The New Suburban Poverty

[wayiwalk]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

I'll throw my lot in with the suburban community over the urban community any day. Too many visual images and stories of an urban area like NYC during the late 1960s and 1970s to make me want to trust that area for my future. Just like the suburbs, the city is also another delicate system dependent on cheap energy and cheap food.

I'd also clarify that the suburban worker is one who doesn't need to commute more than 20 miles each way, to either their place of employment, or to a public transportation. Yes, energy is a big expense for transportation for suburbanites, but otherwise there are no other advantages for the urban dweller over suburban, that I can think of. Then, considering that many suburbanites already have greater flexibility with their work schedule with flexible work arrangements, and I'd say the demise of the suburban commuter is much further out into the future (say, a generation).

I like the fact that away from the city, I can afford enough land to grow food to supplement what I buy in the stores; last family gathering, I made the declaration to sibings that it would not surprise me if in 10 years I am canning foods to make up a larger part of the family diet. The room of engineers and marketers didn't even laugh and point as though I had made that statement while donning my large tin foil dunce hat.

[jiimbergin]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

I'll throw my lot in with the suburban community over the urban community any day. Too many visual images and stories of an urban area like NYC during the late 1960s and 1970s to make me want to trust that area for my future. Just like the suburbs, the city is also another delicate system dependent on cheap energy and cheap food.

I'd also clarify that the suburban worker is one who doesn't need to commute more than 20 miles each way, to either their place of employment, or to a public transportation. Yes, energy is a big expense for transportation for suburbanites, but otherwise there are no other advantages for the urban dweller over suburban, that I can think of. Then, considering that many suburbanites already have greater flexibility with their work schedule with flexible work arrangements, and I'd say the demise of the suburban commuter is much further out into the future (say, a generation).

I like the fact that away from the city, I can afford enough land to grow food to supplement what I buy in the stores; last family gathering, I made the declaration to sibings that it would not surprise me if in 10 years I am canning foods to make up a larger part of the family diet. The room of engineers and marketers didn't even laugh and point as though I had made that statement while donning my large tin foil dunce hat.

I agree with this completely. First of all we are retired and have a large extended family living near by. I have a large garden (have had for many many years), but I now also have fruit trees, blackberries (I have always picked wild ones which are next to my yard, but now have domestic ones now), blue berries and Kiwis. I already supply a lot of vegetables to the family, friends and neighbors. I could never do that in the city.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

The areas you guys are describing sound more like "exurbs" than "suburbs".

Exurbs are a little further out from the city, characterized by lots more than a full acre and no commercial offices or large retail nearby. Commonly owners have enough land to have things like fishing ponds or a couple horses or a little stand of woods. Going to a major grocery store often involves a drive of 5 or ten miles. Each house often has a well and a septic tank and you can shoot target clays with your 12 gauge in the backyard.

My house is in an area more widely considered "suburban" - lots typically a quarter acre, only a mile or two from many big-box retail and grocery stores. When you cross the border from my little suburb towards the city you are standing inside the city limits of a major city (Columbus). A big vegetable garden in my neighborhood is 10 feet by 10 feet, and they are rare. Sidewalks and soccer moms and little lawns are the norm, everyone has city water and sewer service. Laws prohibit discharging firearms.

These semantics matter somewhat from an urban planning or demographics point of view.
.
.

[flintlock]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

between high unemployment and high gasoline prices, expect suburbs to be hit really hard. i don't know how many of you recall ej's graphic of how the housing bust would propagate. the bust started in the outer rings [people who moved to distant suburbs to be able to afford more house, at the cost of very long communtes] and propagated in until it hit the city center. the recovery, otoh, was predicted to propagate OUT: first the city center would recover, etc. given the economy's at best stagnation, any housing recovery in commuter land will be long delayed.

