tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25646979.post2860323412229749936..comments2024-01-01T15:35:12.954-07:00Comments on Simple Utah Mormon Politics: The Real Reason that Housing is Not AffordableFrank Stahelihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01822334061980912687noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25646979.post-52608423437392020402009-09-23T12:07:06.247-06:002009-09-23T12:07:06.247-06:00(On the question about the demographics of Utah Co...(On the question about the demographics of Utah County, I do mean off-campus and not in student housing, which is different than residential housing)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25646979.post-16901942315456888192009-09-23T11:43:05.656-06:002009-09-23T11:43:05.656-06:00I agree that the distinct separation and isolation...I agree that the distinct separation and isolation of differing economic/social democraphics is very unhealthy for communities. This is at least as big a problem in the exurbs as it is in high density housing. How many blacks do you have down in the suburbs of Utah County? How many Latinos? I know from experience there are hardly any in the suburban wasteland of Davis county. Nor are there many housing options for the poor in suburbs. And the rich, with their McMansions are typically also segregated out from the middle-income and poor, often with gated communities. Suburbanization doesn't appear to be any cure for the demographic segregation.<br /><br />Open space should be more than just islands of small parks in the expanse of subdivisions and asphalt. We will be a much healthier society--physically, environmentally, socially, and spiritually--if we focus on high-density development which better enables self-locomotion (walking and biking), encourages more personal interaction, and leaves swathes of open space. The sprawl we see across the Wasatch Front is making things worse, not better.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25646979.post-89652813608862877622009-09-22T17:15:13.887-06:002009-09-22T17:15:13.887-06:00In the article, I stated that "Under the guis...In the article, I stated that "Under the guise of helping the underprivileged, open-space advocates take away many of the privileges that their impoverished fellow citizens had in the first place." There are ample examples of this. There may be plenty of possibility for low-income housing within high-density communities, but so far that has usually achieved an isolation of black people in public housing projects with subsequent high crime. I don't think that such distinct separations of people is very health for society.<br /><br />Communities ought to get together and build parks and other recreational venues for their communities, but I don't think that this falls within the commonly understood definition of "open space". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_space)Frank Stahelihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01822334061980912687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25646979.post-1255299995286317252009-09-22T09:42:52.794-06:002009-09-22T09:42:52.794-06:00So forget "open space?" Because there is...So forget "open space?" Because there is enough government "wilderness" outside human domain, we can forget about green space and undeveloped land within our communities? Just keep paving and subdividing, rolling out the sprawl? You don't think there are any negative consequences to that?<br /><br />I think there is plenty of possibility for low-income housing within high-density communities. Perpetual exurbanization (which will ultimately encroach on the government "open spaces"--conservatives already want industry to have unfettered access to those spaces) isn't the answer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com