I watched The End of Suburbia last night. I’ve also seen related documentaries such as A Crude Awakening and An Inconvenient Truth. Let’s put it this way: I’m a fan of documentary films. We watch a lot of them at One Carbon Trace Plaza (located in the heart of Springfield!).
Journalists — including opinion journalists — try to follow an objective process of reporting. It’s an imperfect process to be sure, but the point of it is to try to get the facts and the best available version of the truth in a given news situation. Documentary filmmakers, however, are not journalists. Like opinion journalists they bring distinct points of view to their work. Unlike journalists, they are under no obligation to seek or report the best available version of the truth. The best among them try.
I’m giving you that build up so that you’ll gain some understanding of my complex and often conflicted experiences with documentary film. The political me cheered The End of Suburbia. The journalism professor me wished it had been less alarmist. Both of these selves — and a few others besides — think the film is an important warning about the coming collapse of suburbia. We’re already seeing it.
I’m not going to make the simplistic claim that climbing on our bicycles is going to solve the problem.
I’m going to make different claim using Springfield as an example. At last night’s Bicycle Advocacy meeting we discussed, among other things, how transportation money and business interest in transportation issues are focused on moving people from communities in Greene Country into Springfield to work, shop, and play. As gas prices go up and home prices go down, this approach no longer makes any sense. What we need to be doing is encourage people to move closer to their work.
It’s difficult to convince leaders to spend money on infrastructure for cycling and walking in a city environment in which people live far from work. Spreading out is no longer an option. We need to encourage greater population density. And this leads to a natural desire for cycling and walking infrastructure as well as public transportation. When work, shopping, and entertainment are close at hand, a car becomes an expensive annoyance.
I was not a bicycle commuter during the 20 years I lived in Kansas City. When we moved to Springfield more than four years ago we made the decision to change our lifestyle based on the physical environment city: flat terrain, grid layout, and rudimentary cycling infrastructure in place. On a map we drew a 2-mile circle around MSU and set out to live within that circle. That decision made bicycle commuting an easy choice to make.
Let’s put it another way: Had we decided to live in Nixa or in the country I wouldn’t be writing this blog right now. I’d be driving a car to work like the majority. I’d be putting thousands of miles on that car each year. I’d be paying high gas prices because I’d have no other choice. I might even be watching my home value drop.
This is the point I want to make: Move. Do it now while you still can (i.e. before home prices fall even farther and the market finishes its steady march straight to hell). I think moving closer to your work is the greatest single impact you can make on a host of transportation, environmental, social, economic, and quality-of-life issues.
Easier said than done– I know. But what’s coming will be much more difficult. What follows can be so much better.
Comments 7
The message I took from watching End of Suburbia is to downsize my life. The only way to better the economy is to downsize and live more a sustainable lifestyle. My living car-free is one of those actions. I am also a fan of smaller living spaces and live in a 620 sq. ft. apartment 2 miles from work.
Another good watch is The Eleventh Hour. James Kuntsler’s blog is an interesting read too.
Posted 23 Oct 2008 at 11:52 am ¶http://jameshowardkunstler.typepad.com/clusterfuck_nation/
Moreover, how do you request Americans to move close to work and drive less now that gas prices are falling down?
I am not talking about the ones that read yours and my blog. We are already sold on the idea.
Posted 23 Oct 2008 at 12:01 pm ¶Can you give more info on the Bicycle Advocacy meeting? How would I get involved?
Posted 23 Oct 2008 at 12:18 pm ¶Shek… Yes, there’s an element of preaching to the choir here. But I’m thinking moving close to work is one step toward sustainability. It’s not the only step. And it may not be the best one. And for some — sadly — it is not even possible. But we could begin to create a critical mass in downtown Springfield with a modest movement toward the city. We’re already seeing go-go loft development. And we have open land in the downtown area.
Jamie… At the advocacy meeting last night we spent a lot of time discussing what kind of bicycle-related projects we can propose for the 1/8-cent sales tax money targeted for structural improvements for transportation. The city is focused right now on finishing and repairing sidewalks. There’s a possibility we can use some of the money for pedestrian and cycle connections among existing infrastructure. We reached no consensus. Instead, most of those attending (including me) seemed to focus on specific bicycle projects that we might propose in the near future (another 1/4-cent tax issue is coming). I’m an advocate of repairing the bicycle lanes and adding sharrows.
Send me e-mail (see About Carbon Trace on the sidebar). We can discuss further, and I can get you involved in the committee.
Posted 23 Oct 2008 at 12:33 pm ¶Jacksonville did the 0.5% increase in sales tax. All they did is build wider roads and added some 3 ft. bike lanes on them. This city is an even larger concrete nightmare.
The problem is that most planners think bike lanes are the solution whereas they are more dangerous in strip-mall dense areas with repetitive right turning driveways. In those situations, it is safer to have no bike lanes and control the right lane.
I like the idea of Sharrows. Bikejax is putting together a post about the feasibility of sharrows in Jacksonville.
Posted 23 Oct 2008 at 3:40 pm ¶I also like the idea of sharrows (marked shared bicycle/auto lanes), for several reasons. The pavement markings legitimize the presence of bicycles on city streets in the minds of both drivers and bicyclists (still an issue in Springfield, where some people still believe bicycles belong on sidewalks). And they don’t gather gravel, glass, and other hazards like designated bicycle lanes. I tried to ride on Boonville today, for instance, and to actually pedal in the bicycle lane would have invited a blowout, it was so full of junk!
Posted 24 Oct 2008 at 5:32 pm ¶Dave… Yep. If you check the pictures I took last week of some problems in the bike lanes, it’s easy to see the gunk in the road. Even a well-placed lane is subject to debris.
Posted 24 Oct 2008 at 5:55 pm ¶