I guess every city is different. Here in Atlanta some of the suburbs are hurting and some are really thriving. I don't think gas prices factor into things as much as they used to. We aren't all factory or office workers working in some central business district anymore. The offices have moved out to the burbs around here, there are no factories left, and quite a few people telecommute at least several days a week. Almost all the good malls are in the suburbs. My neighbor is a firefighter and works 50 miles on the opposite side of town. But he felt the quality of life was worth moving for. His 24 on 48 off shift schedule means the commute is not such a big deal. Most of the remaining manufacturing is high tech stuff and a lot of that is in the suburban areas too.

Some of the wealthiest areas in Metro Atlanta are 20 plus miles away from the city center. Short of an airport, they have everything they need. Hospitals, malls, concert arenas, etc. One thing I'm often amused by is when a die hard city dweller ventures out to my area for the first time. Some seem so surprised to see luxury malls, mid rise office buildings, and subdivisions full of expensive homes. I think some literally were expecting nothing but barns and trailer parks. Or they expect nothing but Southern California style subdivisions, with thousands of tiny homes on tiny lots. We are starting to see some of those type developments, but for the most part, its larger wooded lots and fairly low density. My county is one of the wealthiest in the country and its over an hour from Hartsfield-Jackson airport. But go a few miles outside the city limit of Atlanta and you'll find some real slums developing in the older suburbs.

Atlanta is very dependent on neighborhoods as opposed to proximity to the center of town. Its very mixed between good and bad areas. In fact, if they built an airport well outside of Atlanta I believe Atlanta would absolutely collapse. There isn't much else keeping many people inside the perimeter. The improvement in modern communication( email, text, internet) means less of a need for face to face work. Most American cities are a mash up of old and new, rich and poor. Outside of prime locations, people tend to move on to newer areas and let someone else deal with the crime, broken down infrastructure, etc.

Also, higher taxes more than eat up any fuel savings living in the city. By a lot. My friend pays $3000 more a year than I do just in property taxes for a similar home on a much smaller lot. The tag tax is at least double as well. He pays 3x what I pay for water. And taxes are what I see going up almost as much as energy. Atlanta's water system is a joke. Full of 100 year old mains sprouting leaks every day. Americans are coming around to buying more efficient cars. I just don't see commuting cost as being that much of a problem. Americans still choose to buy less efficient cars because they can afford the luxury. Worst case they give up the SUV for a car. The cities should be worried more about this than the suburbs. They run the risk of business moving out to the burbs to save commuting cost as well as lower taxes, less crime, and better access to a well educated work force. Many businesses also reap the reward of being near an interstate in the suburbs vs deep inside a city where traffic and congestion make deliveries difficult and more expensive. American cities are giant sprawling multi-headed creatures.

[jiimbergin]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

The areas you guys are describing sound more like "exurbs" than "suburbs".

Exurbs are a little further out from the city, characterized by lots more than a full acre and no commercial offices or large retail nearby. Commonly owners have enough land to have things like fishing ponds or a couple horses or a little stand of woods. Going to a major grocery store often involves a drive of 5 or ten miles. Each house often has a well and a septic tank and you can shoot target clays with your 12 gauge in the backyard.

My house is in an area more widely considered "suburban" - lots typically a quarter acre, only a mile or two from many big-box retail and grocery stores. When you cross the border from my little suburb towards the city you are standing inside the city limits of a major city (Columbus). A big vegetable garden in my neighborhood is 10 feet by 10 feet, and they are rare. Sidewalks and soccer moms and little lawns are the norm, everyone has city water and sewer service. Laws prohibit discharging firearms.

These semantics matter somewhat from an urban planning or demographics point of view.
.
.

You would probably call my little city exurbs, Hickory, NC. I can be in the city within blocks of my house, but I still have an acre+ lot, although it is one of the largest in the neighborhood. I used lo live in Columbus, so I have a good idea what you are talking about. My vegetable is 1200+square feet with room to expand a lot. My fruit garden, without the fruit trees, is almost as big. I do have city water and sewer service however.

