Interesting Article: RIP Suburbs (Fresno: cul-de-sac, 2009, apartment)

[NewportBorn]

http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home...Suburbia-R-I-P

The New York Times magazine.The demand for suburban homes may never recover, given the long-term prospects of energy costs for commuting and heating, and the prohibitive inefficiencies of low-density construction. The whole suburban idea was founded on disposable spending and the promise of cheap gas. Without them, it may wither. A study by the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech predicts that by 2025 there will be as many as 22 million unwanted large-lot homes in suburban areas.


The suburb has been a costly experiment. Thirty-five percent of the nation's wealth has been invested in building a drivable suburban landscape, according to Christopher Leinberger, an urban planning professor at the University of Michigan and visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution. James Howard Kunstler, author of "The Geography of Nowhere," has been saying for years that we can no longer afford suburbs. "If Americans think they've been grifted by Goldman Sachs and Bernie Madoff, wait until they find out what a swindle the so-called 'American Dream' of suburban life turns out to be," he wrote on his blog this week.
So what's to become of all those leafy subdivisions with their Palladian detailing and tasteful signage? Already low or middle-income families priced out of cities and better neighborhoods are moving into McMansions divided for multi-family use. Alison Arieff, who blogs for The New York Times, visited one such tract mansion that was split into four units, or "quartets," each with its own entrance, which is not unlike what happened to many stately homes in the 1930s.



The difference, of course, is that the 1930s homes held up because they were made with solid materials, and today's spec homes are all hollow doors, plastic columns and faux stone facades.
There is also speculation that subdivision homes could be dismantled and sold for scrap now that a mini-industry for repurposed lumber and other materials has evolved over the last few years. Around the periphery of these discussions is the specter of the suburb as a ghost town patrolled by squatters and looters, as if Mad Max had come to the cul-de-sac.If the suburb is a big loser in mortgage crisis episode, then who is the winner? Not surprisingly, the New Urbanists, a group of planners, developers and architects devoted to building walkable towns based on traditional designs, have interpreted the downturn as vindication of their plans for mixed-use communities where people can stroll from their homes to schools and restaurants.


Richard Florida, a Toronto business professor and author of "Who's Your City?: How the Creative Economy Is Making Where to Live the Most Important Decision of Your Life," argues that dense and diverse cities with "accelerated rates of urban metabolism" are the communities most likely to innovate their way through economic crisis. In an article published in this month's issue of The Atlantic, he posits that New York is at a relative advantage, despite losing a chunk of its financial engine, because the jostling proximity of architects, fashion designers, software writers and other creative types will reenergize its economy.

Copyrighted, Mansueto Ventures LLC. All rights reserved.

[EscapeCalifornia]

I will move to a high density, noisy, crowded, vertical urban area when you round me up at gun point. Until that happens, no way in hell. "New urbanists" can live where ever they want but why do they feel the need to force everyone else to live in their version of utopia too?

[NewportBorn]

Who says it has to be noisy and crowded?

You have obviously never been to a big city where people (regular middle class folk) all live in a high rise, just cause its tall doesn't mean its hell.

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by NewportBorn

Who says it has to be noisy and crowded?

You have obviously never been to a big city where people (regular middle class folk) all live in a high rise, just cause its tall doesn't mean its hell.

Urban = high density = lots of people close together

How does that not meet the definition of crowded?

[NewportBorn]

Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia

Urban = high density = lots of people close together

How does that not meet the definition of crowded?

The way you say it implies everyone is in one room... It gets crowded when people stuff 8 people in a 1 bedroom apartment

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by NewportBorn

The way you say it implies everyone is in one room... It gets crowded when people stuff 8 people in a 1 bedroom apartment

So you wouldn't consider a place like NYC crowded as long as you had an 800sf apartment to yourself?

[FresnoFacts]

The problem is this is focused only on one side.

For example, if part of the "downfall" is due to increasing commuting costs what if people do not physically commute?

How many suburbs may become telecommuter centers? People would work from home, eliminating the need to go to an urban center high-rise every day.

But then we could write an article that telecommuting will lead to the decline of urban living.

[MIKEETC]

There are positives and negatives to both urban, high-density and suburban, low-density environments. I live in a suburb - it is quiet, there's minimal traffic, and there's none of the 'tension' I sometimes find in denser areas. On the other hand, there are days I wish I didn't have to drive everywhere, where I could meet people for gatherings without the logistics of a moon landing, and where interesting things and places are in close proximity. On days like that, I wish I was living in a residential tower somewhere downtown.

With that said, I think that predictions of the demise of surburbia are premature and even if surburbia were to die, it would happen slowly over decades just as the exodus to the suburbs and the decay of urban cores took decades.

[nightbird47]

Originally Posted by NewportBorn

Who says it has to be noisy and crowded?

You have obviously never been to a big city where people (regular middle class folk) all live in a high rise, just cause its tall doesn't mean its hell.

I moved away from a surburban sprawl because there were way too many people. When I was living in a house with a yard it was barely tolerable, but the apartment was pure hell. I don't like my neighbor a wall away and don't want to know what every argument is. I wasn't made to be a sardine.

I can't imagine living in a tall high rise where my dog couldn't go out without a long ride down the elevator and where there was no place to plant a flower. I don't think I'm all that unusual.

I have a feeling that those who like to live in a metropolitan area will go there, and those who don't will stick it out in the suburbs. Maybe it would be good. Those unwanted homes could be razed and space provided for gardens for the rest. Personally I'd much rather be here in a little town when the shtf but a suburb which had changed to its own community and could feed itself would not be so bad.

Suburbs didn't happen because people decided to go there. They happened because some hated city life, and close quarters, and wanted to get out but couldn't go to the boonies. Those people are still there. I think the dream of a place with some space around you will not die so easily. If these homes are as unwanted as it sounds they won't be so expensive that people who don't like to be enclosed in boxes can find a way to live there.

[bhcompy]

Originally Posted by FresnoFacts

The problem is this is focused only on one side.

For example, if part of the "downfall" is due to increasing commuting costs what if people do not physically commute?

How many suburbs may become telecommuter centers? People would work from home, eliminating the need to go to an urban center high-rise every day.

But then we could write an article that telecommuting will lead to the decline of urban living.

as a telecommuter, i can tell you that they can take away my suburbs when they pry them from my cold dead hands.

urban centers are no place to raise kids. limited park space(especially low on baseball diamonds and football fields), generally increased crime, generally poorer school conditions, and little to no backyards(depending on where you live). ill stick to suburbia where my kid can have some space to grow and get a good education, while i can have the space to sit on my patio and drink while my son plays in the backyard