U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-17-2013, 08:15 PM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,715,489 times
Reputation: 2538

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
Except that's not true. Roman suburbs were quite well regarded and very desirable. Actual facts are that people have always enjoyed so-called sprawl throughout history. The early suburbs of America were railroad suburbs, likewise in London where the Tube has always been a driver of suburbanification. The majority of people prefer to live in suburbs in America and have for over 60 years. Prior to the advent of the train, the largest suburbanizing force in American history, it was quite difficult to live in the suburbs. The car just made sprawl more accessible.

Many cities are doing fine despite most growth being by sprawl. They all faced shrinking tax revenues and decaying infrastructure. The suburbs will be no different. Technology will always shape development. Personally, I don't see autonomous cars making a huge impact on gross level. Cities will still look much as they did before. Only when you come down to the street-level will the change become more evident. Parking will be handled as it is in places that use valet parking which the cars parked away from the immediate area.
Interesting...I didn't know roman suburbs were auto dependent disaggregated sprawl. Tell us more about the Roman car centric suburbs.

Must have looked like this:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Rrya-Q7Ji9...ERIAL_1966.jpg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-17-2013, 08:59 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,065 posts, read 16,081,530 times
Reputation: 12641
Here, this might help:

Quote:
Because trains are gooder than cars. Everyone knows that. It's just dogma, and one does not question dogma. Just as how dogma clearly lays out what sprawl is by selectively ignoring all things written about sprawl that don't subscribe to a particular viewpoint. It's a rather sad exercise in selective vision and practiced ignorance. Urban sprawl? Doesn't exist. Doesn't subscribe to my preconceived notion of sprawl. I shall therefore willfully chose to remain ignorant as that is bliss. Sprawl is suburbs with strip mall because I have chosen to be ignorant.
Sprawl predates the automobile by hundreds and hundreds of years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2013, 09:14 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,989 posts, read 41,967,271 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post

Sprawl predates the automobile by hundreds and hundreds of years.
Ok, here's pre-auotmobile London "tube sprawl":

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Edgwa...,20.05,,0,-1.3

a more modern American example:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hicks...,118.13,,0,0.1

not really the same thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2013, 09:16 PM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,715,489 times
Reputation: 2538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
Here, this might help:



Sprawl predates the automobile by hundreds and hundreds of years.
No, no it does not. Sprawl, by definition, is autocentric. But hey, thanks for the image of Roman sprawl, that was some seriously funny stuff.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2013, 09:26 PM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,859,209 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
No, no it does not. Sprawl, by definition, is autocentric. But hey, thanks for the image of Roman sprawl, that was some seriously funny stuff.
Ever heard of the street car suburb? What the car does is it allows a burb or city to specalize further. No need for sidewalks, less need for Grids(heck grids themselves were a responce to the cable car/street car). That being said yes burbs have exsisted since the dawn of cities and no technology autocentric or not is going to put the automobile genie back in the bottle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2013, 09:53 PM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,715,489 times
Reputation: 2538
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
Ever heard of the street car suburb? What the car does is it allows a burb or city to specalize further. No need for sidewalks, less need for Grids(heck grids themselves were a responce to the cable car/street car). That being said yes burbs have exsisted since the dawn of cities and no technology autocentric or not is going to put the automobile genie back in the bottle.
People

The word I'm using is "sprawl". If your favorite place in the world is a streetcar suburb that pre-dates WWII - congratulations - that is not the object of my ire. Sprawl and autodependency are symbiotic. Sprawl cannot exist without the automobile, the automobile is an absolute necessity for sprawl. On the flipside, the love affair with the car in American is partially born out of absolute necessity on them.

There was no Roman sprawl because, and I've checked this, there were no cars (chariots notwithstanding).

Sprawl have a very commonly accepted understanding within urban planning community

Let's start with a pretty good description from Wikipedia:

Urban sprawl or suburban sprawl is a multifaceted concept centered around the expansion of auto-oriented, low-density development. Topics range from the outward spreading of a city and its suburbs to its logical limits, to low-density and auto-dependent development on rural land, examination of impact of high segregation between residential and commercial uses, and analysis of various design features to determine which may encourage car dependency.[1]

The characteristics are:

Single use zoning
low density zoning
car dependent communities
job and community mismatch
greenfield development

I can point to you dozens of books, and hundreds of videos that bolster these commonly accepted elements of sprawl.

I shall limit it to two - one - part 1 of an old lecture by Andres Duany where he breaks down the elements of Sprawl - 10 minutes - well worth your time (BTW - I suggest you watch all 9 segments - but if you start with first segment you will get the initial gloss on sprawl)


Lecture Part 1 of 9 - YouTube

And here is a nice an succinct 20minute description of what sprawl is by James Howard Kunstler

James Kunstler: How bad architecture wrecked cities | Video on TED.com

There should be no confusion of the term sprawl with pre-war not auto-dependent suburbs.

Some of you need to inform yourself before firing off posts.

