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.
In his article he mentions something that I've read about before, but never really thought much about:
Quote:
But over the past decade, most “cool cities” have not been enjoying particularly strong employment or population growth; in the last decade, the populations of cities like Charlotte, Houston, Atlanta, and Nashville grew by 20 percent or more, at least four times as rapidly as New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, or Chicago. This trend toward less dense, more affordable cities is as evident in the most recent census numbers than a decade.
When I first heard the term "affordable city", my first thought was to think that it meant a densely populated urban city that had low rents/housing in or around the city limits. Now when I hear it, I now think of cities that have a less dense core, not very walkable, and quickly transitions into single family housing. So in other words, they have pockets of density, but most of the growth lies in the area surrounding the city. Now my question is: what does this mean for the future of urban planning. The most apparent implication to me is a higher focus on autocentricity since those cities are not very walkable and don't have the density or build environment to create walkable environments. I know there is a recent trend towards alternative transit, but it could simply be a passing fad due to the economy and ridership is only consistently high in older more dense cities. The way high speed rail is being handled in the US could indicate that a significant amount of Americans are already satisfied with existing infrastructure for getting around.
Another implication that I immediately thought of is that is promotes the idea of the inner city as simply being a place where people go to work and not a place where live, work, and interact with the city. Charlotte is a growing city, but aside from 9-5 Monday through Friday, downtown is fairly quiet with not a lot going on. By a lot going on, I don't mean NYC or Paris levels of activity, I simply the city being a place where people want to hangout when they aren't working.
I guess for now, all I can really is that affordable cities are just utilizing their comparative advantage, but I have to wonder that will mean for those cities when land scarcity due to building outwards drives real estate prices upwards with not a lot of options of using vertical space because of so many detached homes. Those cities will have the prices of NYC, LA, or Chicago without the things that make those cities attractive enough that people are willing to pay high rents to live in them.
Its always those who have low infrastructure upkeep and little actaully public support whcih trnalates to subsidised public systems. often it means most taxbase is inductrial and when that goes for whatever reason ;so goes the city. Wehave seen this agi ain and again in post wwII as the demographic shift stared form othet areas having transport and power to compete. One often doe realise that it took war development to make much of the coutnry to have facilities avialble to compete.
I guess for now, all I can really is that affordable cities are just utilizing their comparative advantage, but I have to wonder that will mean for those cities when land scarcity due to building outwards drives real estate prices upwards with not a lot of options of using vertical space because of so many detached homes. Those cities will have the prices of NYC, LA, or Chicago without the things that make those cities attractive enough that people are willing to pay high rents to live in them.
This doesn't make economic sense. If people aren't willing to pay a lot to live in "affordable cities", real estate prices wouldn't be driven up in the first place.
This doesn't make economic sense. If people aren't willing to pay a lot to live in "affordable cities", real estate prices wouldn't be driven up in the first place.
That wouldn't become apparent until real estate value begins to rise caused by excess demand for housing and a limited supply of housing. Real estate in the northeast corridor is a prime example of this. High housing cost, among other reasons, is causing many people to leave that area of the US and relocate further south where housing is much less expensive.
That wouldn't become apparent until real estate value begins to rise caused by excess demand for housing and a limited supply of housing. Real estate in the northeast corridor is a prime example of this. High housing cost, among other reasons, is causing many people to leave that area of the US and relocate further south where housing is much less expensive.
Like I said, it doesn't make economic sense. If high housing costs in the NE push people to other places and make them more expensive (without having the same amenities people like in the places they left), people will stop moving there; you'll get a new equilibrium.
Like I said, it doesn't make economic sense. If high housing costs in the NE push people to other places and make them more expensive (without having the same amenities people like in the places they left), people will stop moving there; you'll get a new equilibrium.
My response to this is the same as my previous one. That does not contradict any sort of model and equilibriums static the way you view them in a textbook. Census data shows people leaving the Northeast and cheaper sunbelt cities such as Atlantic, Charlotte, Raleigh, Phoenix, Houston, Dallas are some of the prime recipients for those transplants. That migration of the Northeast will most likely continue until the real estate prices in the Northeast significantly decreases and vice versa for the newer cities.
That migration of the Northeast will most likely continue until the real estate prices in the Northeast significantly decreases and vice versa for the newer cities.
That much is correct, but I don't see why you think the real estate prices in the now-affordable cities will become as expensive as NYC, LA, or Chicago if they aren't as inherently desirable as NYC, LA, or Chicago.
That much is correct, but I don't see why you think the real estate prices in the now-affordable cities will become as expensive as NYC, LA, or Chicago if they aren't as inherently desirable as NYC, LA, or Chicago.
I agree, it's not quite that simple... even if that did happen it'd take quite some time. I may even be old by then lol.
That much is correct, but I don't see why you think the real estate prices in the now-affordable cities will become as expensive as NYC, LA, or Chicago if they aren't as inherently desirable as NYC, LA, or Chicago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by weteath
I agree, it's not quite that simple... even if that did happen it'd take quite some time. I may even be old by then lol.
I think there we're arguing past each other. I don't think these changes are going to happen soon. These older, more expensive areas have growing for decades, if not centuries, before the country was even founded. I don't think we'll see any real changes until most people here are in nursing homes. The countries really young so it's still in the process of establishing itself when it comes to these cities. Going back on topic though, the older cities were very much developed pre-wwII and their build design reflects that. The newer cities reflect the post-wwII thought of anti-urbanism and I created this topic because I am interested in hearing what other people have to say about the way they think these cities will continue to grow in the future. DC is a fast growing city, but it is an odd man out since it's pretty established and the local government plans its growth around its currently existing infrastructure.
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.
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.
