HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 4:30 PM
jpdivola jpdivola is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 335
New Census data: Americans are returning to the far-flung suburbs

New Census data: Americans are returning to the far-flung suburbs
Washington Post
By Emily Badger March 26


Quote:
During the housing bubble, Americans moved in droves to the exurbs, to newly paved subdivisions on what was once rural land. Far-out suburbs had some of the fastest population growth in the country in the early 2000s, fueled by cheap housing and easy mortgages. And these places helped redefine how we think about metropolitan areas like Washington, pushing their edges farther and farther from the traditional downtown.

In the wake of the housing crash, these same places took the biggest hit. Population growth in the exurbs stalled. They produced a new American phenomenon: the ghost subdivision of developments abandoned during the housing collapse before anyone got around to finishing the roads or sidewalks.

These scenes and demographic trends left the impression that maybe Americans had changed their minds about exurban living. New Census data, though, suggests that eight years after the housing crash, Americans are starting to move back there again.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...flung-suburbs/

I think a lot of people on the forum have been predicting this for a while. Of course, one years isn't enough to make a definitive judgment. But, it looks like sprawl is back.

Now of course, US cities are still doing better than they have in decades and are growing and attracting wealthier and better educated residents. Nothing suggests this will change anytime soon. An increasing number of Americans will like in dense walkable areas, with good public transit. But, they are largely the exception to the rule.

This isn't really surprising.
Most urban areas are already largely built out and the vacant land/allowable zoning for redevelopment is too small to compete with the cheap, plentiful land in the suburban exterior. In theory, we need upzoning in the "desirable to the middle class" core and more restrictive zoning in the outer regions, with transportation planning to match. But, neither is likely to happen given that land use policies are generally set by a web of little municipalities.

Sure the downtown high rises and "sexy" urban infill get all the attention (particularly on urban sites like this), but the generic suburbs are where most of us live. That is true even in urban cities like SF, BOS, DC, PHILLY, etc.

Hopefully, we can at least do a better job of redeveloping our existing "inner" suburbs to be a little more walkable and mixed-use. Rather then have them fall into decline as the middle class flees to new sprawl suburbs in the outter region.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 5:26 PM
Centropolis's Avatar
Centropolis Centropolis is offline
disneypilled verhoevenist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: saint louis
Posts: 11,866
the inner and middle ring suburban collapse is going full speed ahead. fyi, ferguson is both an inner and middle ring suburb.
__________________
You may Think you are vaccinated but are you Maxx-Vaxxed ™!? Find out how you can “Maxx” your Covid-36 Vaxxination today!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 5:37 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,804
Are they filling the housing that was already built, or is this mostly about new construction?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 6:03 PM
pdxtex's Avatar
pdxtex pdxtex is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 3,124
this board is like rats on a treadmill sometimes. sprawl is dead! sprawl is back! the reality is, some regions are dying, others are on life support, some are stable and some are kicking ass. americans taste for large things hasn't really died. the ford f150 is still the best selling vehicle in the country. the reality is, the urban fabric and transportation infrastructure wont change drastically until fuel makes it cost prohibitive to drive everywhere. and while we are busy wrecking the earths crust fracking, gas is cheap! and people keep driving on....get back to me when gas is 10 bucks a gallon, then we will see some big changes..
__________________
Portland!! Where young people formerly went to retire.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 7:43 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
Eh, I don't think that higher fuel costs explain Europeans' more urban lifestyle, at least not entirely. It's more that the cities are older, and generally nicer. There are a handful of "beautiful" American cities, all of which are doing quite well, and a lot that simply aren't. There are also a bunch of drab, ugly cities in Europe, and they're not as vibrant as the former either.

