Photo Essay

Vancouver: 40 Years of Urbanism in Pictures

A series of photos to illustrate some aspects of the Vancouver Model of urban development.

By Nicholas Kevlahan
Published August 05, 2011

Editor's note: This photo essay of Vancouver serves as a companion piece to the analysis of 40 years of urbanism in Vancouver that was published on Monday.

I've tried to illustrate some particular aspects of the Vancouver Model of urban development in some photos I took while walking the streets of Vancouver. Before we take a look at the city, I'd like to make some random observations.

Vancouver is pedestrian-friendly in many large and small ways: wide sidewalks, usually with a buffer of trees or parking between pedestrians and traffic. The sidewalks are typically two or three times as wide as in Hamilton (which are often only 1.5m wide), and about five times as wide on major shopping streets such as Robson and Granville.

The downtown streets are crowded with pedestrians all day long. This was very different from the rather empty sidewalks I encountered when I'd go downtown as a child.

Walking downtown I also noticed that there are many six-storey above-ground parkades, clearly dating from the 1960s or '70s. These privately operated parkades contrast strikingly with Hamilton, which, as far as I know, has only one (municipally operated) parkade.

Downtown Hamilton has devoted most of its surface area to cheap surface parking, whereas in Vancouver people are used to paying for parking and use the space more efficiently.

The fact that Shopper's Drug Mart and Tim Horton's are common in both cities (okay, Timmies is not quite as common in Vancouver) gave me a chance to compare commercial urban design directly.

In Hamilton, most Tim Horton's are drive-thrus (and many are drive-thru only), and Shoppers has adopted a suburban model throughout the city, with entrance from the parking lot and the windows on the street side blocked entirely by large posters.

In Vancouver, I didn't see a single drive-thru Tim Hortons, and the Shoppers are regular ground floor shops with windows and doors on the street. These chains manage to build proper urban stores in Vancouver; I'm sure they could in Hamilton too!

I'd now like to mention two socioeconomic observations. I hesitate slightly, as both are fairly sensitive issues, but the contrast with Hamilton is so striking I can't really avoid mentioning them.

There are far fewer obviously overweight and obese people, and in my ten days of roaming the streets (in wealthy, middle class and poor neighbourhoods alike) I only recall seeing two people riding electric scooters.

As other studies have found, I suspect that these differences are primarily due to the active, healthier lifestyle that is encouraged by a high density, pedestrian-friendly urban design. Other socioeconomic factors may be at play, but given that Vancouver has the highest poverty rate in Canada (significantly higher than Hamilton), and a large elderly population, a more active population would seem to be the most likely explanation for the difference.

Our hotel at 910 Beach Avenue at the southern end of Hornby below the Granville and Burrard Bridges. Notice how the hotel blends into the surrounding residential neighbourhood. This area used to be a sort of no-man's land of industrial brownfields, garages and warehouses.
Our hotel at 910 Beach Avenue at the southern end of Hornby below the Granville and Burrard Bridges. Notice how the hotel blends into the surrounding residential neighbourhood. This area used to be a sort of no-man's land of industrial brownfields, garages and warehouses.

New two-direction physically separated bike lanes at the south end of Hornby Street.  This is the way to make a one-way street pedestrian friendly: wide side walks with a double buffer of trees and parking/cycle lane.
New two-direction physically separated bike lanes at the south end of Hornby Street. This is the way to make a one-way street pedestrian friendly: wide side walks with a double buffer of trees and parking/cycle lane.

Another new bike lane, this time on Drake Street.  Note the signal button for cyclists and street parking.
Another new bike lane, this time on Drake Street. Note the signal button for cyclists and street parking.

Bike lane pilot project on Burrard Street Bridge.
Bike lane pilot project on Burrard Street Bridge.

The Hornby Street bike lane at Robson square, the centre of downtown.
The Hornby Street bike lane at Robson square, the centre of downtown.

Robson Square: still looking fresh after 30 years.
Robson Square: still looking fresh after 30 years.

All summer long open streets on Granville. Note the absence of police officers controlling traffic and the simple barriers. Viva Vancouver is bringing open streets to many Vancouver neighbourhoods all summer long.
All summer long open streets on Granville. Note the absence of police officers controlling traffic and the simple barriers. Viva Vancouver is bringing open streets to many Vancouver neighbourhoods all summer long.

Wide sidewalks with trees and park as buffers make Robson an attractive pedestrian street (especially for children).
Wide sidewalks with trees and park as buffers make Robson an attractive pedestrian street (especially for children).

