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 11-25-2014, 11:42 AM
 
Location: The City
22,331 posts, read 32,161,575 times
Reputation: 7738

Advertisements

Both will grow - ot an either or nor will ever be

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/res...owthtable2.pdf

A Big City Growth Revival? | Brookings Institution

Will This Be the Decade of Big City Growth? | Brookings Institution

Even After the Housing Bust, Americans Still Love the Suburbs | Newgeography.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-25-2014, 04:27 PM
 
Location: Where my bills arrive
8,124 posts, read 9,566,811 times
Reputation: 8148
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
That is just a technicality due to stupid laws in Virginia where counties and towns can share services, but cities and towns cannot. It is more beneficial in Virginia to be a town and county combo, than it is to be a city with separate services.
The law is written where a town identifies what services they are taking responsibility for such as police but may choose to contribute financially to utilize county schools and fire services. Out of the top 10 cities by size 8 of them are city counties so there is no "county government" to draw from (ref: List of cities in Virginia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Services are shared between Richmond and surrounding counties but in most case Richmond expects to be in charge and be the provider not the recipient.

Is it better in NY/NJ where going down route Route 304 from one state to the other you change towns/city every several miles and each one has it's own services, government and or course tax burden?

Back to the question at hand I think both ways of living will continue and who's in the lead will always be in flux.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2014, 05:29 PM
 
12,299 posts, read 15,196,725 times
Reputation: 8108
Today's youth will move to the suburbs when their children enter school, then move back to the city after they finish high school.

Last edited by pvande55; 11-25-2014 at 05:29 PM.. Reason: Add location
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2014, 05:00 AM
 
Location: Central CT, sometimes NH.
3,475 posts, read 5,146,483 times
Reputation: 3532
Many 1st-tier suburbs are ripe for development and improving connectivity to the city hub. However, in order for that to happen the cities must be centers of employment, entertainment and cultural enrichment. Absent those qualities there is no reason to go into the city. I live in the Hartford area. Hartford is still a decent employment center however, many of the companies that are located in Hartford have expanded outside the city to nearby suburbs with more space, cheaper rents, and easier access. Hartford has some excellent restaurants, decent entertainment, and a rich cultural background (Wadsworth Atheneum, Bushnell Center for Performing Arts, and The Hartford Stage Company). Despite these offerings, Hartford is not a strong magnet to draw people into the city after 5 pm or on the weekends. As more jobs decentralize and more people work at home cities like Hartford will face challenges to grow and thrive and the private investment in 1st-tier suburbs will wait in the wings.

I currently live in a rural and distant suburb from Hartford. My plan is to move to one of the 1st-tier suburbs of Hartford in a few years as my children move onto college for a location that is more convenient, walkable, and closer to family and friends as well as the opportunity to significantly reduce my dependence on extensive use of my car.

Last edited by Lincolnian; 11-26-2014 at 05:09 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2014, 08:30 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,419 posts, read 11,926,143 times
Reputation: 10539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lincolnian View Post
Many 1st-tier suburbs are ripe for development and improving connectivity to the city hub. However, in order for that to happen the cities must be centers of employment, entertainment and cultural enrichment. Absent those qualities there is no reason to go into the city. I live in the Hartford area. Hartford is still a decent employment center however, many of the companies that are located in Hartford have expanded outside the city to nearby suburbs with more space, cheaper rents, and easier access. Hartford has some excellent restaurants, decent entertainment, and a rich cultural background (Wadsworth Atheneum, Bushnell Center for Performing Arts, and The Hartford Stage Company). Despite these offerings, Hartford is not a strong magnet to draw people into the city after 5 pm or on the weekends. As more jobs decentralize and more people work at home cities like Hartford will face challenges to grow and thrive and the private investment in 1st-tier suburbs will wait in the wings.

I currently live in a rural and distant suburb from Hartford. My plan is to move to one of the 1st-tier suburbs of Hartford in a few years as my children move onto college for a location that is more convenient, walkable, and closer to family and friends as well as the opportunity to significantly reduce my dependence on extensive use of my car.
Turning first-ring suburbs into job centers is, generally speaking, a bad idea. Someone on the forum from northern New Jersey has discussed this in the past. The local municipal system there is even more fragmented than the Connecticut town system, with hundreds of municipalities only a few square miles in size. They all want to compete for non-residential development, because it increases the tax base without actually raising taxes (or increasing the biggest cost drivers for smaller municipalities). But this results in a polycentric model where people commute from suburb to suburb for work, resulting in traffic congestion everywhere which no mass transit system could ever address.