And America has relatively few, but larger cities, which naturally leads to huge sprawling agglomerations. In Europe, both Chicago and St Louis would be smaller metros, and there would be something in between. Make Peoria, Bloomington, Champaign, Springfield and Decatur cities of 250k to 500k each (and make them 1,000 years old, and actually interesting and known for something), and you'd have something that looks more like a European pattern of settlement. There would be less sprawl because each would be a smaller, defined place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 8:11 PM
pdxtex's Avatar
pdxtex pdxtex is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 3,124
i think in some ways, theres still a bit of manifest destiny still kicking around the american psyche, to expand west, to mow down trees, build subdivisions and then name the streets after the trees we cut down!. but yes, i agree, european urbanism is mostly a product of history. american urbanism and suburbanism is a product of lack of history, lots of open space and cheap resources....outside of a few cities, it seems like the ultra rich still live on the urban periphery. there is always going to be a segment of society that likes grass and weekend bbq's. rolling down to costco and not thinking much about how they interact with the built environment. thats fine by me. if traffic and its constraints were not a reality, people would probably drive even more.. i just wish transit was more on the american mind. its getting there but the incentive to not drive isn't high enough yet. when gas becomes too expensive, rivaling food costs, then our opinions as a country will change.
__________________
Portland!! Where young people formerly went to retire.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 8:15 PM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
Eh, I don't think that higher fuel costs explain Europeans' more urban lifestyle, at least not entirely. It's more that the cities are older, and generally nicer. There are a handful of "beautiful" American cities, all of which are doing quite well, and a lot that simply aren't. There are also a bunch of drab, ugly cities in Europe, and they're not as vibrant as the former either.
I think part of this is also based on the fetishizing of European centers based on infrequent tourist experiences. If you visit Europe, you're probably going to see places like Venice, Paris, and Brugge. I don't think you'll be stopping into to experience the glories of Essen, or Bradford or Lille. So people have this impression that everyone is living some ultra-urban lifestyle, surrounded by medieval architecture, narrow streets, and incredible street vitality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 8:55 PM
aquablue aquablue is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I think part of this is also based on the fetishizing of European centers based on infrequent tourist experiences. If you visit Europe, you're probably going to see places like Venice, Paris, and Brugge. I don't think you'll be stopping into to experience the glories of Essen, or Bradford or Lille. So people have this impression that everyone is living some ultra-urban lifestyle, surrounded by medieval architecture, narrow streets, and incredible street vitality.
Even the less pretty cities like Shefield, Nottingham, Lille, Dortmund, etc. have more street vitality and urban lifestyle than places like St. Louis, Balitmore, Tampa, and even larger cities like LA (where few people walk). And they have prettier centers too. What does that say for the poorly designed average US city? I'd say they even have more street vitality than DC and Boston. Places like Dublin certainly do - I have extensive experience with that city and have compared it to DC - and that isn't a beautiful city by european standards by any stretch of the imagination. However, it would be up there with the most beautiful in the USA. Europeans are lucky that history of dense cities and nice streets has helped shape their interesting socially connected urban lifestyle. Even the bombed out cities from WWII are much more vibrant even with drab architecture. Sprawl isn't a big factor, although some cities like London, Milan, etc, certainly appear to sprawl out and could be far denser. However, that is compensated by their large populations.

Essen and Leeds have far more vibrant and fun downtowns than Kansas City and Memphis. Visit and you'll see what I mean.

Last edited by aquablue; Mar 27, 2015 at 9:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 9:20 PM
Centropolis's Avatar
Centropolis Centropolis is offline
disneypilled verhoevenist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: saint louis
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxtex View Post
there is always going to be a segment of society that likes grass and weekend bbq's. rolling down to costco and not thinking much about how they interact with the built environment. thats fine by me. if traffic and its constraints were not a reality, people would probably drive even more.. i just wish transit was more on the american mind. its getting there but the incentive to not drive isn't high enough yet. when gas becomes too expensive, rivaling food costs, then our opinions as a country will change.
hay man, i like grass and weekend bbqs. but i prefer both my bbq and grass in my mouth and not on the ground.

puts on shades - queue tom waits song...
__________________
You may Think you are vaccinated but are you Maxx-Vaxxed ™!? Find out how you can “Maxx” your Covid-36 Vaxxination today!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 9:25 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I think part of this is also based on the fetishizing of European centers based on infrequent tourist experiences. If you visit Europe, you're probably going to see places like Venice, Paris, and Brugge. I don't think you'll be stopping into to experience the glories of Essen, or Bradford or Lille. So people have this impression that everyone is living some ultra-urban lifestyle, surrounded by medieval architecture, narrow streets, and incredible street vitality.
I can assure you that my own experiences are not like this (hence the part about some pretty drab European cities). Turin, for instance, is kind of a shithole outside of a small area in the center. But it is more urban than its peer cities in the American Rust Belt.