Bus lane with signal priority in West Vancouver just before the First Narrows Bridge.
Bus lane with signal priority in West Vancouver just before the First Narrows Bridge.

Lighthouse Park and Howe Sound from First Narrows Bridge (from the bus).
Lighthouse Park and Howe Sound from First Narrows Bridge (from the bus).

Georgia St at Burrard St in downtown Vancouver.  Two of the six lanes on Georgia are now bus/HOV.  And in Vancouver HOV means three or more occupants!
Georgia St at Burrard St in downtown Vancouver. Two of the six lanes on Georgia are now bus/HOV. And in Vancouver HOV means three or more occupants!

Bus stops are large, attractively designed and feature the name of the stop.
Bus stops are large, attractively designed and feature the name of the stop.

Under Granville Street Bridge.  It is remarkably free of graffiti.
Under Granville Street Bridge. It is remarkably free of graffiti.

High density development on the North Shore of False Creek with an attractive urban park (George Wainburn Park).
High density development on the North Shore of False Creek with an attractive urban park (George Wainburn Park).

A kinetic wind sculpture on the seawall at George Wainburn Park.  The lower density 1970s development on the South Shore of False Creek can be seen in the background.
A kinetic wind sculpture on the seawall at George Wainburn Park. The lower density 1970s development on the South Shore of False Creek can be seen in the background.

Separated pedestrian (to the right) and bike (to the left) paths on the seawall at George Wainburn Park.  This physically separated design was developed after many years of trial and error to reduce conflict between cyclists and pedestrians.  At first they shared the path, then a yellow line was painted down the middle and finally they decided a separated design was the only good solution.
Separated pedestrian (to the right) and bike (to the left) paths on the seawall at George Wainburn Park. This physically separated design was developed after many years of trial and error to reduce conflict between cyclists and pedestrians. At first they shared the path, then a yellow line was painted down the middle and finally they decided a separated design was the only good solution.

Peaceful coexistence of cyclists and pedestrians.
Peaceful coexistence of cyclists and pedestrians.

A cement factory: the last remaining heavy industry on Granville Island.  This was once Vancouver’s North End!
A cement factory: the last remaining heavy industry on Granville Island. This was once Vancouver’s North End!

Mid rise apartment buildings next to Burrard Street Bridge on the North Shore of False Creek.
Mid rise apartment buildings next to Burrard Street Bridge on the North Shore of False Creek.

Nicholas Kevlahan was born and raised in Vancouver, and then spent eight years in England and France before returning to Canada in 1998. He has been a Hamiltonian since then, and is a strong believer in the potential of this city. Although he spends most of his time as a mathematician, he is also a passionate amateur urbanist and a fan of good design. You can often spot him strolling the streets of the downtown, shopping at the Market. Nicholas is the spokesperson for Hamilton Light Rail.

31 Comments

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Read Comments

[ - ]

By GrapeApe (registered) | Posted August 05, 2011 at 12:59:58

I recently returned from Vancouver (first time there) and I walked about the city, travelled the transit system, and made many of the same oberservations that you have listed here. I had no idea that 40 years ago Hamilton had so many similarities. The thing that really resonated with me was how open the city felt.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted August 05, 2011 at 15:27:17

I love way the cobbled only the pedestrian side of that mixed/use path. Brlliant way to dissuade cyclists by design.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Cristi (anonymous) | Posted August 05, 2011 at 17:14:02

Great photos, Nicholas, and I love to hear your thoughts, as always. But why is Vancouver considered a role model to Hamilton because there "far fewer obviously overweight and obese people"? If your point is that Vancouverites enjoy longer, healthier lives, with lower rates of cancer, heart disease, and strokes, and if you could back that up with some solid evidence, then that would be a great selling point. But just a casual observation that you didn't see many fat people (and treating that as an example of Vancouver's obvious superiority) is rather off-putting to me. I'm all for comparing the beauty of the natural environments and the architecture and infrastructure of the two cities, but when we start to assume that Vancouver is better because there are no fatties around, that's where you lose me.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Grom (anonymous) | Posted August 05, 2011 at 18:51:08

Comments with a score below -5 are hidden by default.

You can change or disable this comment score threshold by registering an RTH user account.

Comment edited by administrator Ryan on 2011-08-08 19:49:50

Permalink | Context

By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted August 05, 2011 at 19:18:37 in reply to Comment 67524

Who the f..k are you supposed to be again? Go back to Vanshitver and leave Hamilton alone.

