I have a short quote in an article in the Christian Science Monitor today about extreme commuting.

The thing that strikes me about the extreme commute is how something absurd has become normalized. As Andres Duany said in my interview with him, “time in public means time in traffic” and its a competitive, hostile experience.

The article is partly in response to the Texas Transportation Institute’s 2007 Urban Mobility Report which, among other things, says

• Trips take longer

• Congestion affects more of the day
• Congestion affects weekend travel and rural areas
• Congestion affects more personal trips and freight shipments
• Trip travel times increasingly are unreliable

They have some suggested solutions, but they mostly have to do with traffic engineering (not surprising considering the source). It’s a kind of myopic viewpoint, restricted by the profession. A more comprehensive view would consider urban planning issues, including multiple design theories and scenarios.

Then there’s the personal angle:

“There’s the philosophy that people buy houses on Sunday and discover on Monday that it’s a tough commute.”

James Lee has penned a column in response to the KERA broadcast and notes the importance of churches and schools, and the fact that these topics were left out of the film. It’s a valid point, and not one that escaped my attention. The issue of churches and religion was left out of the film on purpose, along with a few other big topics like the role of media. I’m working on a post that talks about these matters. The bottom line on my view of the role of churches is that they can be connectors but, importantly, they can can also be dividers - it depends on the church and how politicized they are.

I especially appreciated this line:

I’ve traveled the world, and it has been my experience that, whether in neighborhoods or foreign countries, people generally get back what they radiate.

Absolutely. If everyone around you is cold, its very hard to be warm, and vice versa.

The Mercury has posted an article and interview conducted a few weeks back. The interview is probably of more interest to readers of this blog. Here’s an excerpt:

Q: What … effects does poor community planning have on Americans today?

A: When you have a loss of social capital - a lack of community - the problems are many. Basically if you don’t have community at a local level, you may not have democracy.

When you are isolated, statistical research has shown you are more unhealthy, you age faster, and you are two to five times more likely to die of all causes if you’re socially disconnected. Crime rates are known to be directly related to social connectedness. A lot of the things people think are crime problems, and they tend to try to solve them by creating more barriers, more walls, more fences, more isolation, more separation. That actually makes the problem worse, not better.

Q: What would you tell someone who tries to strengthen the connections within their subdivision communities?

A: Most people do want some kind of connection to others to varying degrees. There are some who will always want to be pretty isolated and shut in. It’s very hard to overcome neighborhood inertia and style. The style of neighborhood I was in before was basically cold. To overcome that takes a tremendous amount of effort and understanding as to what makes things work and not work.

Q: What are the differences between subdivisions and communities like Little Forest Hills?

A: Planning means everything. Modern subdivisions are very poorly planned for community and for people. They’re planned for automobiles, for one thing. When you create subdivisions, which are disconnected from everything else - shopping, work and school - and are economically segregated, you’ve created a situation that encourages isolationism.

Q: How do you plan neighborhoods that will encourage strong social interaction?

A: The main thing is to be able to enter public space. There should be a public realm.

There should be something to do, places to go, places to interact with people in a casual way.

I (appreciate) some elements of modern design, but I also recognize that it can be very cold and inhuman.

Read the full interview here.

Looks like the folks in Little Forest Hills (the neighborhood profiled in Subdivided) sent Robert Wilonsky a post about the upcoming KERA screening (Jan 3 @ 8pm on KERA 13). He kindly wrote a note about it on the Dallas Observer blog.

Michael Davis over at Dallas Progress also picked it up. I read through his blog and noticed an interesting post about how San Diego has banned giant retail stores. Hard to imagine that outside of the west coast and certain parts of New England. Davis writes:

I hope that the current and future Dallas City Councils take notice.

While some community and elected officials openly wish that they had a Wal-Mart in their area, I ask you to take a drive to 3155 W. Wheatland (map) and ask yourself if this is what you want in your community.

The mismanaged Wal-Mart near US-67 & Wheatland is a disaster. Their lack of selection, filthy floors and shelves, dirty parking lot, and overall lack or willingness to provide a decent shopping experience is evident. Once night falls, it simply feels unsafe. Only open for three years, the store looks like it’s been open for twenty.

Good stuff. And thanks Michael for the kind words on the film!