"The Suburbs Made Us Fat"

[HMARK Center]

Ok, it's a bit more complicated than that, but I think this article is really interesting.

www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/08/blame-the-city/375888/?single_page=true

It briefly touches on the history of city street planning, and focuses on a study that finds a correlation (though the study's creators are quick to point out "not causation") between lower levels of obesity in areas with more grid like streets and a higher number of intersections, before talking about how some folks, sadly, don't have a choice to live in more walkable/bike-able towns. Thus, we need to start taking those things into consideration when putting communities together; there may be a health cost/benefit to the town you live in based largely on your street layouts.

Kind of makes me appreciate Jersey City a bit more.

[Bo Rida]

Interesting.

I'd like to see it balanced against the other health issues that can be caused by living in cities mostly from air pollution.
You may be able to walk more in a city but inhaling diesel fumes while doing exercising isn't healthy.

[Deleted]

I saw a documentary a while back called "URBANIZED" which talked a lot about how cities are planned all across the world and how the planning cities like that is so inefficient.

You put all your residential areas on one side of town, all your shopping, entertainent, restaurants 20+ miles away (or whatever) and then your industry equally far a way with only high ways to connect them. This creates traffic congestion, smog, etc which basically makes more problems than it solves. Of course refineries and such should be seperate from the residential/commerical areas but there's no reason shopping/eating can't be blended with residential.

That also gets into the idea of gigantic superstores which create all kinds of problems for a neighborhood and can't be integrated into one.

But yeah - I live in a part of Oakland that basically allows for you to walk or take public transport everywhere. And most any store/shop/restaurant is within walking distance.

There is the issue of diesel fumes like Bo Rida talked about, but I'd wager that having fewer cars on the road would balace that out. If you live in a place where everyone's driving all the time you're bound to have more garbage in the air on the whole.

[HMARK Center]

Aug 13, 2014 11:15:14 GMT -5 Bo Rida said:

Interesting.

I'd like to see it balanced against the other health issues that can be caused by living in cities mostly from air pollution.
You may be able to walk more in a city but doing inhaling diesel while exercising isn't healthy.

It's an interesting question, and I think it'd have mostly to do with what type of city we're talking about.

For example, for as many cars as there are in the New York City area, smog really isn't an issue there due to the scaling back of factories (which, sadly, has had more than some negative effect on middle class employment in the city) and policies that have been made over the past decade or so that have emphasized bike usage, walking lanes, high efficiency taxis/buses, etc.

Los Angeles, on the other hand, is so much more sprawling that car use is inevitable, and LA of course has its well documented smog issues.

The study clearly has more to do with obesity and related health conditions, and even in that case there's a lot to dissect.

There's also the issue, again, which the study and article tried to bring up, that a lot of poorer residents in cities don't have as much access to really good transportation infrastructure and more walkable communities, so there's an economic inequality aspect to it.

For me, I've always been fascinated by the Modernist 1950s-1960s "top down" urban planning, and it's amazing to me to look at what worked from that era, but what decidedly did not (e.g. separating home, shopping, entertainment, work, etc. so far and thus necessitating car use) as well. All things to consider as we move more and more into the future.

[Deleted]

I live in an area where you have to drive for about 10-15 minutes to get to anything. I can imagine that it would be really nice to be in an area where you could realistically walk or bike places.

[Deleted]

I think a lot of it is also the kind of jobs people in the suburbs usually work. Like if it's a cushy non physical job with lots of sitting that plays a factor in it. Also if the Suburbs is far away from bunch of gyms, parks, walking trails, and your job then you're wasting more time that can be spent on exercise.

[Hawk Hart]

In the suburbs I learned to drive and you told me we'd never survive.

[HMARK Center]

Aug 13, 2014 13:21:49 GMT -5 @supersweetbotch said:

I think a lot of it is also the kind of jobs people in the suburbs usually work. Like if it's a cushy non physical job with lots of sitting that plays a factor in it. Also if the Suburbs is far away from bunch of gyms, parks, walking trails, and your job then you're wasting more time that can be spent on exercise.

The funny thing for me was that when I still lived at my parents' house in the suburbs, I had an easier time getting to the gym than I currently have getting to the one in Jersey City; the suburb trek was a quick drive, while the main affordable gym I know of here is more like a 20 odd minute walk...which I don't mind, except when it's the dead of winter and I have to amble through ice and snow.

Most of the folks I know in the city work sedentary jobs, as well, but a lot of this is about how much walking you wind up doing by default in an urban area, where you just take a short walk to do errands or go out for a bite or a drink or what have you.

[Deleted]

Aug 13, 2014 17:44:21 GMT -5 HMARK Center said:

Aug 13, 2014 13:21:49 GMT -5 @supersweetbotch said:

I think a lot of it is also the kind of jobs people in the suburbs usually work. Like if it's a cushy non physical job with lots of sitting that plays a factor in it. Also if the Suburbs is far away from bunch of gyms, parks, walking trails, and your job then you're wasting more time that can be spent on exercise.

The funny thing for me was that when I still lived at my parents' house in the suburbs, I had an easier time getting to the gym than I currently have getting to the one in Jersey City; the suburb trek was a quick drive, while the main affordable gym I know of here is more like a 20 odd minute walk...which I don't mind, except when it's the dead of winter and I have to amble through ice and snow.

Most of the folks I know in the city work sedentary jobs, as well, but a lot of this is about how much walking you wind up doing by default in an urban area, where you just take a short walk to do errands or go out for a bite or a drink or what have you.

Depends on the suburb I guess and the layout of the city. If all your amenities are built in the burbs then that's awesome for people living in. But I really think it depends on how long it takes to work, traffic congestion, having kids, and what kind of work you do. At least in retail you're always standing.