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.
The inner core of many city neighborhoods are becoming affluent while the suburbs are becoming ghettos, Inner city doesn't mean what it did 20 years ago.
The inner core of many city neighborhoods are becoming affluent while the suburbs are becoming ghettos, Inner city doesn't mean what it did 20 years ago.
I've said for years that outer ring suburbs that hang on the fringes of rural areas are simply unsustainable over time. After the appeal of that shiny new house wears off, all you're left with is Bed Bath and Beyond, Big 5 sporting goods, an aging mall, Walmart, Applebees, Chili's, IHOP, and some grocery stores. A lot of these homes aren't built well enough to sustain a succession of families moving in and out of them, and before you know it, the value drops and anybody can move in. Once the exclusivity is gone, they're done. Americans generally like new homes, not old ones, and that's not a good thing either. Just invites more sprawl.
Like i always say, i can only live in the city (or in an inner ring suburb near the city limits), or in the country. But i can find no appeal to living in between. Some of the outer ring suburbs of Phoenix look like hell. I'd hate to see them in 30 years.
"We keep building" suburbs because people WANT to live there. They are voting with their dollars, and the dream of dense, vibrant urban cores lives a little bit in reality but mostly in the minds of urban planners.
I was particularly struck by this: "But Nelson, whose research predicts the vast oversupply of large-lot homes in the coming decades — and the growing “suburbanization of poverty†— said much can be done today to reshape the residential landscape. Most of the homes he expects to exist in 2025 have yet to be built."
Really? With a housing stock of like 120 million units, in 13 years more than half of those will be 13 years old or less? We're going to build 4 million new housing units per year?
I call BS. We've never, ever built 3 million units/year even at the height of the biggest real estate boom times--and now we're way under one million units per year. And this guy thinks we'll average 4 million units per year for the next dozen years? That makes me question how good he is at math, and how valid his other statements are.
"We keep building" suburbs because people WANT to live there. They are voting with their dollars, and the dream of dense, vibrant urban cores lives a little bit in reality but mostly in the minds of urban planners.
Well poor urban people now want to live in the suburbs, and they are voting with their feet.
Unless downtown Chicago, NYC, DC, Boston, etc.. is the matrix, I don't know why you say it only exists in the minds of urban planners. Have you gone to a downtown in the past 5 years??
Well poor urban people now want to live in the suburbs, and they are voting with their feet.
Unless downtown Chicago, NYC, DC, Boston, etc.. is the matrix, I don't know why you say it only exists in the minds of urban planners. Have you gone to a downtown in the past 5 years??
SF, I've been to downtown Chicago several times in the last few years for a few days at a time, and I agree it is fabulous. Walked the Magnificent Mile then up Lakeshore Drive another mile, back down to Millenium Park, Navy Pier....and housing and stores and restaurants all around, very cool. I could see living and working in downtown Chicago--and I could not in a zillion years contemplate commuting from the suburbs and working in downtown Chicago. But that's for now, when I am an empty-nest household. Would not have raised kids in the center of the action, I do not think. And I've read of young professionals leaving the city center for the suburbs when babies arrive.
Great thing about this country, you pays your money and takes your choice. It is exciting that the vibrant urban cores are an option. I just think the suburbs are not going to turn into blight, although they will become less homogenous.
And the guy in the article is full of it about half the housing units in 2025 not being built yet.
Like i always say, i can only live in the city (or in an inner ring suburb near the city limits), or in the country. But i can find no appeal to living in between. Some of the outer ring suburbs of Phoenix look like hell. I'd hate to see them in 30 years.
I've said for years that outer ring suburbs that hang on the fringes of rural areas are simply unsustainable over time. After the appeal of that shiny new house wears off, all you're left with is Bed Bath and Beyond, Big 5 sporting goods, an aging mall, Walmart, Applebees, Chili's, IHOP, and some grocery stores. A lot of these homes aren't built well enough to sustain a succession of families moving in and out of them, and before you know it, the value drops and anybody can move in. Once the exclusivity is gone, they're done. Americans generally like new homes, not old ones, and that's not a good thing either. Just invites more sprawl.
Like i always say, i can only live in the city (or in an inner ring suburb near the city limits), or in the country. But i can find no appeal to living in between. Some of the outer ring suburbs of Phoenix look like hell. I'd hate to see them in 30 years.
Many of the historic districts of phoenix look like hell. Personally I would rather live in a free neighborhood outside of downtown then live in a dictorship HD and I bet most others would also.
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.