14 Comments
User's avatar
patrick flockhart's avatar

I’d say apathy. I am astounded by the number of people (who should know better) who are quite prepared to normalise wrongs so long as they do not immediately effect them.

Jonathan Tonkin's avatar

I hear you, Patrick! I wonder, do you think it's more of a social thing -- people waiting to see what others do first -- or just a feeling of lack of individual agency and general burnout?

patrick flockhart's avatar

social - enjoyment and security in the status co.

Kim Strongman's avatar

Probably apathy and despair. Apathy in respect that we often feel so removed from the subject that it is hard to get emotionally involved. And if you do get involved, despair creeps in when you feel like you are getting nowhere anyway.

A couple of years ago I voiced my concern to our local council about the lack of trees on berms and high fences in our area. I emailed them, got no reply, emailed again, rang them numerous times and eventually (after many months) a council representative knocked on my door and basically said nothing was going to change. So that left me feeling a sense of despair. Also it comes down to not really knowing how to tackle these issues as an individual.

Jonathan Tonkin's avatar

That's so shocking! Pretty terrible treatment really. Yes, the key is as individuals we often have very little power. But collectively we do. It's just hard to pull people together to act collectively.

Theodore Rethers's avatar

I agree with apathy, a new building design for our area is the inclusion of underground car parks under suburban houses, this involves months of extra ground work and the removal of massive amounts of earth and do they even get any extra living space with a steep sloped drive? The best was an eco permeable drive where low grasses could be planted but that seems to be a one off.

Theodore Rethers's avatar

I tried to get society interested in the buy, sell, swap notion for the real-estate sector, as developers are outbidding families who wish to live in the houses for sale but can not afford them as they wish to upsize, downsize or just move into a more modern dwelling. If they can offer the developer another option for demolition then it is a win win and we can keep the best housing stock viable into the future at no extra cost.

Jonathan Tonkin's avatar

Great initiative. Any progress on it?

Jonathan Tonkin's avatar

Frustrating. The challenge is we're stuck in a world of cars until they redesign cities. One of my biggest frustrations is massive ground-level carparks -- so I hear your point but would still prefer utilising the space under an existing building if at all possible. Ground-level parking lots just increase the walking time between amenities (see x-minute city point).

Theodore Rethers's avatar

Totally agree for bigger buildings and if they connect these underground between apartment complexes then we could free up whole streets for pedestrian and other activities, day care or coffee and gardens, even low impact sports. I think each new complex of more than say 5 stories should have this in mind so we can either connect back to back or end to end underground.

No I have had little success, time is money and money always wins in this field. People do not understand if you demolish a house halfway through its life then you are distorting the whole resource allocation toward homelessness.

Jonathan Tonkin's avatar

Love that idea! Anything to free streets of cars and carparks!

Karoly's avatar

Apathy for sure, but why? Either we are so distracted from the issue, don't understandthe issue, or don't care until they are directly impacted.

Jonathan Tonkin's avatar

Thanks Karoly. You touch on the key points for sure.