Hmm... You know, if you think about this proposal...given that the proposer wouldn't be an issue anymore...it's actually quite compelling.

Permalink | Context

By chimochimo (registered) | Posted August 05, 2011 at 19:27:48 in reply to Comment 67525

Indeed

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted August 05, 2011 at 21:41:44

still boggles my mind that our 'chamber of commerce' fights tooth and nail against bringing that kind of business investment, vibrancy and quality of life to our city. Are they run by a competing city's Chamber that I'm unaware of?? Only enemies would try to hold us back so fiercely.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By kevlahan (registered) | Posted August 05, 2011 at 21:58:54

Christi,

I certainly didn't intend to offend with my comments about the much lower rates of obesity in Vancouver, which is why I hesitated in mentioning it. I apologize if you were offended.

This is certainly not an esthetic issue, but a health issue and I believe it is related to the pedestrian-friendly active lifestyle encouraged by the urban design of the city. I should have been clearer that lower obesity rates mean a healthier population. Vancouver's obesity rate of 11.7% is almost three times lower than Hamilton's rate of 34.6% (http://www.canadafacts.org/the-slimmest-and-fattest-in-canada/), and this is associated with a significantly healthier population. Table 1 of

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/health...

shows that the average life expectancy in Vancouver is 81.1 years (the highest in Canada), while the average life expectancy in Hamilton is 79.4 years.

Vancouver has been rated the "healthiest city in Canada" according to several measures:

http://www.besthealthmag.ca/get-healthy/health/canadas-healthiest-cities http://www.besthealthmag.ca/get-healthy/...

Hamilton didn't make the top 20 in 2009.

According to most epidemiologists and public health organizations North America and Europe are facing a so-called obesity epidemic which has serious health implications. For example, see the following parliamentary report:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/resear...

Figure 1B of this report shows that the prevalence of obesity in Canada has increased from less than 8% in 1970 to about 15% in 1998. The rate in 2010 was 25%, more than three times the rate in 1970 (http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2010/09/23/obesity-canada-adults-oecd.html). Lack of exercise is cited as a significant risk factor epidemiologically (i.e. on a statistical basis), and a pedestrian-oriented city has a more active population. The parliamentary report points out numerous health dangers with obesity,

"Numerous scientific studies have linked overweight and obesity with increased risk for a broad range of illnesses, including: Type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, insulin resistance, gallbladder disease, obstructive sleep apnea and respiratory problems, cardiovascular disease (e.g., coronary heart disease and ischemic stroke), hypertension, osteoarthritis, some types of cancer (e.g., breast, endometrial, colon, prostate and kidney), psychosocial problems, functional limitations and impaired fertility.(11)"

See also the World Health Organization:

http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/obes...

Comment edited by kevlahan on 2011-08-05 22:13:35

Permalink | Context

By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted August 06, 2011 at 08:31:24 in reply to Comment 67530

I'm finding myself shaking my head at this exchange. The notion that Nicholas should have to essentially apologize for a comment that should not have been taken as some kind of slight is absurd. But this is where we are right now, with a faction of people girding themselves with umbrage at the slimmest (!) connotation or suggestion of 'fatness' or being 'overweight' or 'obesity' being injected into a conversation.

As this whole issue is one of my prime passions in Life, and as I have struggled with my own eating disorder while maintaining a broad fitness regimen almost all my life, I find I don't have any desire to 'play nice' when the subject comes up.

We've created a society that has –for the most part– detached itself from itself physically. As members of the animal kingdom, we've entirely abrogated our natural inclinations and said an emphatic 'Fuck you!' to our physical selves. And I'll tell ya, besides being saddening, maddening and frustrating...it's utterly disgusting.

And to think that this has happened over the relatively short time-span of fifty years. (Yes, I've lived it all, and can tell you first-hand what happened, but I won't take up space here.)

The 'excuses' I hear from 'the other side' are enough to make me barf...even when taking in all the contributing factors, all the extenuating circumstances. Here it is in a nutshell: when I was in public school in the mid-60s, we had maybe ONE 'overweight' kid in each class. I remember one school I went to, in the entire six grades there was ONE notable 'overweight' child, 'Fat Freddy'.

Go into any elementary school classroom now. Do a count. The percentage of 'overweight' kids is beyond alarming.