And who doesn't like grass and weekend BBQs? That's why anyone in NYC that can afford to decamps for the Hamptons or Jersey Shore or someplace every weekend in the summer. But most people have to make the choice, rather than buying or renting a weekend house.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 9:26 PM
Minato Ku's Avatar
Minato Ku Minato Ku is offline
Tokyo and Paris fan
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Paris, Montrouge
Posts: 4,168
Europe is much more suburban and car centric than people imagine
In France, 70% of the retail is suburban, car is by far the main mean of transportation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 9:53 PM
pdxtex's Avatar
pdxtex pdxtex is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 3,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Centropolis View Post
hay man, i like grass and weekend bbqs. but i prefer both my bbq and grass in my mouth and not on the ground.

puts on shades - queue tom waits song...
yes, i do also and so do most americans i would guess. the staunch urbanist who only wants wall to wall concrete and 20k ppm density is still a fringey portion of society and north american cities have evolved to cater to both groups. so really, the suburbs and central cities of regions with booming economies will continue to grow. americans are spoiled too and think only coastal markets and a few southern cities are the best ones. the smart people can adapt and evolve and live a kick ass life where ever they go. and we can't undue suburban sprawl but we can retrofit the transportation infrastructure and thats probably the best we can hope for in america. this last recession really made an impact on the american psyche, probably in a good way once the dust finally settles. people are driving less and conserving more. cheap gas from fracking is temporary too. i think the freewheeling mcmansion days of the past 20 years aren't over but they are definitely not the building footprint of choice anymore. id be very excited if more americans would embrace the rowhouse concept. that seems to be gaining traction out west and in some southern cities. not sure how midwesterners feel about that. i like english suburbia the best. rowhouses, small cars, little yards and a good train network. perfect...
__________________
Portland!! Where young people formerly went to retire.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 10:17 PM
Centropolis's Avatar
Centropolis Centropolis is offline
disneypilled verhoevenist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: saint louis
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxtex View Post
yes, i do also and so do most americans i would guess. the staunch urbanist who only wants wall to wall concrete and 20k ppm density is still a fringey portion of society and north american cities have evolved to cater to both groups. so really, the suburbs and central cities of regions with booming economies will continue to grow. americans are spoiled too and think only coastal markets and a few southern cities are the best ones. the smart people can adapt and evolve and live a kick ass life where ever they go. and we can't undue suburban sprawl but we can retrofit the transportation infrastructure and thats probably the best we can hope for in america. this last recession really made an impact on the american psyche, probably in a good way once the dust finally settles. people are driving less and conserving more. cheap gas from fracking is temporary too. i think the freewheeling mcmansion days of the past 20 years aren't over but they are definitely not the building footprint of choice anymore. id be very excited if more americans would embrace the rowhouse concept. that seems to be gaining traction out west and in some southern cities. not sure how midwesterners feel about that. i like english suburbia the best. rowhouses, small cars, little yards and a good train network. perfect...
i also prefer light rowhouse and townhouse density to anything else by far, just like you describe. its a shame that so much of that density was wrecked in the midwest - when it used to define the midwestern river cities.
__________________
You may Think you are vaccinated but are you Maxx-Vaxxed ™!? Find out how you can “Maxx” your Covid-36 Vaxxination today!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 10:27 PM
Jonboy1983's Avatar
Jonboy1983 Jonboy1983 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The absolute western-most point of the Philadelphia urbanized area. :)
Posts: 1,721
I looked at the latest census data, and it doesn't make any sense? Pittsburgh MSA is still declining?? Huh??? Anyone else find this confusing?

More people are moving into the region versus leaving, but I thought births were overtaking deaths with the exception of Westmoreland County. I guess they're skewing the population change downward still...

http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/t...xhtml?src=bkmk
__________________
Transportation planning, building better communities of tomorrow through superior connections between them today...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 11:11 PM
mousquet's Avatar
mousquet mousquet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Greater Paris, France
Posts: 4,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minato Ku View Post
Europe is much more suburban and car centric than people imagine
In France, 70% of the retail is suburban, car is by far the main mean of transportation.
Hm, yeah? We've been wrongly influenced and completely fooled in that respect. I'm still waiting for e-business to murder those "zones commerciales" and malls in the outer suburbs for good. Are we a wannabe 20th century US? Well yes, we've been so to some bad useless extent.

