Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, this is incorrect. Most colleges that have Urban Planning programs that are respected by both advocates of architectural desirability AND economic / social researchers ABSOLUTELY will advocate for planning that encourages a desirable mix of businesses that are broad enough to be resilient through inevitable downturns in the business cycle for some sectors. Similarly an appropriate understanding of the traits that make specific projects desirable to the affluent as well entire sub-sectors of development that can provide for appropriate housing for those a wide range of income / household types is CENTRAL to all good urban planning. Further when there are failures of urban planning to improve livability AND economic failures the direct result is a worsening of schools and other social aspects of the community.
For a fairly recent illustration of this consider the misguided efforts of some urban planners to advocate for reducing the flow of traffic on some retail intensive streets. The desired effect was to encourage more pedestrians but this failed. In many cases the value of the retail space was diminished which HURT the ability of property taxes to support schools. The other obvious effect of such fake "open air malls" was to create spaces that did not encourage shoppers but did encourage counter culture youth that would skip school to hang out and skate board on super wide empty sidewalks with empty fountains and benches... For cities that instead reconsidered the appropriate scale of retail shopping disricts and did not try to model space on commercial enclosed malls there was eventually a positive effect on shopping and property values.
Really this is basic stuff that anyone with experience working with urban planners in either private sector firms or for governments will agree with --the goal of planning is largely to seek out principles of design and methods of encouraging development that will benefit the greatest number of BOTH commercial and civic interests! You could get a well trained chimp to stamp building permits that merely keep Floor Area Ration and Building Height to set limits. Having a well trained planner with a broad enough vision to understand what development patterns will KILL a town and which will keep it vibrant is why many advocate for ONLY graduate level degrees in Urban Planning.
I think all urban advocates should put pressure on the school districts, which are almost always a separate entity from the city government, to clean up their act. I think it's sad that urban schools have declined so much in quality.
I think all urban advocates should put pressure on the school districts, which are almost always a separate entity from the city government, to clean up their act. I think it's sad that urban schools have declined so much in quality.
It's somewhat condescending to assume that city residents are lazy and accepting of poor schools. I'm amazed you can characterize all urban advocates of all urban areas in this way.
As has been said 100 times, there is usually a direct link between socioeconomic status and school rankings. With many cities like mine missing an entire middle class from which to draw engaged students with parental support, the schools as a whole suffer. That isn't to say nobody is trying, but some understanding of the situation beyond what you saw in a tiny city in middle America would be required before you categorize broadly.
Like you said earlier, "you don't have all the answers."
It's somewhat condescending to assume that city residents are lazy and accepting of poor schools. I'm amazed you can characterize all urban advocates of all urban areas in this way.
As has been said 100 times, there is usually a direct link between socioeconomic status and school rankings. With many cities like mine missing an entire middle class from which to draw engaged students with parental support, the schools as a whole suffer. That isn't to say nobody is trying, but some understanding of the situation beyond what you saw in a tiny city in middle America would be required before you categorize broadly.
Like you said earlier, "you don't have all the answers."
Please explain how you go from what I said in my post to the bold. It is well known that well-off urban parents often send their kids to private schools, bypassing the city schools altogether. I said nothing about the schools in my city, either.
Please explain how you go from what I said in my post to the bold. I said nothing about the schools in my city, either.
No you didn't - you made a bunch of broad generalizations about urban schools, and ALL urban advocates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
I think all urban advocates should put pressure on the school districts, which are almost always a separate entity from the city government, to clean up their act. I think it's sad that urban schools have declined so much in quality.
What data do you have to support that school districts are almost always a seperate entity from city government? They aren't, here - and I'm not sure it matters, anyway.
For a fairly recent illustration of this consider the misguided efforts of some urban planners to advocate for reducing the flow of traffic on some retail intensive streets. The desired effect was to encourage more pedestrians but this failed. In many cases the value of the retail space was diminished which HURT the ability of property taxes to support schools.
Meh. I've seen several examples of well functioning pedestrian malls. The successful ones strengthened an area already popular with pedestrians and end sucking away retail from the adjacent streets.
I saw your edit after I posted. I do not have all the answers. I do think attendance is critical, despite the fact that some will say that some kids are just there bodily, not mentally. At least something might osmose into their heads while they're at school.
Would higher attendance help the girl I gave in this example? I suspect less attendance would been have better. The kids who had no interest in being there made learning for everyone else difficult. This means giving up on the disruptive students but they aren't getting much from high school anyway.
Of course, she was lucky she lived in a city that did have decent schools available for those motivated enough.
Louisville CO: 2% of families below poverty line.
Baltimore MD: 15.4% of families below poverty line.
How can there be an expectation of equally succesful schools?
"Here in Wealthville, we have fine schools. You all in Poorville need to get your acts together though (but we'd rather not pay for it)."
You see how that's a little crass, right?
Maybe you can just quit your attacks!
You say your city has no middle class, yet you post a poverty rate of 15.4%. Does that not mean that 84.6% are above the poverty line?
And before you accuse me of not wanting to pay for schools, let me school you (no pun intended) on school finance in Colorado. School funding in this state is a state/local partnership. Unlike some states, we have a school finance equalization act in place, which keeps school funding fairly level from district to district. It's not perfect, but it helps to do away with the "rich district/poor district" issue that is present in more backward states.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
