10-26-2021, 05:51 PM
(10-26-2021, 04:43 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(10-26-2021, 04:03 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Transportation/location aside, it does look like they have put significant effort in this, and it's far more than "green in name" only. They are looking to generate all their energy through geothermal and solar, and the land usage is far less than typical suburban house, let alone a township one. And they are far smaller, 815 sqft as opposed to 2000+ sqft that's typical in the townships. They are using sustainable materials, they have community gardens, there are no garages, and parking is outside the community.
Doing this on a larger scale, or next to an existing community, would certainly be better. But I still respect the developers for what they are trying to do. As it is, it's about 1 km from Bloomingdale (OK for me to walk or bike but not for many others), Sawmill Rd isn't particularly bike-friendly -- and Bloomingdale doesn't offer much in terms retail (although there is a regional library branch there).
I mean, this comes back to my original question, do they really not understand the implications of where they are locating? Sociologically, I'd really like an answer from them on this. They do seem in earnest...would they care to understand the implications of carbon free rural living?
So, let's agree that one would really need a car to live in this development -- or a car share on site. But if you are not driving more than once or twice a week (you are retired, for example, or working from home) the location is not unreasonable. If you are not looking for city life, you can enjoy the Grand (kayak, canoe), nearby trails (hike, cycle), community gardens and generally quiet life. And much of that activity is low impact on the environment.
Or what implications am I missing?