[don]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

The areas you guys are describing sound more like "exurbs" than "suburbs".

Exurbs are a little further out from the city, characterized by lots more than a full acre and no commercial offices or large retail nearby. Commonly owners have enough land to have things like fishing ponds or a couple horses or a little stand of woods. Going to a major grocery store often involves a drive of 5 or ten miles. Each house often has a well and a septic tank and you can shoot target clays with your 12 gauge in the backyard.

My house is in an area more widely considered "suburban" - lots typically a quarter acre, only a mile or two from many big-box retail and grocery stores. When you cross the border from my little suburb towards the city you are standing inside the city limits of a major city (Columbus). A big vegetable garden in my neighborhood is 10 feet by 10 feet, and they are rare. Sidewalks and soccer moms and little lawns are the norm, everyone has city water and sewer service. Laws prohibit discharging firearms.

These semantics matter somewhat from an urban planning or demographics point of view.
.
.

Spot on. I've lived in both. On 3 acres we had 25 walnut trees, half a dozen olive, a few fig. My wife's garden was about 400 Sq Ft. All of that was plenty, both working fulltime. In the suburbs we always had a garden - with one exception. When we moved from owners to renters my wife stopped planting. Plenty of flowers but no vegetables. Curious, eh . . . .

[LazyBoy]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

Here we go again with the eco-frauds ( the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, and that bunch ) who have been running and ruining city planning departments, not to mention the cities they plan, going on with their old and worn-out line about blaming people for moving out to suburbs. Read their crap carefully here because their high-density viewpoint on how to plan cities is one of the paramount reasons why I left my career many years ago as a city planner.

Just read their crap here about "paved-over farmlands and paved-over undeveloped land", as if that were a crime. According to these bastards, farmers are to have vast tracts of farmland with low-taxes and preside around metro areas as a sort of ruling class.

Etc. x 1000

Actually, the documentary I referred to had NOTHING to do with ecology or moving out of cities. I can't recall much concern about farmland, although I see it is mentioned in the linked description.

It was about the incentives common for building new suburbs vs repairing the infrastructure in the old suburbs causing population and business loss and a dwindling tax base and leaving a first-ring wasteland that everyone is just commuting past.* Do you know what it takes to repair a 50 year old sewage system? It's an aging infrastructure problem and a where-the-tax-incentives-are problem. Of course that could just be what those sneaky environmentalists want me to think.

The 18foot frontage lots you're describing sound more like city to me than 1st ring suburb. These suburbs were 5+ miles outside Cincinnati and were at least 1/4 acre lots.

Did you see the movie you wrote a 12 paragraph reaction to?

Anyway, I don't have a horse in this race.


* I know, it doesn't matter, there's no oil shortage. Steve rant #3

[Starving Steve]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

Actually, the documentary I referred to had NOTHING to do with ecology or moving out of cities. I can't recall much concern about farmland, although I see it is mentioned in the linked description.

It was about the incentives common for building new suburbs vs repairing the infrastructure in the old suburbs causing population and business loss and a dwindling tax base and leaving a first-ring wasteland that everyone is just commuting past.* Do you know what it takes to repair a 50 year old sewage system? It's an aging infrastructure problem and a where-the-tax-incentives-are problem. Of course that could just be what those sneaky environmentalists want me to think.

The 18foot frontage lots you're describing sound more like city to me than 1st ring suburb. These suburbs were 5+ miles outside Cincinnati and were at least 1/4 acre lots.

Did you see the movie you wrote a 12 paragraph reaction to?

Anyway, I don't have a horse in this race.


* I know, it doesn't matter, there's no oil shortage. Steve rant #3

This might sound strange coming from a social-democrat and an Obama fan, like myself, but I do not think it is the business of government ( city-planning departments or environmental-planning departments, transportation departments, public-works departments, or whatever ) to tell people where they are going to live. If people want to move-out of the city or its first-ring suburbs, then that is their right.... If people do NOT want to live one-on-top of each other on 18 front-foot lots as they do in places in Winnipeg and almost everywhere in San Francisco, then it is the right of the people to move as far out of the city as they wish to.

