
02-10-2023, 03:31 PM
|
Sage
|
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 9,928
Thanks: 6,936
Thanked 2,255 Times in 1,821 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive
Agreed, and good points, especially the one about density per square mile. I've only been to Alaska once (went there by accident) but the points made, make sense.
However The Villages isn't about population density. The name says it all. Villages. Our Village is maybe four blocks off El Camino Real, which can be a real traffic bear, but in our Village it is all about peace, quiet, and neighbors interacting. The most traffic noise we ever hear back here is the garbage truck twice a week, and the occasional landscaping crew.
It is that way, living space - wise, all over The Villages. The Villages grow OUT, not UP. Most of us come from cities where stacking the people on top of one another can lead (not necessarily all the time, of course) to housing developments where the negatives predominate. Here, in our Village, the new villages south of 466 might as well be on the moon.
The one exception to the above, is that infrastructure here doesn't seem to keep up with development--though, realistically, it is probably that way in just about every area in America experiencing explosive growth. Example, that road construction zone up near Sam's Club on 441 (and I use the term "construction" very loosely, as there seems to be precious little constructing actually going on there) is a traffic nightmare and has been for years, particularly in high snowbird season, though that is a political, not a social issue. But infrastructure catches up in time. There is no reason to think that it won't here in The Villages, as well.
|
Every animal population has a "holding capacity", which depends on available food, range, and infrastructure in humans' case. At some point, for humans, the "quality of life" starts dropping. I am just hypothesizing that both the US and The Villages MAY (?) have crossed that threshold.
|