Re: [CTPP] INNOVATION BRIEFS Advisory - ctpp-news

17 Jun 2002

Actually, many smart growth advocates are quite clear headed about the
role of the automobile in shaping our built environment, and those who
say otherwise are either misinformed or intentionally misrepresenting
the facts.  Check out the principles and work of the Smart Growth
Network (see my .sig for link).

Citizens demanding smart growth have cars, and drive them.  They also
have feet, and walk.  They want choices.  Some have kids, and want them
to have choices.  Low-density, single-use, no-choice automobile sprawl
doesn't provide the quality of life and choices that many Americans
want, and it has demonstrably worse environmental outcomes than smart
growth.  That same "LDSUNCAS" has a 50-70 year head start and is
bolstered by past demographic trends that are now changing (e.g. aging
boomers), outdated policies and standards that haven't been changed yet
(e.g., transportation funding, street design), outdated mindsets that
haven't changed yet (e.g., read the papers!), and a cadre of outmoded
professionals who desperately need to defend "business as usual" to keep
the funding spigot open.  Look around -- what financial stake do many
who advocate smart growth have in its success?  Then look at the
defenders of the status quo.

Smart growth is clearly not "no growth".  Smart growth is clearly not
"anti-auto".  Where's the "innovative" alternative to the
choice-less,
unloved landscape that the old paradigm has built.  For more and more
Americans, the alternative of choice is smart growth.

Time to change.

Chris.
------------------------------------
Christopher V. Forinash
U.S. EPA: Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation
1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW (MC 1808), Washington DC 20460
(Delivery: 401 M St. SW, #WT-1013D)
202-260-5044 vox 0174 fax; forinash.christopher(a)epa.gov
------------------------------------
Development, Community & Environment Division:
http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth
A partner in the Smart Growth Network: http://www.smartgrowth.org

                      C Kenneth Orski                                                     

                      &lt;korski(a)erols.co         To:      Ed Herlihy
&lt;ed.herlihy(a)comcast.net&gt;                                            
                      m>                       cc:      ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net          

                      Sent by:                 Subject: Re: [CTPP] INNOVATION BRIEFS
Advisory                                          
                      owner-ctpp-news@                                                    

                      chrispy.net                                                         

                      06/16/2002 11:57                                                    

                      AM                                                                  

Ed -
Perhaps my point of view will become clearer if you see the entire
Brief, which is attached. Unlike you, most "smart growth" and
anti-automobile crusaders refuse to accept the implications of the
trends revealed by the 2000 census. You would understand what I mean if
you took part (as I do) in some of the other forums devoted to "smart
growth" and anti-automobile proselytizing, such as CNU (Congress of New
Urbanism), STPP and TLC-net. Unfortunately, many "smart growth" and
anti-auto zealots are not as reasonable and clear thinking as you. They
do not let facts interfere with their  ideology.
Regards,
Ken Orski
----------------

Ed Herlihy wrote:
...

 Ken:

 As one of those who happens to support the Smart Growth movement you can
...
  rest assured that I was not at all
"surprised" by the new data in the Year
...
  2000 Census.  Most of us who follow these things, even
casually, knew full
...
  well that the aggregate trends were (and are) still
going in the "wrong"
...
  direction.  Lets remember, the Smart Growth movement
is just a "babe in the
...
  woods" and it may take decades for the message to
take hold.

 Perhaps the message of Smart Growth will not take hold and perhaps there are
...
  some land speculators who still expect to derive huge
profits from sprawl
...
  and the proliferation of large lot McMansions.  So be
it.

 But it is not the job of the "new Census data" to send us a message that
all
...
  of the Smart Growth ideas are a "failure". 
And it was never the message
...
  from the Smart Growth folks that the car was going to
be obsolete at any
...
  time in the future.

 It is  the job of planners to seek out solutions that best serve our
 communities.  And, as we dig into the census data, we will most likely find
...
  some exceptions to the overall trends that will tell a
good story about
...
  Smart Growth and its benefits.

 Ed Herlihy
 Reston, VA

 PS. OK, I fully agree the CTPP may not the best list to start a discussion
...
  about the merits of Smart Growth.  If the list
moderators have a suggestion,
...
  I will be glad to move the discussion to a more
appropriate forum, if there
...
  is one.  Any suggestions? (See attached file:
New Census Data Provides Reality Check.doc)