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)
 
Old 03-04-2015, 04:20 PM
 
Location: M I N N E S O T A
14,800 posts, read 17,715,636 times
Reputation: 9029

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by drum bro View Post
That's a big step up only haveing it urbanised around the stations. You might as well be living In the county in most suburbs
Its not a big step when your goal is to completely change the layout of whole cities.

You are going to have to do more than build those wanna be urban apartment complexes here and there, as i said you will need to either build more houses in between existing houses or demolish whole neighborhoods and rebuild them to your liking.

Both of which will most likely never happen on a huge scale.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-04-2015, 05:26 PM
 
2,289 posts, read 1,295,823 times
Reputation: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
I'd add that the stabilizing factor in those suburbs that were built in the 50s and 60s is most likely from a lack of mobility. What keeps suburban neighborhoods stable is a continuous renewal of households with similar or greater incomes. What happens in 20 years when the 21% of Ross Township that is over 65 is no longer with us? Are the kids who grew up there really that keen on staying and raising their own families there?

These places don't have anything to offer. It's not like they have attractive, historic housing that is close to the downtown jobs core, they're not near a suburban jobs cluster, and they're not new enough to offer all the mod cons that people want when they're shopping for a new house.
Perhaps these older suburbs could be reinvented as walkable neighborhoods? It has been commented that some of the Millenial generation are interested in walkability.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 06:55 PM
 
2,388 posts, read 2,955,202 times
Reputation: 1953
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
How is the cause and effect wrong? I didn't say anything much different from what you said, just in less words.
sorry. I must've put an "'nt" on the end of a word that wasn't there. My bad.

Still, it seems like you're saying that older housing will just maintain unless something bad happens when it's more like older housing will decline unless something unusual happens.

This is the basic market theory of housing. That people with money continue to seek out the best and newest housing (even if it's a brand new house in the shell of a much older one)and as owners move on the houses get passed down the income ladder.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 06:59 PM
 
312 posts, read 359,675 times
Reputation: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Randal Walker View Post
Perhaps these older suburbs could be reinvented as walkable neighborhoods? It has been commented that some of the Millenial generation are interested in walkability.
You see some people DONT like walkable.

I would turn down the perfect home in a "walkable area"

Foot traffic is not a good thing

People like quiet - silence. Not crowds

You move to Manhattan for crowds
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 07:03 PM
 
2,388 posts, read 2,955,202 times
Reputation: 1953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Randal Walker View Post
Perhaps these older suburbs could be reinvented as walkable neighborhoods? It has been commented that some of the Millenial generation are interested in walkability.
Definitely. I don't think 50s neighborhoods need a ton of retrofitting to make them more bike/ped/transit friendly. I think the problem is that there is too much product. It's not like when you're talking about housing from the victorian era or even the 1920s - there's a limited supply of it so wherever it's relatively intact and not in a war zone it's going to have value.

The 50s, insofar as the housing has a mid-century modern aesthetic, is already getting its due with people paying handsomely for houses by well known designers of the time. But then there are thousands upon thousands of cape cods and ranches from the 50s/60s that are boring from a design perspective and are located in middling and/or less convenient places.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 07:07 PM
 
2,388 posts, read 2,955,202 times
Reputation: 1953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clampdown69 View Post
You see some people DONT like walkable.

I would turn down the perfect home in a "walkable area"

Foot traffic is not a good thing

People like quiet - silence. Not crowds

You move to Manhattan for crowds
Because these places don't exist
http://www.6sqft.com/wp-content/uplo...rf-Court-2.png

Everything is either Manhattan or a cornfield.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 07:48 PM
 
Location: Tucson for awhile longer
8,872 posts, read 13,552,358 times
Reputation: 29032
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
... Everything is either Manhattan or a cornfield.
Ummm, no. I don't live in either one. I live in a single family house, less than 15 years old, in an area with other single family homes housing a diverse population. There are stores, restaurants, churches, a community college, a huge YMCA, a hospital, and other amenities all within a five-mile radius of my home. In my subdivision alone there are young families, retirees, whites, Latinos, African-Americans, and a couple of Asians. The average home price is about $200,000. I call it a suburb. No person or governmental entity is trying to suppress this way of living or engineer its decline. In fact, I drove out to a rural area today on an errand and saw three new subdivisions of houses being built, so not only is this suburb not in decline, it's growing as the economy improves. And the rural area won't be a rural are much longer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Tucson for awhile longer
8,872 posts, read 13,552,358 times
Reputation: 29032
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
In fact, the homes in your link look a lot like these, all built since 2000, in The Glen, Glenview, IL.
The Glen subdivision in Glenview, Illinois, Homes for Sale - Homes by Marco

The Glen's homes are all a very close to a town center, also built in the 21st century, that looks like this:
https://www.google.com/search?site=&...%3B3968%3B2232
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 08:05 PM
 
2,289 posts, read 1,295,823 times
Reputation: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
Because these places don't exist
http://www.6sqft.com/wp-content/uplo...rf-Court-2.png

Everything is either Manhattan or a cornfield.
Would this be the lower end of moderate density? I think my immediate vicinity-the northern end of Fremont, in Seattle-would count as such. It is walkable, and there are some conveniences within walking distance. I would describe it as at the lower end of walkable.

It is also quite pleasant. Most of the buildings are small to middling sized pre-WWII houses, with small yards. There are a few old, small brick apartment buildings of similar vintage. There is some newer construction, such as the small, two story apartment building I live in ( eight apartments). There is a main drag a few blocks away, which includes a small grocery store (which is expanding!); and a tiny, locally owned video store, which is a sort of focal point for the neighborhood. There are some other businesses within walking distance.

Last edited by Tim Randal Walker; 03-04-2015 at 08:18 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2015, 08:30 PM
 
2,289 posts, read 1,295,823 times
Reputation: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clampdown69 View Post
You see some people DONT like walkable.

I would turn down the perfect home in a "walkable area"

Foot traffic is not a good thing

People like quiet - silence. Not crowds

You move to Manhattan for crowds
There is a lot of low density suburbs, which seem to be a very popular with many people. I expect this status quo to continue.

As for the inner suburbs becoming walkable neighborhoods-this may be a niche thing. But why shouldn't there be an option for people who want walkability?
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