This email was sent to the city and thought it would be worth a post. I just had a great conversation with Tom and think this opinion is worth considering. Thanks for the input Tom, -Scott
"I was doing a little snooping around the internet about Victor and found this web site:
http://www.ecospace.cc/ecoproducts/mountainside-sustainable-neighborhood-1207.htm
I want to make a comment about my feelings about Mountainside Village. I think that it is the most rediculous piece of planning for this valley I have ever seen. It is not "forward-looking" design and it is not inspirational to say the least! We do not like that kind of density and I am surprised that the City of Victor allowed it. The roofs are so close together and so steep, that a child could be playing in between the buildings when the ice and snow slides off and get killed. There is no privacy. This type of clostrophobic living is what people move here to get away from! If this is anything like what is slated as a Traditional Neighborhood Overlay, I say dump it now! How in the world can "this type of design...increase vitality and productivity in Victor"? The residents of communities like that become like chickens that peck themselves to death in their little tiny cages. High density living does not increase vitality, rather it reduces the quality of life. We moved from San Diego, California to escape this kind of high density nonsense. To me, it's all about profits. Developers want high density to increase profits. Cities want high density to increase revenues. This is where common sense takes a back seat to profits. Is it any wonder, when people live on top of one another that they, like the chickens, start to peck at each other and become maladjusted? The streets, rather than becoming a place where people hang out on the porch to visit with the neighbors, are taken over by gangs.
Here is an excerpt from the above web page:
Mountainside Village is a leader in forward-looking design on a local level as well. Officially incorporated into the town of Victor, Idaho, it has become an inspiration for the city’s City Planner, Bill Knight. Re-energized by the warm look and feel, Mr. Knight is leading an effort to encourage the incorporation of Traditional Neighborhood Design principles into the development of downtown Victor.
“When knitted into the town plan,” Knight explains, “this type of design will increase vitality and productivity in Victor.” Based on this vision, Knight is currently in the process of presenting Victor’s planning and zoning committee with plans to implement a new, Traditional Neighborhood zoning overlay, slated to surround the center of town. This parallel zone will allow landowners to develop Victor’s town center in way that enhances its warm, neighborhood feeling, preserves the aesthetics of its streetscape, and encourages pedestrian and bicycle transport – many of the same values that Mountainside Village seeks to promote in its community."
Tom Egbert
Victor, ID
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
I gave permission to allow an email I sent to Victor City to be posted in this blog. After reviewing the content through the eyes of a public audience, I want to make some clarifications.
When I said, "It is not forward-looking design and not inspirational," that is a statement of MY opinion and not meant to imply that I expect that others should share the same.
When I said, "We do not like that kind of density," I was referring to all the people I have ever spoken with about Mountainside Village, with the exceptions of those who have vested interests in the project.
Additionally, the email I sent to Victor City, in no way was meant to impugn, castigate, or belittle anyone in office or on the city council.
It should be taken as one persons opinion that happens to be shared by many in this community.
Tom Egbert
I gave permission to allow an email I sent to Victor City to be posted in this blog. After reviewing the content through the eyes of a public audience, I want to make some clarifications.
When I said, "It is not forward-looking design and not inspirational," that is a statement of MY opinion and not meant to imply that I expect that others should share the same.
When I said, "We do not like that kind of density," I was referring to all the people I have ever spoken with about Mountainside Village, with the exceptions of those who have vested interests in the project.
Additionally, the email I sent to Victor City, in no way was meant to impugn, castigate, or belittle anyone in office or on the city council.
It should be taken as one persons opinion that happens to be shared by many in this community.
Tom Egbert
Intersting point of view Tom has here. I read it and the Atlantic article at the same time, and they seem to be at odds with each other. I questions how "urban" the San Diego area really is - it's hard to find any real density in California at all unless you're in SF or downtown LA. Exactly what is Tom is trying to escape? If it's crime (due to his gang reference) we face a much bigger danger from meth labs in far-flung single family subdivisions than we face from gangs in our core community.
Using California as a model I see TND putting us more in the realm of Nevada City - a pretty beautiful place - instead of Auburn, which is just down the road and a pretty nasty example of sprawling suburbia in a rural environment.
Hi Tom,
On behalf of Mountainside Village, I would like to respectfully offer a few responses to some of the points you have made regarding the our development, and, more importantly, the concept of traditional neighborhood design.
First of all, I want to let you know what I am not going to do. I am not going to try to convince you to like the aesthetic of Mountainside Village if it does not suit you. I am not about to argue that beauty is absolute; the old “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” maxim applies here as well as anywhere else, including the finest art museums in the world. However, I will point out that there are many people who find Mountainside’s look quite attractive – beautiful enough to display on the cover of national building magazines and pleasant enough to attract numerous passersby to come check us out.
I am also not going to argue that the type of development described by “traditional neighborhood design” belongs everywhere. It does not. Teton Valley’s truly rural spaces need not be developed densely, and indeed should not be if we wish to retain this area’s majestic open spaces and agricultural character. However, it is precisely the desire to preserve this quality of Victor that leads us to argue that denser development is important in our downtown, on our main street, within our “urban” zones and, to a lesser extent, the transition zones between urban and rural areas. By concentrating human populations in these areas, we leave more of the valley’s open space open. We preserve more farmlands and more wildlife corridors, and we prevent these lands from being swallowed up by subdivision after subdivision. We reduce the number of invasive roads, electric lines, sewer lines, and water lines that need to get stretched out into the fields, and we save tax-payers money that they can spend on their families and their homes.
Finally, on a related note, I am not going to argue that neighborhood living is for everyone. We hope that efforts like ours will increase the diversity of housing options that are available in this area, allowing people who like these kinds of developments to live in them, and those who don’t to live farther from town, in areas where development pressure has been reduced by the concentration of development elsewhere.
Now that we’ve gotten that out of the way, let me offer a few responses to your specific points in the order you brought them up:
Density – We recognize that density is a hot-button issue here in Teton County, and understandably so. Ever since the close of its booming days as the end of Union Pacific’s Oregon Short Line, around the turn of the 20th century, Victor’s density has been decreasing… Until recently. Teton County is now the fastest growing county in the entire state of Idaho, as the pace of development here demonstrates. We do not have the luxury of keeping things the way they have been for the last several decades; this is not realistic, nor is it good for the economy of this area. The choice we really have to make is whether to develop in a way that preserves our precious open space, supports small businesses, and maintains our unique rural character, or to develop in a way that fills the entire valley with subdivision after subdivision, strip mall after strip mall, big box store after big box store, and turns us into a sprawling suburb like San Diego. I grew up in Los Angeles, and, believe me, I understand how unpleasant poorly planned, low density, sprawling development can be; I work for Mountainside Village because it is developing in a way that can help prevent Victor from becoming another Los Angeles or San Diego.
Done well, density makes services more affordable, helps small businesses stay afloat, and creates a feeling of community. It also has the potential to reduce the additional traffic created by each new resident, by allowing people to get the services they need without driving. Again, this will help ensure that Victor never becomes another Los Angeles or San Diego.
By urban standards, Mountainside Village is not dense at all. Because of this, we are not in danger of the “pecking chicken” effects you have described. Rather, the people who live in Mountainside enjoy seeing their neighbors, walking to their post office boxes, and hanging out on their porches. There are already nine homes occupied here, and I encourage anyone who is interested in this question to ask our residents how they feel about living in the Village. This is the best way to get an honest response about this issue… I think you will find that, far from being maladjusted, claustrophobic, and violent, Mountainside Village residents are quite happy and comfortable living in this neighborhood.
Finally, I want to point out that most of your comments, especially those regarding density, privacy, and roof pitch seem to refer most directly to our “cottage” house type. Though these have been some of the first homes built here, cottages lots account for only 11% of the lots at Mountainside Village. The other house types are larger and sit on slightly larger lots. It also seems relevant to note that though they are small (or perhaps because they are) cottages are without a doubt among our most popular lots.
Roof Pitch and Snow Slides – It is true that our cottage homes do have steep roof pitches. This is choice based on aesthetics (admittedly, aesthetics you may not agree with), as well as durability, safety, and environmental impact. Steep roofs reduce “heat island” effects (through which developed areas become unnaturally hot microclimates), prevent snow build up, and allow for persistent snow shedding. Rather than being a safety hazard, this actually increases the safety of a home. The steep pitch of the primary roofs on our cottages never get more than six inches of snow on them, and, since the eves are not too far from the ground, they do not pose a dangerous risk to children or anyone else.
Actually, low-pitched roofs pose a larger risk. This winter Larry, our architect, saw the aftermath of a snow slide with a crown greater than three feet. It came from a large, low-pitch metal roof, and landed directly on the front walk of a house. That slide could have flattened an adult had someone been standing there, and it took place on a large, rural lot. Faulty, careless design, no matter the size or shape of the house, can be prove to be extremely dangerous. Designed well, small lot size, tight home spacing, and steep roof pitches need not endanger anyone.
Privacy – There are different ways to think about privacy. Everyone needs a place to go when they don’t want to be seen, when they want their own space, when they want to be alone with their family. However, it is possible to have spaces like this without requiring that each home be placed on its own vast property. While it is true that none of our lots offer tremendous acreage, it is also true that the homes that have been built so far have been designed to ensure privacy. Each home is lifted a few feet off the ground, so the first floor it not at ground level. This design prevents a person walking by on the street from seeing into the living areas of the home. While the walker might be able to see the ceiling inside a room, he or she will not really be able to see what is going on inside. Furthermore, as appropriate, lots will be landscaped along lot lines to create additional privacy. In these ways and others, a sense of privacy can be created without requiring that large amount of open space be subdivided into large, single-home lots.
Profits – As with all developments, Mountainside Village is a for-profit entity. However, Mountainside Village is the project of a small, family-owned business that is locally based and committed to the future of this area, not a distant development corporation or a suite of wealthy investors who have no interest in Teton Valley. Profit has, in many ways, taken a back-seat to vision here. In contrast with developments that are building density for profit’s sake, our smaller lots are priced to be affordable, and the sale of these lots will not make enough money to pay the bills. Rather, it is the sale of our larger lots that we hope will keep us above water. Why do we offer these smaller lots then? Because we believe that healthy neighborhoods offer a diversity of housing options, allowing people with different levels of economic prosperity to be a part of the community. Unlike a development that has thoughtlessly jammed units together to maximize profit, Mountainside Village has been carefully designed to ensure that everyone is close to a green space or park, that sidewalks feel safe and comfortable to walk down, that traffic is slow enough to protect bicyclists, and that cars and garages don’t become the centerpieces of the streetscape. We have preserved a small farm on our property to help support local agriculture and we have designed our hillside lots to protect wildlife corridors. Mountainside Village has been designed to maximize community, not profit, and, again, we would be happy to show you what we mean if you ever want to come by for a visit.
I hope this begins to answer some of your concerns about Mountainside Village, and about TND in general. If you are not the kind of person who likes living in a neighborhood with other people, prefers to drive rather than walk, and does not like the craftsman-style, front porch look of our homes, then Mountainside Village is not for you. You should not move to a place like this, because it will not fulfill your desires. But there are many others in Victor who love the sense of small-town community that we seek to encourage here, who long for the return of a vibrant main street, and who would be thrilled to be able to safely walk to the park, the bus stop, or the local café. We don’t think they should be denied their wishes either, and we hope Mountainside Village offers them the opportunity to live in just that kind of place.
Sincerely,
Dahvi Wilson
Director of Sustainability
Mountainside Village
Post a Comment