All the reasons, all the rationalizations in the world are fine and dandy, but the bottom line is that our obesity pandemic is the greatest risk to not only ourselves via the concomitant afflictions (heart disease, arthritis, Type 2 Diabetes, etc), but our health care system; the NHS in the UK predicted more than six years ago that its projections showed that it could very well be bankrupted because of obesity in less than two decades. This applies to Canada's system as well.

Enough with the 'acceptance'. We need to return to our physical selves. What we've allowed ourselves to become is a real betrayal.

'Cook fresh food. Be active. Have fun.'

Comment edited by mystoneycreek on 2011-08-06 08:32:11

Permalink | Context

By WRCU2 (registered) - website | Posted August 06, 2011 at 09:08:19 in reply to Comment 67539

I'll tell ya, besides being saddening, maddening and frustrating...it's utterly disgusting

I agree mystoneycreek, but neither you nor kevlahan has made the proper connection between human obesity and improper nutrition. Alas, the details are too deep for this particular discussion except to say the solution exists in rich mineral pockets flowing down from the great Rocky Mountains.

PS - WHO = Wreck Health Organization

Comment edited by WRCU2 on 2011-08-06 09:30:24

Permalink | Context

By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted August 06, 2011 at 09:40:38 in reply to Comment 67541

...but neither you nor kevlahan has made the proper connection between human obesity and proper nutrition.

Not true. Not true at all.

I've spent an inordinate amount of time over the past two decades actively involved in this subject. Both from an empirical, first-hand vantage point, to being a personal trainer, to keeping a constant eye on what's going on in general. I'm fully aware of the various levels of concern there are regarding nutrition, from the factor of ease-of-availability-of-calories (forty years ago it wasn't convenient to ingest 1,500 calories; today, you can take a box out of the freezer and within ten minutes, you can consume two-thirds of the average daily requirements...and yes, I'm being sloppy with my caloric requirements for the sake of expediency), to the notion of empty calories to the insulin factor to additives to chemicals, yadda, yadda, apathy-towards-information yadda. (Even down to the water we drink...which I believe is connected to your RM reference.)

But I maintain that in the formula involving 'nutrition/activity', the latter is beyond question the one that's never really properly addressed...unless it's addressed by the fitness/supplement/diet industrial complex by way of Madison Avenue. Mostly because people have come to refuse to acknowledge the responsibility they have for their bodies.

There's a reason that John Locke's quote has remained in circulation for over four centuries (albeit in its truncated form):

"A sound mind in a sound body, is a short, but full description of a happy state in this World: he that has these two, has little more to wish for; and he that wants either of them, will be little the better for anything else."

Permalink | Context

By WRCU2 (registered) - website | Posted August 06, 2011 at 10:13:42 in reply to Comment 67544

Even down to the water we drink...which I believe is connected to your RM reference.

Not really mystoneycreek.

Bread from stones: and thus forsooth
The Bible words maintain their truth
Art we love but never can endure
To see the artificial in manure

Julius Hensel - Bread From Stones - Acres USA Publishing 1991, Chapter 8: Stone-Meal Manure, pgs. 47-53; selected excerpts from Pioneer, July 22, 1892

Comment edited by WRCU2 on 2011-08-06 10:20:42

Permalink | Context

By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted August 07, 2011 at 07:05:18 in reply to Comment 67548

Not really mystoneycreek.

Well then, I have something marvellous to share with you.

: )

Permalink | Context

By Cristi (anonymous) | Posted August 05, 2011 at 23:31:44 in reply to Comment 67530

Thanks for the additional info, Nicholas. I totally agree that making Hamilton a more pedestrian-friendly, walkable place would benefit all of our citizens. The benefits of regular exercise and an active lifestyle are apparent. But the goal (and I'm sure you will agree) should be healthy citizens, not just people who "look" healthy. (i.e. thin) Many of those slim Vancouverites you observed may have been addicted to drugs or alcohol, or smokers, or working in high-stress jobs, or experiencing other risk factors for ill health. But you would never know it by looking at them. If we improve Hamilton's public transit and provide more opportunities for healthy lifestyles that include a lot of exercise, ALL Hamiltonians will benefit. Not just the fat ones.

Permalink | Context

By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted August 06, 2011 at 15:17:25 in reply to Comment 67533

As much as this is, without a doubt, an issue where 'individual effort' really does matter, there's a lot of larger factors at work.

Food, in general, tends to have much more calories and less nutrition than fifty or a hundred years ago. This means we can easily exceed our day's calorie needs without getting anywhere enough nutrients. As a result we still feel "hungry", or weak, tired and depessed (all clinical side effects of under-nutrition). Combine this with a century of motorizing every task we can imagine, and this is going to have very predictable effects on people. Some will get fat, some will be undernourished, some will be both and a lucky/privileged few will be neither. Overall, though, we'll be much less healthy.

