement of the middle and upper classes out of it. The move to suburbia collapsed the city, dramatically increasing the poverty and..as a direct result…the crime.

    I’ve already stated….and well all already know…..that Saint Louis is underutilized and underdeveloped economically. That translates into social problems.

    However, none of these problems can be solved without the conscious decision to reinvest in dense communities and leave behind our suburban faux-utopias.

    As for the “communities” Jimmy described; I can only bring back my example of the trains. In the context I am using it, a “community” is not an abstract and group-specific. In one of my specific understandings of community there would be many, many sub-communities. The concept of community in question is a geographically specific form of social organization.

    For example: I Cherokee Street is the sort of community I am talking about. Within it are racial, ethnic, gender, and sexuality communities….as well as communities of professionals, career types, ages…etc.

    I find it damaging to inhabit a uni-cultural community. The worst example being nursing homes, where the isolated elderly are kept within a cloistered group of other elderly.

    Suburbs, though, have the same problem covering a wider area. Not only is diversity lacking, but any diversity that does exist would be difficult to tap into. It’s either hidden intentionally or has no real outlet.

    Without density, human interaction becomes costly and inefficient. That’s a pretty horrifying problem to have….and I use that word with all seriousness and intent. You’ll have to recognized that humans are social animals; we cannot survive in isolation without losing a good chunk of what makes us human. To actually organize ourselves in a way that interrupts or blocks-off humans from humanity is terrifying. What’s worse, the subtlety and voluntary nature of this process obscures the consequences.

    That, by the way, is me beginning to elaborate on suburban dehumanization.

     
  80. Adam says:

    “That, by the way, is me beginning to elaborate on suburban dehumanization.”

    and thank you. agreed. video games/media might compound an existing dysfunction, but they’re not the cause. i grew up playing video games. still do. i’ve never murdered a single person. i don’t even eat animals! well… the occasional fish. 🙂

    i’ve been reading Jane Jacobs (finally) and her observations on how neighborhoods function seem pretty relevant here, especially in terms of how the external environment effects social behavior. eyes on the street – at all times of day – are key to preventing crime. this requires density for sure, but also that a neighborhood be multifunctional so as to attract foot traffic at all times of day.

    surprisingly (to me at least) she posits that neighborhoods require a degree of anonymity in order to thrive. she cites multiple cases in high-rise projects where all anonymity is lost. neighbors became paranoid and ended up hiding from one another, leading to increased crime in the corridors. perhaps suburbs, on the opposite end of the spectrum, afford too much anonymity, leading not to localized crime but poor socialization (which leads to serial killing, etc.)

     
  81. Alissa says:

    I wanted to jump in and answer a question that STL Neighbor posed early in the discussion.

    For the three years I’ve lived in the neighborhood, I’ve been involved with the West Corner Community (westcornercommunity.blogspot.com), a group of neighbors living in the westernmost part of Benton Park West. We DO have block parties several times a year, and together we have started two community food gardens, as well as adopting the large city planter at the corner of Utah and Gravois.

    There is also a group of involved citizens in the Gravois Park neighborhood who have started community gardens and worked towards improvements in the Park itself. I can’t comment too much on this, since I’m not directly involved in their group.

    Community building is definitely difficult in neighborhoods like this, where the majority of residents are renters, and thus more likely to be transient. However, I will say that the continued redevelopment along Cherokee is inexorably linked to the vitality of our community. We can both keep our dollars in the neighborhood, as well as creating a pull for the existing residents, hopefully we can encourage renting residents to continue their leases and continuing to build a diverse (economically, socially, racially) neighborhood.

     
  82. Ben says:

    Congats, Angelo, on getting published in Urban Review.

    Although suburban (and especially exurban) development does tend to epitomize many of the bad things with modern society, e.g. isolation from neighbors, ridiculous commutes from sprawl, dismal street planning, and cultural homogenization, it is good to not to lose track of the all the historical problems that plagued turn-of-the-century neighborhoods in the urban core. This would be things like crime (gang-driven then, just as it is now), limited access to decent food, rampant racism, poverty, poor sanitation, and dismal living conditions. The increased housing, with haves closer to the have-nots, did not magically solve all problems.

    Indeed, try asking some of the more historically aware Soulard homeowners about how their buildings were inhabited in the 19th century (and even up to the first half of the 20th). It was common for tenements to be rented out per room, often with multiple inhabitants in each room.

    I would strongly recommend reading the book The Good Old Days–They Were Terrible! by Otto Bettmann (of Bettmann Archives). He published this book for the express purpose of dispelling what he perceived to be myths about historical living, both urban and rural. That is, he felt exasperation from people repeatedly requesting things like archival photos of idyllic Central Park in the 1800s, but very rarely photos of the dirty, open air street markets in the poorer parts of NYC, where the food was often second hand and the meat was rarely what it was advertised to be.

    Nevertheless, we do indeed enjoy things like clean water supply, ubiquitous sanitation, strict air pollution control (when compared to the 1930’s), and refrigeration, which can indeed permit a new form of harmonious and sustainable urban living. But the mistakes of the past, whether from St. Louis’ miserably crowded tenements at the turn of the century, or the far flung suburbs from the post-WWII era, must be kept in mind, lest we repeat them.

     
  83. Angelo says:

    Ben,

    The greatest benefits of the modern age are worthless if enjoyed alone. The horrors of past eras could be suffered only through human companionship.

    “The increased housing, with haves closer to the have-nots, did not magically solve all problems.”

    It did create problem-solvers, and ideas to help them. It also allowed organizations to spring up to help alleviate these issues and bring us into the modern era.

    As I said before, great ideas and great people (and organizations) develop and take root in dense populations.

     
  84. equals42 says:

    Does this diatribe come with a Che Guevara poster? It read like a High School term paper. Let’s tone down the posts to civil discussions again, please.

    It’s your soap box, Steve, but it’ll be in a lonely corner of the park soon with these submissions.

    [slp — the choice is a few contributors every so often or no post at all on those days. My goal is to give others a chance to work on expressing their thoughts. Read my posts and ignore the contributors you don’t like reading.]

     
  85. Angelo Stege says:

    “Does this diatribe come with a Che Guevara poster? It read like a High School term paper.”

    Followed by:

    “Let’s tone down the posts to civil discussions again, please.”

    Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm??? What on earth was the point of your statement? Was that considered objective analysis or constructive criticism?

     
  86. equals42 says:

    It was an exaggerated retort to your histrionic post. I suppose it accomplished little but to register my opinion of the post with Steve.

     
  87. Angelo says:

    As if that makes you less of a hypocrite.

     

Comment on this Article:

Advertisement



[custom-facebook-feed]

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe