# Is America's Love Affair with the "Exburbs" Over?



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

"Crime and schools, mainly.

People in American cities generally do a much worse job of controlling their violent criminality than people in Europe, for whatever reason."

Maybe if we would ban gun ownership things would change. Americans with guns simply can't behave themselves.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

Xusein said:


> Hybrids are more fuel efficient than average cars. If the technology is developed further with pure electric cars, the potential efficiency could moderate the eventuality of high gas prices that will come.


I honestly doubt that. They carry two machineries with them, traditional and electromotor. That means they have to be heavier. At the same time electricity does not come from the power plug and if it comes from the fuel, even if it uses breaking energy it will have a hard time to be more efficient of a mentionworthy extend. In city traffic they might indeed be a bit more efficient, but not necissarily cheaper for the customer as the investment for one of these cars is substantially higher. 

Purely electrical cars all depend on the energy source (again, electricity does not come from the power plug but from a power plant) and if suddenly a a mentionworthy part of the society is driving by electrical cars, don't expect that this demand could be satisfied with todays power plant capacities. Realistically I would guess, the only way to serve these crude quantities of additional electricity would be coal and oil power plants, maybe add nuclear power to that mix, even though thats not the cheapest option either and has its major flaws as well.

If you do it clever it might be more efficient indeed to travel by electric car. (For example when the power plants are not only producing electricity but also heat for a distributed heating system) But I doubt it would be that much cheaper. Which leads us back to the initial problem, neither the congestion get less nor the car journey really considerable cheaper. The only factors that seem to be capable of doing so in my opinion are the old known ones: build more highways, pray for cheap oil. Not really something I would rely on.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

Captain Obvious said:


> You can actually find charts which show you the "true" cost per mile of driving specific models of cars. A lot of corporations use them for reimbursement purposes when an employee has to use a personal car for company business. It's often double (or more) the price per mile of just the fuel.
> 
> Anyway, for what it's worth, I already took that into consideration when I mentioned how gas would have to be $7 per gallon for my city to be cheaper (for me) than the suburbs.


I can remember having seen once a table where fuel costs made up not more than 20% of the full costs, but then a major part of it is of course the amortization. Nonetheless I think only two times the fuel costs is optimistic, but then I am not an expert. What I know however is that you of course have to take into account the infrastructure you use. 



> But keep in mind, that for Americans (I have no clue what it's like in Austria) that our taxation is highly variable depending on our municipality. So by living in my city instead of a nearby exurb, I have to pay an extra 2% income tax, and my property taxes are between 5%-45% higher than certain exurbs!! The auto savings do NOT even begin to make up for this extra taxation.
> 
> So that's why I think that many suburbs in America are not really in danger yet.


Wow, thats unbelievable. So the state is even punishing people for living in an urban environment? I mean the property could be possibly higher due to more expensive homes in the urban area, (or do you mean the tax rates themselves are higher?) but the higher income tax seems just insane. It looks like the American state is deliberatly trying to destroy the cities.

Regarding the car costs, well, they might not be enough to compensate you for higher costs in the city, but then its also about time, accessibility etc. An urban life can hardly be compared with one in the suburbs or on the nearby countryside, thats at least my own experience. 

I don't think that the suburbs are in immenant danger of collapse, yet. You are building your own doom however. Suburbia lives on cheap fuel and the pike of last year or so was only an appetizer. The oil prize could run high easily within the next decades and stay there. The structure of cities needs however several decades to change substantially. I hope you see the dilemma. But then, who knows, maybe most Americans don't give a damn about that in their daily lifes, many Austrians do not either I guess. They simply follow the logic of high fuel taxation, which is maybe the only way that works for fuel efficiency.


----------



## tablemtn (May 2, 2006)

> So the state is even punishing people for living in an urban environment?


Cities set their own municipal tax rates. Some city councils are very short-sighted, and choose to raise taxes rather than cut expenses.


----------



## mgk920 (Apr 21, 2007)

Don't forget, too, that the layouts and designs of much of that 'sprawly' type of exurban development are _**REQUIRED**_ by law - look over the zoning laws of any of these munis and see. In many, anything smaller than a mansion on a park-sized lot is *PROHIBITED* and when proposals are made to loosen things up, the residents come out in force to prevent the changes. You also see this closer in - for example, check out the epic zoning battles that ensue even for proposed high-rises in NYC and central Chicago.

Seeing these trends in the real estate market run headlong into local zoning laws will be interesting indeed.

Mike


----------



## El Mariachi (Nov 1, 2007)

philadweller said:


> "Crime and schools, mainly.
> 
> People in American cities generally do a much worse job of controlling their violent criminality than people in Europe, for whatever reason."
> 
> Maybe if we would ban gun ownership things would change. Americans with guns simply can't behave themselves.


Banning guns in cities won't rid them of their criminal element.


----------



## Koen Acacia (Apr 17, 2007)

tablemtn said:


> Cities set their own municipal tax rates. Some city councils are very short-sighted, and choose to raise taxes rather than cut expenses.


I wouldn't call it "short-sighted" per se. If expenses are needed, then cutting them doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
That a central city has more expenses than the suburbs surrounding it that still profit from the functions that that city offers them also seems rather obvious.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

mgk920 said:


> Don't forget, too, that the layouts and designs of much of that 'sprawly' type of exurban development are _**REQUIRED**_ by law - look over the zoning laws of any of these munis and see. In many, anything smaller than a mansion on a park-sized lot is *PROHIBITED* and when proposals are made to loosen things up, the residents come out in force to prevent the changes. You also see this closer in - for example, check out the epic zoning battles that ensue even for proposed high-rises in NYC and central Chicago.
> 
> Seeing these trends in the real estate market run headlong into local zoning laws will be interesting indeed.
> 
> Mike


I agree. The zoning laws in at least large parts of the US seem to be worse than terrible. If I am not wrong there is however a new trend that some areas at least realized how bad it really is. 

I think however a large break through in this devil circle will be able when for example inner post war suburbs for example start to fear about their future. Before going down the river, residents may prefer to try something new instead.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

Koen Acacia said:


> I wouldn't call it "short-sighted" per se. If expenses are needed, then cutting them doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
> That a central city has more expenses than the suburbs surrounding it that still profit from the functions that that city offers them also seems rather obvious.


Thats the problem. In my opinion those advantages should be identified, quantified in Dollars and the suburbs that potentially profitate from it should pay every single Cent.


----------



## El Mariachi (Nov 1, 2007)

Why does everybody hate the suburbs on here? Don't blame them, blame the cities for not making themselves more attractive places to live. 

Using my own city as an example. Who in gods name wants to raise a family here when this is what happens in schools?


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

"Why does everybody hate the suburbs on here? Don't blame them, blame the cities for not making themselves more attractive places to live."

I blame the Cold War. The threat of nuclear war in the 50's decentralized massive populations. Cities are trying desperately to make themselves attractive.


----------



## monkeyronin (May 18, 2006)

El Mariachi said:


> Why does everybody hate the suburbs on here? Don't blame them, blame the cities for not making themselves more attractive places to live.


Kind of hard to do with upper layers of government actively working against them. 




> Using my own city as an example. Who in gods name wants to raise a family here when this is what happens in schools?


Yeah, fights never happen in the suburban schools. :|


----------



## Mollywood (May 23, 2007)

El Mariachi said:


> Why does everybody hate the suburbs on here? Don't blame them, blame the cities for not making themselves more attractive places to live.
> 
> Using my own city as an example. Who in gods name wants to raise a family here when this is what happens in schools?


Fights don't happen in suburban schools? I grew up in the burbs and I saw lots of fights at school, so your thinking is pretty distorted. I don't think there is much difference at all. (Well, in my city, anyway)


----------



## Koen Acacia (Apr 17, 2007)

El Mariachi said:


> Why does everybody hate the suburbs on here? Don't blame them, blame the cities for not making themselves more attractive places to live.


Since this thread is about people moving _from _the suburbs _into _the cities, it would be you who should be blaming the suburbs for not making themselves attractive enough. And that's even with your current tax laws and zoning laws stacked in their favour.


----------



## LtBk (Jul 27, 2004)

I don't get why many parents in this country are obsessed with senting kids to the best schools. It takes more than schools to make a person intelligent. I personally think these parents depend on school to teach them everything.


----------



## El Mariachi (Nov 1, 2007)

monkeyronin said:


> Kind of hard to do with upper layers of government actively working against them.
> 
> 
> Yeah, fights never happen in the suburban schools. :|


I don't believe that the upper levels of government are working against cities growing and prospering. 

As for fights in the schools---sure they occur in the suburbs, but not to the extremes that they do in the cities. There is clearly a difference between suburban/exburbs' schools and urban schools, at least in the U.S. 

Why should people be expected to put up with this? People who seek suburban lifestyles are unfairly seen as villains on this site.


----------



## El Mariachi (Nov 1, 2007)

Koen Acacia said:


> Since this thread is about people moving _from _the suburbs _into _the cities, it would be you who should be blaming the suburbs for not making themselves attractive enough. And that's even with your current tax laws and zoning laws stacked in their favour.


Why should I do that? The article in this thread really didn't present any facts to show that the age of suburbia is dead. 



LtBk said:


> I don't get why many parents in this country are obsessed with senting kids to the best schools. It takes more than schools to make a person intelligent. I personally think these parents depend on school to teach them everything.


Because people want their children to get the best education. I don't see whats wrong with that? People on this thread almost seem like they dislike people wanting to better their lives---as opposed to living the bare minimum.


----------



## TexasBoi (Jan 7, 2004)

Why was that fight news? Was it slow that day in Milwaukee. I'm pretty sure there was a few more happening throughout the city that day anyway. Why did those not make the news. It's not like you won't see this in the suburbs and yes, they do happen as often as the inner city.


----------



## tablemtn (May 2, 2006)

The really bad schools in the US are really, really bad. I don't think Europeans have any idea of just how dire they are in terms of educational standards. No sane parent would want to send a child to some of those places.

A lot of the blame for this has to go to big-city mayors and city councils which have used their school districts as dumping grounds for patronage hires and appointments, or as bags of money to be looted. This has gone on for decades.


----------



## amar11372 (Sep 5, 2005)

philadweller said:


> I still do not understand why American parents would rather raise their kids in the suburbs. They can learn so much more in an urban environment. I was lucky to grow up in Queens and then in a streetcar suburb of NYC. This is where America is lacking in the brain department.


cool, where is Queens? I grew up in Astoria.


----------



## El Mariachi (Nov 1, 2007)

whizz_pat said:


> ^^
> I realise that.
> 
> They do not have to be poor. Just because urban areas in America are like this, doesn't mean they have to be like this.
> ...


Well yeah, anything can be changed----but thats just the way things are here. 



Slartibartfas said:


> Thats not a total truth anymore either, even if it might still describe a lot of the urban areas correctly.


Its not an absolute truth, but its pretty close to being one if we are strictly talking major cities.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

El Mariachi said:


> Its not an absolute truth, but its pretty close to being one if we are strictly talking major cities.


I don't know Ameircan cities well enough to argue with you about it, but good enough to view your claim very sceptical. Maybe others who know American cities better than me can comment on your claim.


----------



## mhays (Sep 12, 2002)

It's true that the average urban district has worse problems than the average suburban district. However, that's misleading. 

The #1 factor in achievement, according to many experts, is involved parents who insist that their kids work hard and set a good example. This is a huge problem heavily concentrated in poor areas, where the parents themselves are often low achievers and/or undereducated. 

Urban districts sometimes have higher "legacy" costs, just like air carriers and auto manufacturers. This can be outdated facilities, pensions, etc. 

Urban and inner-suburban districts often have large numbers of ESL and poor students who need extra services. In most states, this money comes from the same local pot as basic education, with no equalization. 

In some central cities like Seattle and Tacoma, the public votes enthusiastically for major bond issues and levies to maintain, renovate, and/or partially rebuild schools (despite our very low student-age population in Seattle's case). Seattle and Tacoma got behind on facilities for a while, but have played catch-up for over a decade and things are looking MUCH better. Generally projects have involved renovating the historic school, and demolishing/rebuilding whatever monstrosity was built mid-century. 

Of course, since most funding is localized, and it's often property-tax, it really matters what local properties are worth. In a prosperous central city with high property values, that can be a healthy amount. 

I've been known to babble about my high school, Garfield. Yesterday Garfield won New York's "Essentially Ellington" jazz band competition...again, with Seattle's Roosevelt HS taking #2. Last year Roosevelt won and Garfield was #2. Garfield is known for its diversity (arguably more now than when it was thought of as a "black school" when I was there), for winning countless track and basketball state championships, and for generally being #1 or #2 in national merit scholars in Washington since it's also a magnet school. Also, how many schools send groups of 30 students to Florida and Hawaii for two weeks in the spring to study biology (I went on the Florida Keys/Everglades trip in 1986, learned to SCUBA, etc.), not to mention month-long trips to places like Australia in the summer? Ok, I'll stop babbling.


----------



## El Mariachi (Nov 1, 2007)

Well, thats the problem. Bad parents and living in a community with no expections for education. You can't fault the school or city itself for this, but you would expect them to motivate the children. They need to step into the role of a parent-figure if the child's actual parent is a deadbeat---which is all to common in the cities. 

American cities are incubators for deadbeats. Thats the difference between the suburbs and most big cities. Sure, that may seem like painting with a broad brush----but thats the way things are.


----------



## mhays (Sep 12, 2002)

In many of the more prosperous cities, the poor are moving to the older suburbs, while central neighborhoods are gentrifying. That's changing the math quite a bit. Eventually some US cities will look more like many European cities, where the poor, and the worst schools, are generally in the suburbs.

As that transition happens, the legacy costs I'm talking about will also become disadvantage for the suburbs as well. That can happen when the retired-teacher population rises to a certain point relative to the employed teacher population (particularly if the district's population is stagnant or shrinking), and the school buildings are reaching the ends of their useful lives, i.e. need renovations or are simply run despite inefficiencies.


----------



## Audiomuse (Dec 20, 2005)

Well several suburban towns in and around San Antonio are starting to develop downtowns, including this one:

http://www.dpz.com/projects.aspx


We're also getting back into working on light rail. Suburban development has slowed, while urban infill is still steady.


----------



## bayviews (Mar 3, 2006)

zaphod said:


> What I do care about is ending things like strip malls that can only be accessed on freeway feeder roads, banal suburban development that's meant to only last the generation that buys it new, etc.



There you may get a significant part of your wish. From the standpoint of many urbanists, if there's any good to come out of the Great Recession--and there's been plenty of suffering--its been the large-scale, often very hasty abandament of many of the chains, big boxes, banking/mortgage/real estate offices & other complexes that anchored many of the strip malls & suburban office parks.


----------



## FM 2258 (Jan 24, 2004)

Personally I would want to live in Downtown Austin because that's where all the hottest clubs and hottest girls are at. It would be so easy to bring a girl home by pointing at your skyscraper of residence and saying "the after party is up there." :cheers:

Much better than knowing that your residence is 45 minutes away from downtown. I don't see why the hell anyone would want to live so far from town. I'm a city guy so maybe that's why. Plus I'm happy to see Texas inner cities growing.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob (Jan 29, 2009)

America must reform. It uses more than its fair share of fossil fuels and is ruining the world's environment for its own greed.


----------



## bayviews (Mar 3, 2006)

dnobsemajdnob said:


> America must reform. It uses more than its fair share of fossil fuels and is ruining the world's environment for its own greed.


Agreed. I think one of the best ways is to figure out how to reinvent & revitalize many of our North Coast cities. The Great Lakes boasts plenty that the likes of Vegas & Pheonix don't: One of the world's biggest reservoirs of fresh water, one of our most precious resources. Cities like Toledo, Buffalo, Cleveland, & other "winter cities" have plenty of surplus housing & public infrastructure. Hopefully they'll follow the pathways started by Chicago, Twin Cities, Milwaukee, & other older cities, that have again become destinations for new immigrants & have significantly rejuvinated themselves.


----------