Permalink | Context

By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted August 07, 2011 at 07:11:10 in reply to Comment 67570

As much as this is, without a doubt, an issue where 'individual effort' really does matter, there's a lot of larger factors at work.

Sorry, I disagree with the tack of 'rationalizations'.

If people took responsibility for their bodies and what went in them, even to the extents that are available re: available food, most of the problems would be solved.

The human body is an amazing machine. But it has to be used. It's no different than other animals' bodies: it can handle a lot, as long as it's used.

For example, nutrients are best utilized when they're eaten, not ingested as supplements. The body's systems are in place for good reasons and when we circumvent them...for convenience, for example...then we're essentially doing an injustice to the whole notion of physical forms. And yet people believe they can do an 'end-run' on proper eating...and I'm differentiating between 'feeding' and eating' here...by 'supplementing'. Wrongo.

So much can be attained even within our poisonous culture by returning our bodies to an active, mobile state. Not 100% of their potential, but I'll tell ya; give me the average sedentary, over-eating, disaffected person...and I'll give them great health in six months...and it won't 'cost' them anything.

Permalink | Context

By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted August 07, 2011 at 21:55:46 in reply to Comment 67590

I'm certainly not saying it can't be done. I've done it, as have many of my friends.

Cultural factors, however, are not entirely under the control of an individual. There's food availability and cost. There's the amount of time people have available to go hunting for better/cheaper food (or grow it themselves). There's the education in food they've received. There's what others around eat...

Social factors never affect everyone equally, or in the same way. Apply these factors to a few million people, and some will be far more hard-hit than others. Looking at what the introduction of western food culture has done to countries like Japan (as the number of fast food restaurants doubled, so did the obesity rate...), it's pretty clear that there's something rotten. Or did the entire nation suddenly become more lazy, ignorant and mutate their DNA?

Individual actions can only go so far...alone. Individuals acting together can change everything - it's the very definition of cultural change. Eating healthy and exercise aren't the most rewarding activities if they isolate you from peers. Far too many, these days, view it like a kind of religious penance. If, on the other hand, they bring us together (ie: shared meals and sports), it's a whole different story. While I totally agree we need to shatter the myths about health and nutrition, we also need to embrace healthier alternatives in ways that go beyond our own personal sphere.

Permalink | Context

By WRCU2 (registered) - website | Posted August 07, 2011 at 11:16:41 in reply to Comment 67590

Well then, I have something marvellous to share with you.

Likewise, I have another marvel of common sense to share from the same book which confirms your claim of the merits of physical activity upon a healthy body, although I feel I must reiterate, "the details are too deep for this particular discussion."

Man, whose producing spirit desires occupation and to whom is granted the wonderful mechanism of the fingers, has the advantage that he can weave his garments according to the season, either of flax and cotton or of the wool of sheep and the hair of goats, and can protect himself from the wind, the weather and the cold by using the wood from the forest to build his house and to warm it.

Food, clothing and shelter are the fundamental requirements to which everyone born has a claim, and these can also be acquired by everyone who has sound limbs. In the muscles of our arms we possess the fairy charm which can say: "Table be set!" for labour always finds its reward. Of course if people are foolish enough to leave the places where the muscles of their arms are in demand and paid for, if they leave the source of all earthly riches, agriculture, and go where their arms have no earthly value, because many others that are unemployed are waiting for employment, then distress, lack of food, of clothing and shelter must give him occasion to consider and turn back, returning to a life in the country, which is continually becoming more deprived of its inhabitants.

Every work brings its rewards. Work is necessary for our bodily and mental well-being. By co-operation it confirms us in the consciousness of a common humanity, for in social life we see in every fellowman an image of ourselves and this calls for mutual regard, charity, kindliness, mutual assistance. How different with the man who is not working. His thoughts turn to laying nets and setting traps in which to catch his unsuspecting fellowmen.

Further, when the knowledge will have spread more and more that the essential work of man consists in allowing the sun to work for him, in order that food, raiment and wood may grow up from earth, water and air, then many foolish outbirths of idle brains will lose their soil and foundation.

