is a more attractive surroundings than this
Posted on 02/21/2008 3:09:14 PM PST by Lorianne
Strange days are upon the residents of many a suburban cul-de-sac. Once-tidy yards have become overgrown, as the houses they front have gone vacant. Signs of physical and social disorder are spreading.___ Arthur C. Nelson, director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech, has looked carefully at trends in American demographics, construction, house prices, and consumer preferences. In 2006, using recent consumer research, housing supply data, and population growth rates, he modeled future demand for various types of housing. The results were bracing: Nelson forecasts a likely surplus of 22 million large-lot homes (houses built on a sixth of an acre or more) by 2025—that’s roughly 40 percent of the large-lot homes in existence today.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
But don't think this means the cities will become gleaming and beautiful-they'll be slums still, as well.
In all seriousness, while I'm no fan of the cookie-cutter house, I see this article as another rallying cry for mandating that we all live like sardines in tight quarters in cities.
Oh, and one-sixth of an acre is NOT a "large lot."
I’m sorry. While art galleries, museums, and other “fun” stuff might have mattered when I was 21, now that my wife and I are looking to start a family, I’d rather live in a quiet suburban neighborhood than a concrete jungle.
Once you get outside the city, outside the suburbs and sprawl, and into the real countryside, life gets better.
But, you still rock. Right RR?
Regards
"all models are wrong. some are useful."
Since 1970 this country has added 100 million to its population and by 2060, another 166 million as we near a half a billion people and maintain out status as the third most populous nation on the planet. There will be more urban sprawl, traffic congestion, etc. in the future. Demography is destiny.
Didn't happen in DC. The schools there are still among the worst hellholes in the world.
But of course!
No mention of illegal immigrants in this article. But if the demographics are pointing to an excess of 22 million “large home lots,” then I imagine illegals will find them convenient places to stay—but unfortunately not to maintain or repair.
I predict that grain prices will get high enough that it is economic to turn some suburbs back into farmland.
Liberals hate suburbia, the automobile, discount stores, and sports. Always have, always will.
The article almost suggests that we need to allow more self-importing illegals to help the housing market.
We recently moved into an older, inner city neighborhood. Although it’s pretty bad, I see many promising signs of gentrification. Hopefully the suburbanites will return to the cities and bring their money with them, while the drug dealers & vagrants move outward.
And those large lots will be handy for all the cars, especially the ones up on blocks, you know?
People with sixth grade educations in todays world would not be able to pay the payments, but then if you put six families to a home and ten cars in the yard it may work.
What the writer is really saying is that there will be an even bigger glut in expensive homes as the baby boomer's die off. Nothing new here was predicted thirty years ago.
Most large American cities are experiencing New Urban renewals, so I would expect most downtowns to get better and more expensive over the next few years, while formerly nice suburbs (Shaker Heights, OH, anyone?) head into shocking declines as the "rings of blight" move outward.
Incidentally, people who live in those declining suburbs are the ones who think America is going to Hell in a handbasket due to crime and illegal immigration - they are in the bullseye. The New Urbanites and Country Club Suburbanites don't see the effects of these problems, and keep voting Democrat thinking they are being kind to the poor and the Earth.
No thanks. I like the suburbs.
:)
Interesting study.
And disturbing for a guy like me who has little desire to live in the city.
“There will be more urban sprawl, traffic congestion, etc. in the future.”
Clearly a prescient observation.
I was lucky to have grown up in Illinois where I could be pheasant hunting in ten minutes right after school... in DUPAGE COUNTY.
Try that now!
About a decade ago, some home developer did a lot of research and came up with what he thought was the optimal design for “social ergonomics”. That is, a way to design housing that, unlike the isolation of the ranch house suburban design, would tend to create a strong sense of neighborliness, while preserving privacy.
They designed a flower arrangement, or octagon, with the fronts of the houses pointing out, the sidewalk, streets and garages on the outside. Inside the octagon, each condo-like house had a small private backyard, and a larger commons.
That set up was conducive to a very friendly atmosphere. But the one thing the developer was unsure of was how the social atmosphere would change once homeowners started to age.
That is, it worked very well for young families with children, but no idea how the social interaction would continue with “empty nesters” and old people.
But wouldn’t it be interesting if home buying adopted some of the elements of a dating service, to try and match a buyer with a housing block where they and their family would feel most comfortable.
Well, not everyone can be an early adopter.
I hope your suburb stays fresh and beautiful for years to come; I, on the other hand, am about to walk my kids down to the corner grocery and pic up some stuff for dinner. Maybe we’ll get a puffy taco or some fried corn at one of the kiosks on the way back. ;-)
Life aint so bad in a cookie suburb. There is a nice side to being near civilization, who wants to drive 30 miles for a bag of chips?