Last edited by Komeht; 03-17-2013 at 10:54 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2013, 12:15 AM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,859,209 times
Reputation: 1439
I live in a city and ah:

“Single use zoning”—That is normal even in a large city. Some areas are residential, some are commercial and some are industrial. It is just that a burb caters to one or the other much more than a city and those areas can be farther away from each other in a burb than in a city. Your probably don't want to locate the dyanmite factory next to the public school.

“low density zoning” Even in a city there are laws about how high a building can be and how close you can put them together. Some people want larger yards and bigger lawns, this is the crowd the burbs cater to. Given a choice I would rather not live with someone’s 2 year old above me in an apartment and if I were more into lawns and gardening I wouldn’t mind a larger yard.

“car dependent communities” Only in the biggest of cities can you do without a car and even then that is limited. Public transit is expensive and only makes sense when you have a lot of people to move. You can be car dependant and live in Chicago if your job lets off at a time when there is less pubic transit available.

“job and community mismatch” As old as industrialization and as old as public transit. It is nice when your work is near where you live but very often that isn’t true and isn’t possible even in a city with good public transit. I have had jobs where I had to commute to the burbs to work from the city, job that were within the city but located far from where I lived and heck while I might have wanted my workplace closer, I didn’t want it anywhere near walking distance of my house (i.e. factories which can be noisy, smelly, generate a lot of traffic and otherwise be bad neighbors).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2013, 11:16 AM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,005,048 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
This thread is amusing - it's all based on a kind of techno-gradiosity - something magic will come along that will make sprawl all right.

We won't tech our way out of this mess. Magical thinking won't change the cities. The era of driving an insane amount of miles to be able to live in modern palaces is over. We have to totally rethink the entire system, top to bottom. We can start with repairing the extensive passenger rails system this country had until the 50s (high speed rail - more magical thinking - not going to happen).

This is a fine mess - we are living on borrowed time. There is no magic tech solution to sprawl.
Wanting someone else to "magically" create a quick- and cheap-to-implement solution is just human nature.

If anything, vehicle automation, by increasing vehicle density via reduced reaction times and thereby reducing commute times, will increase suburban and exurban property values and push exurbs further out. If you reduce the cost of something, you've reduced the barrier to its use; suddenly, property at every distance that was "too far" becomes more valuable, while the value of previously "close in" land loses some of its value.

For example, if the commute time (or, at least, travel time on freeways) from Gilroy becomes something reasonable, then, given development in those areas, people who want to own a home will live there. Meanwhile, the benefit (and accordant higher cost) of living close to work is reduced because you'll see diminishing returns to automation at short distances and on densely used streets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2013, 11:27 AM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,005,048 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
I live in a city and ah:

“Single use zoning”—That is normal even in a large city. Some areas are residential, some are commercial and some are industrial. It is just that a burb caters to one or the other much more than a city and those areas can be farther away from each other in a burb than in a city. Your probably don't want to locate the dyanmite factory next to the public school.

“low density zoning” Even in a city there are laws about how high a building can be and how close you can put them together. Some people want larger yards and bigger lawns, this is the crowd the burbs cater to. Given a choice I would rather not live with someone’s 2 year old above me in an apartment and if I were more into lawns and gardening I wouldn’t mind a larger yard.

“car dependent communities” Only in the biggest of cities can you do without a car and even then that is limited. Public transit is expensive and only makes sense when you have a lot of people to move. You can be car dependant and live in Chicago if your job lets off at a time when there is less pubic transit available.
Going OT, but I believe some notes are important.

"Single use zoning" also keeps stores away from residential zones; not every combination is as mismatched as a dynamite and a school. Meanwhile, the combination of "single use zoning" and minimum parking requirements has created "car dependent communities" because it becomes unreasonable to expect residents to walk to stores and restaurants. Remember, walking is also an alternative to the car. Case in point, I used to live in apartments behind a convenience store, and I used it all the time for trips I would have elsewhere had to use a car for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2013, 03:52 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,065 posts, read 16,081,530 times
Reputation: 12641
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Ok, here's pre-auotmobile London "tube sprawl":

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Edgwa...,20.05,,0,-1.3

a more modern American example:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hicks...,118.13,,0,0.1

not really the same thing.
But not all that different either. I wouldn't really want to rely on walking from that single-use residential sprawl. It's a bit more dense than most American housing, but it's pretty sprawly.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Edgwa...ngdom&t=h&z=15

At any rate, Hicksville is a railroad suburb, not an auto suburb.

Mountain View, CA
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Mount...23.58,,0,-0.35

Walnut Creek, CA
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Walnu...337.88,,0,9.77

Pleasanton, CA
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Pleas...197.03,,0,0.28

The majority of Pleasanton looks more like this:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Pleas...,86.88,,0,2.63

Different, but not all that different than the majority of Edgeware:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Edgwa...132.54,,0,5.13

Streetcar development in the city of San Francisco:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=San+F...188.05,,0,9.42

Developed in 1912, before the automobile was really that dominant. Very much a suburb mentality. Roads were paid for and maintained by the HOA up into the late '70s as they do not conform to city code.

Last edited by Malloric; 03-18-2013 at 04:08 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top