I just watched End of Surburbia today

[pstans]

I just watched End of Surburbia today. I am a little bit in shock even though I have been a follower of Peak Oil and New Urbanism for a few years. The question that I am asking myself is what is the best way for me to make a sustainable future. I am young, graduate from college in a few months, married, have a house in a medium sized town. I am not tied down to my current living arrangement. I have ideas and ideas, but not sure where to start.

http://www.endofsuburbia.com/
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/
http://www.kunstler.com/

[kliljedahl]

1. Excellent movie, I've been recommending it for a long time

Scary & depressing at the same time. Best way? Learn survival skills IMHO.



Keith’s Barbeque Central

[phantom power]

2. If you can...

Try to live within biking distance of work, groceries, etc. I don't know how many jobs will survive the scenarios that some of these guy envision, but I think it's hard to predict what's the best strategy for a period of major upheaval. It's one of the things that make chaos scary. It's hard to plan for, even if you believe it's coming.

Interestingly, the end of suburbia implies either a move to agricultural living, or a move to true urban living. Living spaces contract into denser modes, to make room again for agriculture. Maybe a return to the "many small towns" model, where no town is very far from the farms that support it.

If you can find work there, maybe that means living in a small town is the best move.

I'd also definitely stay away from the desert southwest. I have a feeling that those of us living out here are going to be screwed, in multiple ways.

[Coastie for Truth]

3. Realtor's say "Location, Location, Location"

Buy some real estate

---in a "regentrifiable" urban, inner city, or pre-1948 ring of old suburbs
---walking distance of schools (they always hold their value -- and gain value as the neighborhood regentrifies)
---walking distance of transit and shopping (at least Starbucks and convenience stores)
---some sort of a "magnet" at the end of or long the transit line - downtown, major university, etc.
---don't sweat the absence of a big, quarter acre lot -- those will be obsolete, go for a town house or garden apartment.

Nobody can really predict what new businesses and products the "downslope" from the "peak" will create. But it will create business opportunities.

I am not as pessimistic or Malthusian as Kuntsler. There will always be "winners"

[thegreatwildebeest]

5. About gentrified areas...

It's amusing that you point out those areas that are being gentrified, since that is a major source of homelessness, suburban expansion, amongst other social ills.

[Coastie for Truth]

6. You can draw different conclusions

from different times, different communities, and different ways of gentrifying,

It appears to me that the gentrification of two local communities benefited the "original" low income local residents, and the gentrification of another local community (a few years - or decades) earlier was catastrophic to the "original" low income local residents.

I think the "urban removal" model with D8 bulldozers and "quick buck" planning was a catastrophe - but that model (while still being practiced in some communities) is slowly fading.

(My experience includes Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Metro Detroit, and the SF Bay area including East Palo Alto and Oakland -- and I think East Palo Alto and Oakland, and Cleveland Heights/University Heights OH were all done very well).

[Coastie for Truth]

7. The Affordable-Housing Crisis - NY Times - June 16

Congress is waking up at last to the fact that millions of poor families are no longer able to buy or even rent decent homes. In the House, bipartisan support is coalescing around a proposal that would create an affordable-housing fund by setting aside a small portion of profits from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the federally sponsored mortgage finance giants.

The plan is contained in legislation that will need to overcome opposition from the Bush administration and some members of Congress. But the basic idea - to put money earned on housing right back into the same area - makes perfect sense.

The House version, which could move to the floor this month, is contained within broader legislation that would provide tighter federal oversight of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It would require the two entities to set aside 5 percent of their after-tax profits for the affordable-housing fund, which could eventually generate as much as $1 billion a year. The money would be used to increase home ownership and create more decent rental housing. Similar funds have operated successfully at state and local levels for a long time.

The White House believes that the regulatory part of the legislation is not strong enough. Other critics argue that taking money from Freddie Mac's and Fannie Mae's profits would prompt them to become even more aggressive in the mortgage market, putting pressure on banks that already believe the two companies are too domineering.

As you note, a problem with gentrification/regentrification is that gentrification/regentrification raises the price of housing, and prices many families out of housing.

In this regard, as the Times article observes, money to house the poor, and to promote home ownership in depressed areas, has to come from somewhere. And, in the case of gentrification/regentrification, money to house those priced out of the housing market also has to come from somewhere.

As the Times editorial observes, the private sector seems unable to address the crying need for decent and affordable housing, Congress needs to step in. And, with the demands for urban housing (as we abandon the suburbs) increasing with the down slope from Peak Oil, this problem will develop into a hyper crisis.

Too complex for one append in a "Peak Oil" thread.

As to the "homeless" - my volunteer experience with veterans outreach in the 1970's, and with those made (temporarily) homeless by a disaster - even an apartment fire - is that the "hard core homeless" is primarily a mental health problem. I could give you a lot of privileged and anecdotal information. But my impression - a very large fraction of "homelessness" (I didn't say "all" or even "most") is a mental health problem.

So, let us Progressives solve this multi-faceted problem --- in the context of Peak Oil.

[brystheguy]

4. This is a good thread from the Peak Oil group here that I enjoyed

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=266&topic_id=492&mesg_id=492

[pstans]

8. I will be moving in a 1 or 2

I graduate from college and have been thinking about moving. I live in a medium sized town in Iowa of 25,000. I think a town of this size has a good shot of minimizing the impact and being close to agriculture is a huge plus.

I have thought about moving to a metropolitan area like Kansas City. If I moved there I would not live in Suburbia, my uncle is city planner in the area and has shown me some walkable neighborhoods/New Urbanism developments in the area.

Then it has crossed my mind that maybe I should buy a few acres just outside of town and then work to going Off-Grid with solar and wind power.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. I'm in an old neighborhood that never had to be gentrified because

it has always been considered a desirable place to live, due to its location between two lakes in Minneapolis.

One of the best lines of what passes for bus service in this city runs past my apartment. There's a little urban village with all essential services within walking distance.

[dcfirefighter]

10. Eternally optimistic

no matter how bad it gets, we as a species are resilient and adaptive.

Ideally, I'd love to live in a city outlined in www.carfree.com.

Until that time, we have a few options, especially to deal with our soon to be out-dated suburban housing stock. Namely, put what we have to use: edible landscaping, biointensive gardening (food for one for one year in 7000 sq ft, with 10" of rain). In-law suites from basements and garages (higher densities better support mass transit). Shared & Co-operative equipment, including transportation, or specialized transportation (pickups, vans). Co-operative guest housing, rather than an empty spare room. Local approval of mixed use zoning - putting jobs and shopping destinations within walking distance of homes. Neighborhood carfree street parks. Community gardens, and community composting. Just a few thoughts.

And, if you'd like to see market forces lower housing costs, and improve transportation, vote for split rate taxation.

If it's a financial disaster, look into http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LETS