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.
Suburbs of Babylon and Rome. Hell if I know if they even had names, let alone what they are. The point is their existence is well documented, especially with ancient Rome.
I presume you're referring to these. None of the examples listed are what we would understand suburbs to be. Outlying neighborhoods being poor had a long history, and these were for the most part not true suburbs because people didn't commute for the most part into the "city proper." As for the upper-class example, they were no more suburbs than English country manors were. Upper class people mostly don't work, thus don't commute, and thus their communities were not suburbs. The earliest true suburbs are from the 19th century with the invention of the horsecar.
No, I didn't say ANYONE was responding to a push. I have no idea about that, nor do I care. I don't care what ANYONE does - I just don't see why they are trying to push it on others (hence the reason that the thread doesn't say "why LIVE an urban lifestyle?") I only said I have SEEN a push - and no, not by the media, but by individuals who are in effect cheerleaders for the urban lifestyle.
Here's another way of looking at it, that might be more applicable to rust belt cities. Maybe these "cheerleaders" are proclaiming to whoever will listen: "Hey, these cities are no longer the dirty, polluted, crime-filled cesspools that we were told they were. But, many of the better aspects of urban living: great architecture, walkable neighborhoods, cultural amenities, etc., are still here! Come and see for yourself!"
I presume you're referring to these. None of the examples listed are what we would understand suburbs to be. Outlying neighborhoods being poor had a long history, and these were for the most part not true suburbs because people didn't commute for the most part into the "city proper." As for the upper-class example, they were no more suburbs than English country manors were. Upper class people mostly don't work, thus don't commute, and thus their communities were not suburbs. The earliest true suburbs are from the 19th century with the invention of the horsecar.
Yes, they are.
They might not a suburb to you because they don't match an antiquated "Disney" version of suburbs with white picket fences and a golden retriever that doesn't even exist today, much less 2,000 years ago.
Since you may not be aware:
1) Most people do not commute from suburbs to the city proper for work. There's actually more jobs in the suburbs than the cities, have been for a long time.
2) "not-rich" suburbs are as old as suburbs themselves. They still exist today as well.
The process was even more rapid in American cities. The Lower East Side of New York, for example, began emptying out rapidly after 1900 as soon as immigrants accumulated enough money to allow them to get better housing in less dense neighborhoods farther afield. At first they walked over the East River bridges to nearby communities like Williamsburg and Greenpoint in Brooklyn. Eventually, inexpensive public transportation allowed them to live much farther from their place of employment, for example, in northern Manhattan and the outlying boroughs. After several decades of outward movement, there were not enough tenants left to fill the oldest and least sanitary tenements on the Lower East Side. In response to the outward migration, together with new, tighter building laws, many building owners boarded up their properties above the first floor or abandoned them altogether. Densities plummeted. Manufacturing firms dispersed along with the residents, sometimes in advance and sometimes trailing, as they required larger and more up-to-date facilities. Along with the factories, many retail establishments dispersed as well. Both the residential and the employment density curves in the New York area flattened rapidly.
Note how that's pretty much the same effect the automobile had as well.`The more things change, the more they stay the same.
They might not a suburb to you because they don't match an antiquated "Disney" version of suburbs with white picket fences and a golden retriever that doesn't even exist today, much less 2,000 years ago.
Since you may not be aware:
1) Most people do not commute from suburbs to the city proper for work. There's actually more jobs in the suburbs than the cities, have been for a long time.
2) "not-rich" suburbs are as old as suburbs themselves. They still exist today as well.
The key difference between those "suburbs" and today's suburbs is that the past ones were formed by people trying to move inward towards the core, whereas today's typical American suburb consists of people attempting to move away from the core.
The key difference between those "suburbs" and today's suburbs is that the past ones were formed by people trying to move inward towards the core, whereas today's typical American suburb consists of people attempting to move away from the core.
Except it wasn't. Wealthy Romans weren't attempting to move to the core when they built their suburban estates. Wealthy NY and Chicago railroad suburbs weren't built because people were attempting to move to the urban core. Emeryville has a lot of new apartment/condos going up because people want to be close to the urban core and can't afford to live in San Francisco. Park Slope in the '80s wasn't gentrified by people trying to get out of the urban core. It was gentrified by people who couldn't afford Manhattan who wanted to be close.
Except it wasn't. Wealthy Romans weren't attempting to move to the core when they built their suburban estates. Wealthy NY and Chicago railroad suburbs weren't built because people were attempting to move to the urban core. Emeryville has a lot of new apartment/condos going up because people want to be close to the urban core and can't afford to live in San Francisco. Park Slope in the '80s wasn't gentrified by people trying to get out of the urban core. It was gentrified by people who couldn't afford Manhattan who wanted to be close.
Exactly! Sewickley, a suburb of Pittsburgh, is one of these older suburbs where people could escape the odors and soot of the steel mills.
The key difference between those "suburbs" and today's suburbs is that the past ones were formed by people trying to move inward towards the core, whereas today's typical American suburb consists of people attempting to move away from the core.
What?! More like they built houses on acreage outside of the city once they could afford to do that.
Except it wasn't. Wealthy Romans weren't attempting to move to the core when they built their suburban estates. Wealthy NY and Chicago railroad suburbs weren't built because people were attempting to move to the urban core. Emeryville has a lot of new apartment/condos going up because people want to be close to the urban core and can't afford to live in San Francisco. Park Slope in the '80s wasn't gentrified by people trying to get out of the urban core. It was gentrified by people who couldn't afford Manhattan who wanted to be close.
No, they were essentially building vacation houses that were close enough to the city to be accessible without making a dangerous cross-country journey to get there.
No, I didn't say ANYONE was responding to a push. I have no idea about that, nor do I care. I don't care what ANYONE does - I just don't see why they are trying to push it on others (hence the reason that the thread doesn't say "why LIVE an urban lifestyle?") I only said I have SEEN a push - and no, not by the media, but by individuals who are in effect cheerleaders for the urban lifestyle.
Perhaps you could present evidence of any push? Don't see why cheerleaders count as a psuh.
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.
