Eco-Eruv
Jews – especially observant ones – are particular. Dietary laws of kashrut require that we eat certain foods prepared in certain ways, we require a quorum of ten adult Jews when we pray, and we send our children to special schools to receive Jewish education. This requires a lot from a community. As a result, Jews moved to live near Jews so that all of life’s essentials could be nearby. The shtetl was born.
Beyond the convenience, the rabbis understood the value of shared physical space. To this end (or so that’s how I’m interpreting it), they formed laws that essentially required Jews to settle within established communities. According to the 39 law of Shabbat, Jews are not supposed to carry outside their homes. For a variety of reasons, the rabbis established the eruv, a physical enclosure that extends the marks the entire community as “home.” Though challenging in a modern lifestyle, this rule can be understood to reinforce the spiritual community with physical proximity.
When I was younger, I observed the laws surrounding eruv – even when my family went camping over Shabbat, we enclosed our campsites with twine. Since, finding an apartment within an eruv has not been my priority. Rather than searching for a kosher butcher, I sought the local health food store. Rather than worrying about a mikva (ritual bath), I found a home close to Central Park. Still, I think the rabbis were on to something and they’re not the only 
ones.
Realtors, city planners and environmentalists are examining the “walkability” of a city. Walkscore.com just came out with a report that rates cities and neighborhoods by how easy it is to walk to the basic necessities of life. In other words, they’re rating whether a neighborhood’s eruv can sustain the community within. Though it’s so “easy” to hop in a car to drive the 10 miles to the grocery store or movie theater, functioning within a walkable eruv provides wonderful spiritual, environmental and health results.
Check the score for your neighborhood by putting in your address – I hope you “do well.” It’s ok if you didn’t – America wasn’t built with eruvs in mind. Still, that doesn’t mean we can’t start thinking about the wonders of 21st century eco-shtetl.
I think the factors WalkScore.com considers are limited and as such, don’t give a complete picture. It seems to merely utilizes a very simple web service to identify distances to mundane merchants like markets, coffee shops and restaurants. However, it doesn’t appear to account for the presence/absence of sidewalks or the relative traffic/width of the streets on which the walking will occur. For example, vis a vis the first point, I compared my current home to my childhood home. None of my family or friends who have been to both would argue that the childhood home’s neighborhood is more walkable, though it scored higher (only slightly but still). It lacks sidewalks, and in order to get to most merchants mentioned, major thoroughfares must be crossed, most of which are not well designed for walking. However, my current home’s neighborhood has both sidewalks and narrow streets, which encourage walking psychologically much more, in my opinion. That is, I’d walk 0.7 miles to a market in my current neighborhood before I’d walk 0.4 miles to a market in my childhood neighborhood.
err, utilize.
Joshua Pines,
Your point is well taken – hard numbers never give the full story. One would have to see the landscape to truly measure walkability.
Walkscore.com has other faults, too – it doesn’t register places of worship or accessibility to public transportation.
Good points and I noticed those things lacking as well.
By the way, I didn’t mean to poo-poo the entire idea, as I think it’s a very good one; it’s just not the end-all, be-all.
It would be very interesting to try to design a more complete measure for livability within walking distance. What would need to be nearby? Access to outdoor space, perhaps, like parks, and to entertainment, as well as easy access to markets and restaurants.