Regarding Hartford in particular (I'm originally from Connecticut, albeit not the Hartford area) the main thing you need to turn Downtown into a 24-hour neighborhood is more residents in and around Downtown. New Downtown apartment units are filling up easily, but it's still a drop in the bucket. Worse, Downtown is surrounded by a moat of highways and non-residential neighborhoods - you have to walk through some very pedestrian unfriendly areas to get to the nearest residential areas (none of which are very nice current, outside of the West End, although I think some of the classic apartment blocks south of Downtown have potential).

Still, in contrast to Hartford, look at New Haven. With Yale right next to (even bordering) Downtown, along with two middle-class neighborhoods right next to it (East Rock and Wooster Square) Downtown New Haven has long had a great nightlife and restaurant scene, and has only been getting better since I moved away ten years ago. There's two different grocery stores downtown now, for example. All of this despite New Haven having many of the same issues in pockets (high crime, mostly bad neighborhood schools, concentrated urban poverty) that Hartford has.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2014, 12:13 PM
 
Location: Central CT, sometimes NH.
3,475 posts, read 5,146,483 times
Reputation: 3532
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Turning first-ring suburbs into job centers is, generally speaking, a bad idea. Someone on the forum from northern New Jersey has discussed this in the past. The local municipal system there is even more fragmented than the Connecticut town system, with hundreds of municipalities only a few square miles in size. They all want to compete for non-residential development, because it increases the tax base without actually raising taxes (or increasing the biggest cost drivers for smaller municipalities). But this results in a polycentric model where people commute from suburb to suburb for work, resulting in traffic congestion everywhere which no mass transit system could ever address.

Regarding Hartford in particular (I'm originally from Connecticut, albeit not the Hartford area) the main thing you need to turn Downtown into a 24-hour neighborhood is more residents in and around Downtown. New Downtown apartment units are filling up easily, but it's still a drop in the bucket. Worse, Downtown is surrounded by a moat of highways and non-residential neighborhoods - you have to walk through some very pedestrian unfriendly areas to get to the nearest residential areas (none of which are very nice current, outside of the West End, although I think some of the classic apartment blocks south of Downtown have potential).

Still, in contrast to Hartford, look at New Haven. With Yale right next to (even bordering) Downtown, along with two middle-class neighborhoods right next to it (East Rock and Wooster Square) Downtown New Haven has long had a great nightlife and restaurant scene, and has only been getting better since I moved away ten years ago. There's two different grocery stores downtown now, for example. All of this despite New Haven having many of the same issues in pockets (high crime, mostly bad neighborhood schools, concentrated urban poverty) that Hartford has.
Windsor has had a lot of development with the insurance companies and distribution centers and is planning a development that will bring a mixed use live/work development. It's easier (and cheaper) to start with a clean slate.

Partners Winstanley, ABB close in on Great Pond's launch | HartfordBusiness.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2014, 12:50 PM
 
Location: M I N N E S O T A
14,800 posts, read 17,715,636 times
Reputation: 9029
Suburbs are not going anywhere, however we are starting to see better quality of life in our cities so we will now have more choices to live in urban areas.... which means we don't only have to look to suburbs if we want safe neighborhoods and good schools anymore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2014, 11:03 AM
 
1,714 posts, read 3,137,575 times
Reputation: 1137
Where I live (Los Angeles County), both the urban areas and established suburban areas are flourishing--getting denser and denser.

Lots of new people, lots of new development--just lots of exciting new things no matter where you are.

The traditional low-density suburbs aren't really disappearing because they are ALWAYS people who prefer them... they are just moving away further out.

In the case of the LA metro area, the new suburbs are being built out in the desert/rural areas, while the old "suburbs" are reinventing themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2014, 07:09 AM
 
12,299 posts, read 15,196,725 times
Reputation: 8108
Suburban office parks seem to be falling out of favor. Partially due to accessibility; locate in the (north, west) suburbs and you can't recruit anyone from the (south, east) suburbs. Partially because big cities are getting away from tax-business-out-of-the-city policies. And better rail transit from the suburbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2014, 09:17 PM
 
4,832 posts, read 10,892,252 times
Reputation: 1290
I think the communities are becoming based on class.

The wealthy will live in safe, new urban environments. Middle class and upper middle class in the suburbs. Older suburbs and older urban areas, as well as rural areas will be filled with the working class.

I think we will see more growth in the burbs because more people can afford it.
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