It is butt-ugly. Full of large surface parking lots and parking garages. No matter how hard they try to make them attractive, it's still ugly and sorry looking.

Shop in the very city for your fun, or on the internet when you're in a hurry, or simply die.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 11:25 PM
Hamilton Hamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Journal Square
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
There are a handful of "beautiful" American cities, all of which are doing quite well, and a lot that simply aren't. There are also a bunch of drab, ugly cities in Europe, and they're not as vibrant as the former either.
.
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with this. I'm a New Yorker and have took a trip to Baltimore recently. It was a sublimely beautiful city, built for a million inhabitants but housing only 620,000 today. As of a couple of years ago, it was still bleeding population even a couple of years ago. The census claims that it may have finally reached zero net growth last year, but only due to births and immigration. In general, people are still fleeing the city in droves, despite a few people who fall in love with the row houses. The city has even announced plans to tear down entire blocks of row houses, sadly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2015, 12:07 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Yesterday's Census Bureau estimates have Baltimore growing again.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2015, 12:17 AM
goat314's Avatar
goat314 goat314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St. Louis - Tampa
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamilton View Post
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with this. I'm a New Yorker and have took a trip to Baltimore recently. It was a sublimely beautiful city, built for a million inhabitants but housing only 620,000 today. As of a couple of years ago, it was still bleeding population even a couple of years ago. The census claims that it may have finally reached zero net growth last year, but only due to births and immigration. In general, people are still fleeing the city in droves, despite a few people who fall in love with the row houses. The city has even announced plans to tear down entire blocks of row houses, sadly.
Yes, I agree with you. America has a lot of beautiful cities in every region. The problem is many of them are rundown and not loved. Most of our older cities have architecture that is nice by international standards. What said is, we probably have the most bipolar and poorly planned cities in the industrialized world. It seems like Canada and Australia did a much better job maintaining their transit systems and keeping their urban cores solid. Too much rural politics in America.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2015, 12:31 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by goat314 View Post
Yes, I agree with you. America has a lot of beautiful cities in every region. The problem is many of them are rundown and not loved. Most of our older cities have architecture that is nice by international standards. What said is, we probably have the most bipolar and poorly planned cities in the industrialized world. It seems like Canada and Australia did a much better job maintaining their transit systems and keeping their urban cores solid. Too much rural politics in America.
I'd say crime is the biggest factor for why these cities bleed. If places like Baltimore, Detroit, Trenton, Camden, Flint, and so on reduced crime to the point of it being safe city wide and not just in a few areas (usually cbd's which become bad after 6pm once all the office workers leave), we would see a resurgence. People leave in part to safety. Its a really nice city (baltimore), but high crime keeps it from reaching its potential. Crime, along with its elements also infiltrate schools, and thus provide a poor system which is a big factor for raising a family.

They might be cool for younger people, but once the raising of children comes into mind, many things sound promising in the suburbs versus cities with high crime rates.

Unfortunately in the U.S., we tend to let inner city neighborhoods degrade to the point of it looking like a ghost town.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2015, 12:31 AM
dc_denizen's Avatar
dc_denizen dc_denizen is offline
Selfie-stick vendor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York Suburbs
Posts: 10,999
Looking at this by city:

NYC: tons of infill in city, prosperous inner ring suburbs (but with population turnover driven by immigration), some exuburban growth driven by immigrants and ethnic inner ring popuation cashing out and moving to the fringes.

LA: less infill, built out, plenty of population turnover in city and inner ring burbs, some trailer parks being built in the desert somewhere

Chicago: exurbs growing, less population turnover on south side to replace exodus, inner ring suburbs stable, 2/3 of city improving

SF, Seattle, Portland: minimal exurban growth, lots of infill, stable inner ring suburbs without much population turnover

DC, Boston: tons of infill, exurban growth, but inner ring suburbs built out and stable/prosperous, less population turnover than in NYC or LA.

Detroit: exurban growth, city declining w/ no replacement for people moving out, inner suburbs built out and stable, little densification in suburbs

St. Louis: exurban growth, inner suburbs built out and declining, city improving

Denver, Minneapolis: some infill, city improving, new exurbs, inner suburbs stable.
__________________
Joined the bus on the 33rd seat
By the doo-doo room with the reek replete
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:31 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.