Quote:
Originally Posted by pvande55
Chicago does not have any streetcars. Nor, I believe, does New York. But both have quite livable railroad suburbs, some 50 miles or more from center city. It might surprise new urbanists that many commuters on the trains commute to other suburbs.
|
A lot of streetcar suburbs don't have streetcars anymore--but they are still "streetcar suburbs" due to their era of construction (they both DID have streetcars.) My city doesn't have streetcars either, but we did--the neighborhoods constructed are "streetcar suburbs" because they were built in conjunction with streetcar lines, often by the same people (who often also sold both electricity.) They share similarities with railroad suburbs, which New York and Chicago both have, but are more closely built--they tend to be more linear, due to the frequency of streetcar stops, vs. the more widely spaced railroad suburb pattern. Chicago also had a lot of interurban lines, whose development pattern was somewhere in between railroad-suburb and streetcar-suburb.
If we ever stop using cars, the neighborhoods that they created will still be called "automobile suburbs," assuming we don't demolish them.
And no, it is no surprise that many commuters commute from one suburb to other suburbs--anyone who has seriously studied recent urban development knows that job centers have become decentralized, largely due to our transportation network. Streetcar suburbs facilitated this to some extent, although it was the automobile that really disjointed things.