If folks want to live out in the sticks great, but please don't expect others to subsidize your Internet
As far as sprawl goes I don't believe it exists , all I see is people following their dreams.
Detroit must not have got the message.
I live in a “suburban” style neighborhood that’s within the city, with big lots and nice houses and everything that goes with it but within walking distance of museums and the zoo, a college campus and 10mins from downtown and I could walk to work if I needed to.
I don’t get why people think living in the city means you’re automatically in some concrete jungle surrounded by crackheads and crime.
I like yards grass and trees and like them to be MINE, not some public grounds.
:p
You're not until you enter the public schools in the area.
One of the first things the Bolsheviks did was to turn large houses of the bourgeoisie into apartments. Thank you Obama and Hillary. National Housecare.
What city, BTW?
Yeah, but the problem with them is that once you let them in, they just start building more houses.
“The results were bracing: Nelson forecasts a likely surplus of 22 million large-lot homes (houses built on a sixth of an acre or more) by 2025”
idiot researcher
if there is a surplus (suggesting houses that are or need to be sold), the owners will have to lower their price and if they don’t and they can’t sell they will either stay in their house - no longer surplus - or default on their mortgage
if they default on their mortgage the price will get really low because though the lender would like full top price what the lender MUST get is only the balance of the principal, at least
thus, those homes will never be surplus, they will be bargains
Cause I lived in New Orleans.
“But wouldn’t it be interesting if home buying adopted some of the elements of a dating service, to try and match a buyer with a housing block where they and their family would feel most comfortable.”
if you are buying and your real estate agent is not, automatically, doing that, then get another agent
Did you know that RE Agents in Maryland are technically not allowed to comment on the school district? They can’t say that “Howard County Schools are better than Prince George’s County” because it might be “discriminatory” since Howard County schools happen to have fewer minorities than PG County...
my goodness
you’d think, with the past growth of this country without adherence to massive development plans to prevent speculative development disasters that might have been, that our past haphazard growth and development should have sent us back to the caves
well it didn’t
and neither will future growth that ignores this guy
markets, markets, markets will work out demand and supply, not utopian dreams and ambitions
There are many places in urban DC and Baltimore where there aren’t going to be any “gentry” moving in any time soon, although some fringe areas and places that once used to be nice are going through what others are calling an “urban revival”. I suppose that’s actually true, in that there are grocery stores and other shops returning to the neighborhood. In Baltimore, the best urban renewal is being done by John Hopkin’s. They started putting up 10’ tall fences topped with barb-wire. Then they decided that was foolish for the long-term, so they waited until the surrounding housing was worth zero, bought up blocks and blocks, and demolished it all, except for a facade around the perimeter. That’s urban planning!
my relatives in ny got that kind of info on their own directly from state education website
It’s OK, we’ll be homeless but living under bridges, that’s OK because it won’t be cold since Bush wouldn’t stop global warming and finally, we won’t starve because President Obama is going to keep the checks coming.
Oh, come on, you can have those things in the city...I do, and I live in a SERIOUSLY low-rent area. I even have a pecan tree.
“I live in a “suburban” style neighborhood that’s within the city, with big lots and nice houses and everything that goes with it but within walking distance of museums and the zoo, a college campus and 10mins from downtown and I could walk to work if I needed to.”
We have enough problems with noise and other aggravations living in suburbia these days, why would I want to live in a townhouse and share walls with my neighbors just so I can walk to the corner for a taco or go visit a museum occasionally?
Of course, I would rather live by myself on several acres (I have plans to do that in the future) so I don’t relate to the whole city living idea anyway.
LOL You want people out in the sticks to feed you and clothe you but you don’t want them to have internet service?
Are all urban/suburbanites that generous?
Be happy, the only way most people around here can get internet service is from Hughes satelite and it is prohibitively expensive. Besides, when we can afford it we’re going to get shoes first.
It depends on what part of the country you’re in. Here, anywhere in the city is either ghetto or hugely expensive.
Well, that’s a different topic, but if they’re in my yard, I can plant them, I can prune them, I can harvest the fruit from them, and I can cut it down.
Hyperbole alert!
is a more attractive surroundings than this
Well, that’s the way it’s been everywhere...But I hope that as the rich people buy up city properties, the price goes up even in the ghettos. People that don’t have any kind of connection to their neighborhoods cash in and move out, allowing in more people who are willing to invest in their property. Lawns get mowed, businesses return, meth dealers get replaced by aging hippes, etc. This is going to mean cleaner, safer neighborhoods for the people who stay (I hope).
We’ll see. :) I think to some degree, that will happen. However, I think many suburbs will continue to thrive as well.
Maybe it’s just because I don’t particularly like people. LOL.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.