If almost no-one wants to live in the old city and in its first-ring suburbs, then a decision has to be made by government whether it is worth the cost of repairing and maintaining old infrastructure in these places. It may well be better to demolish these dying cities and re-build them in a different plan...... But the point is that the government is to help people to live where and how they want to live, and government is NOT to be telling people where and how they are going to live.

Let's get this point straight, too: The people are to make their own decision about how much gasoline and oil they want to consume, and it is not the business of government to tell people how they are going to use energy. Again, government is to make life easier for people, but government is not to be pushing people around and making them do anything. If people want to live far away from densely populated and poorly planned cities, and they want to commute to/from such old cities to work using their automobile, then naturally they will pay the price in fuel for that personal choice.

The problem the way I see it is that with the advent of the environmentalists, planners have begun to push people around. Under environmentalism or environmental planning, government has begun to treat people like criminals, as if the people have become criminal for just wanting to live out of the city.

[wayiwalk]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

Spot on. I've lived in both. On 3 acres we had 25 walnut trees, half a dozen olive, a few fig. My wife's garden was about 400 Sq Ft. All of that was plenty, both working fulltime. In the suburbs we always had a garden - with one exception. When we moved from owners to renters my wife stopped planting. Plenty of flowers but no vegetables. Curious, eh . . . .

That 3 acres sounded nice. What part of the country was good for olive trees - California?

Thrifty - thanks for the clarification on exhurb vs suburb. I was reading this like a close minded suburbanite.

In New Jersey - the exurbs, which tend to be found in the north western counties, there are the issues for seniors who need caregiver type assistance. It is tough finding people to come out to their homes which tend to be far from the places where semi-skilled (trained as Homehealth Aides) typically live.

So - that is where I see exhurbs suffering in NJ.

I don't see the same impact on working age people yet. Our office has a few people living that far out and they manage to offset their higher fuel/transportation costs with lower housing costs....

[don]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

That 3 acres sounded nice. What part of the country was good for olive trees - California?

NorCal - SF Bay Area. A mix of valley and some coastal weather, mostly the former. Hot and dry in the summer, unlike the City. Olive trees - non-bearing - are often used as decorative plantings. Ours bore two crops a year. Discovering a hired shaker for the walnut trees was a revelation. Most of the grove in one day!

[shiny!]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

When we moved from owners to renters my wife stopped planting. Plenty of flowers but no vegetables. Curious, eh . . . .

Vegetables are food for the body. Flowers are food for the soul.

[LazyBoy]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

This might sound strange coming from a social-democrat and an Obama fan, like myself, but I do not think it is the business of government ( city-planning departments or environmental-planning departments, transportation departments, public-works departments, or whatever ) to tell people where they are going to live.

I don't think that either. But government incentives make the new construction more attractive. End that, and repairing old infrastructure might compete with developing new roads/sewers/water/power distribution.

[don]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

Vegetables are food for the body. Flowers are food for the soul.

You may be onto something! Loss of 'ownership' may have led her to push (up) the flowers and not the veggies. Now we're moving to a condo and she plans on plenty of indoor plants and joining the local sustainable farm. Having paid cash for the place, ownership returns in . . . broccoli. Adios, Amigos! I'll be offline for some time with the cross country trip and all.

[shiny!]

Re: The New Suburban Poverty

You may be onto something! Loss of 'ownership' may have led her to push (up) the flowers and not the veggies. Now we're moving to a condo and she plans on plenty of indoor plants and joining the local sustainable farm. Having paid cash for the place, ownership returns in . . . broccoli. Adios, Amigos! I'll be offline for some time with the cross country trip and all.

Congratulations on the new home and garden, Don. Have a safe trip.