There are, indeed, in these times some bad calculators who say: We will work less and get more money. These do not consider that the more money is in circulation, so much more money must be paid for the materials of food, if these remain the same in quantity, and this change will be of indefinite limits. The real remedy can only consist in producing more food. The more grain is raised, the less money will be required to pay it. Here we must apply our lever. What infatuation, when men attack one another in order to compel the supply of sufficient food. That can only be furnished by the earth. "Does a cornfield grow in my palm? "God has created us rich enough in supplying us with an understanding. If we use this, brother need not overreach brother, but we can in serene tranquility of soil win the little that we need day by day from our all-mother Earth.

Julius Hensel - Bread From Stones - Acres USA Publishing 1991, Chapter 5: A Chapter for Chemists, pgs. 35-36

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted August 05, 2011 at 22:07:12

excellent stuff Nicholas. The correlation is clear and has been well-documented all over the world: people in vibrant, walkable cities are generally in better shape than those in highway towns like ours.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By BOOIS (anonymous) | Posted August 06, 2011 at 09:50:41

Nice photos. You're right. Vancouver is the best. I moved here from Toronto and I will never go back. Hamilton is even worse than Toronto. Terrible air pollution, and not much going on as a city. Just move back to Vancouver man.

Permalink | Context

By bigguy1231 (registered) | Posted August 06, 2011 at 18:24:27 in reply to Comment 67547

Actually the pollution on most days is worse in Toronto than it is in Hamilton. Unfortunately your another Torontonian who has bought into the old stereotypical view of Hamilton.

I am sure if you check you will see that the air quality stats will show Hamilton is on a par with Vancouver and many other Canadian cities when it comes to air quality levels.

Permalink | Context

By Grom (anonymous) | Posted August 06, 2011 at 12:12:36 in reply to Comment 67547

insult spam deleted

Comment edited by administrator Ryan on 2011-08-06 13:43:05

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Grom (anonymous) | Posted August 06, 2011 at 12:24:38

insult spam deleted

Permalink | Context

By bigguy1231 (registered) | Posted August 06, 2011 at 18:35:22 in reply to Comment 67555

On this site they never tell you the whole story. It's all about selling their point of view.

Vancouver is a beautiful city and a place I could live, but the underbelly of the city makes Hamilton's seedier side look like Disneyland.

Then again they all fawn over Portland which has one of the highest percentages of heroin addicts and homeless people per capita in the US. But thats okay because they have LRT and that makes it the most wonderful place on the planet.

Permalink | Context

By Ryan (registered) - website | Posted August 08, 2011 at 07:11:20 in reply to Comment 67578

Did you actually read Nicholas' piece on Vancouver last Tuesday? It includes an entire section on the problems and drawbacks with that city's pattern of development.

Permalink | Context

By Grom (anonymous) | Posted August 07, 2011 at 22:47:58 in reply to Comment 67578

insult spam deleted

Permalink | Context

By jason (registered) | Posted August 07, 2011 at 16:38:09 in reply to Comment 67578

another one of the old, tired attempts to discredit valuable lessons we can learn from other cities - because they aren't perfect and have their own problems, that means we toss out EVERYTHING they've done properly?? Come on, you can do better than that.

Permalink | Context

By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted August 07, 2011 at 07:14:11 in reply to Comment 67578

On this site they never tell you the whole story. It's all about selling their point of view.

Um... Look at the title of the site. And its mandate.

However, I do agree that there is a tendency on the parts of ardent RTHers to get all pissy when you point out harsh realities and the 'less-savoury' side of the city.

As you'll see in how this comment is downvoted. LOL

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By TnT (registered) | Posted August 07, 2011 at 09:39:02

I saw a great article on this site about food creation in micro gardens. More farmers markets and urban food resources bringing healthier food to cities would go along way in creating healthy, happy populations. I wish I had more time to work on my own garden.

Permalink | Context

By WRCU2 (registered) - website | Posted August 07, 2011 at 11:13:16 in reply to Comment 67598

creating healthy, happy populations. I wish I had more time to work on my own garden.

I wish I still had a garden, this season I had to simulate one. But the results of my experiments this year will reach fruition next spring when I bring what I've learned here, and begin to share everything.

PS - I could not find the key words "micro garden" anywhere on this site but while searching "food security" these two articles seem to fit the bill just right:

Eat Local - Really Local
Urban Bounty

Comment edited by WRCU2 on 2011-08-07 12:04:59

Permalink | Context

By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted August 08, 2011 at 22:31:58 in reply to Comment 67602

I'm curious about how your experiments are doing. I did a few of my own over the last few years, with mixed success. How is the heatwave treating the tubes?

Permalink | Context

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to comment.

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds