Yet another article claiming that I, every member of my family, and all of my friends don’t actually want to live in our horrible susburbs. It’s not possible that we actually love it here, that we like the clean air, wide open spaces, huge yards, non-crowded downtown, small family friendly parades, and our rodeo. Nope, we’re all just lying to ourselves and really want to love in a cramped arcology.
The myth of revealed preference for suburbs
21–30 of 143 posts
Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs
#22Yet another article claiming that I, every member of my family, and all of my friends don’t actually want to live in our horrible susburbs. It’s not possible that we actually love it here, that we like the clean air, wide open spaces, huge yards, non-crowded downtown, small family friendly parades, and our rodeo. Nope, we’re all just lying to ourselves and really want to love in a cramped arcology.
Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs
#23Yet another article claiming that I, every member of my family, and all of my friends don’t actually want to live in our horrible susburbs. It’s not possible that we actually love it here, that we like the clean air, wide open spaces, huge yards, non-crowded downtown, small family friendly parades, and our rodeo. Nope, we’re all just lying to ourselves and really want to love in a cramped arcology.
The point I got from it is that some people want to live in dense neighborhoods and others want to live in less-dense neighborhoods - and in certain areas that were built up more recently (e.g. Atlanta), there is more demand for dense areas than there is supply, while in some older cities (e.g. Boston) there is a short supply of both dense and less-dense neighborhoods.
If anything, your comment dismissing dense areas as "cramped arcologies" is more dismissive of other people's desires than the article is. Do you have trouble believing either or both of the following: (1) some (though not all) people want to live in densely populated areas where they can walk to most amenities and (2) modern urban building patterns have underserved such people?
Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article seems to support this argument: > In Boston, about 40 percent of respondents said they preferred denser, more pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods, while in Atlanta, just under 30 percent of respondents did so. In the absence of prohibitive zoning laws and other restrictions, the split between urban and exurban properties should converge to align with consumer preferences. Of course, it’s possible that consu…
Not sure about Atlanta but Boston suburban lots tend to be about half an acre, the ones outside of the 495, closer to an acre. Inside the 128 they do get smallish though. So given those sizes, I’m not surprised people are okay with “more density”.
Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs
#25Once you include the drawbacks that can not be removed, you will find they are living exactly where they want to live.
The kind of analysis in this report is one of those "lying with statistics" things, because I don't think it's measuring what the authors think it's measuring.
Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs
#26>If so many people live in suburbs, it must be because that’s what they prefer, right? But the evidence is to the contrary. This article makes its point from the book "Zoned Out" (2005.) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the argument is that zoning policies make suburban sprawl, not free markets. They argue that if zoning restrictions were lifted and development responded to free market forces, higher density hous…
I would hold up Houston as the counterexample. It has zero zoning policies whatsoever and is one of the most sprawled cities in the country, and everyone lives in low-density single family ranch homes with huge floor plans and drives an hour to work each way. Developers still basically just plop large single-family residential developments on random plots of land with few ways to stop them. In the absence of zoning,…
In fact that's such a strong counterexample to the article you can basically discount it entirely.
> will not build denser properties because they’re riskier.
Or because people don't want them. What's riskier about them?
Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs
#27>If so many people live in suburbs, it must be because that’s what they prefer, right? But the evidence is to the contrary. This article makes its point from the book "Zoned Out" (2005.) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the argument is that zoning policies make suburban sprawl, not free markets. They argue that if zoning restrictions were lifted and development responded to free market forces, higher density hous…
I would hold up Houston as the counterexample. It has zero zoning policies whatsoever and is one of the most sprawled cities in the country, and everyone lives in low-density single family ranch homes with huge floor plans and drives an hour to work each way. Developers still basically just plop large single-family residential developments on random plots of land with few ways to stop them. In the absence of zoning,…
It also mandates setbacks from the street, wide roads, and long blocks.
Overall Houston does a lot of stuff right! But, I think they have still baked sprawl into their system.
From what I can see, my dense Montreal neighbourbood would be illegal in Houston. (It's illegal almost everywhere in North America, of course)
https://marketurbanism.com/2016/09/19/how-houston-regulates-...
Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs
#28Yet another article claiming that I, every member of my family, and all of my friends don’t actually want to live in our horrible susburbs. It’s not possible that we actually love it here, that we like the clean air, wide open spaces, huge yards, non-crowded downtown, small family friendly parades, and our rodeo. Nope, we’re all just lying to ourselves and really want to love in a cramped arcology.
That's decidedly not what the article claims. It claims that there are people who live in the suburbs but would prefer not to, and provides evidence to support that claim. The same evidence acknowledges the existence of people who are happy living in suburbs.
With a topic as sensitive as urban density, where city planners have been bombarding us with the "right-answer" of high-density living for decades, I would expect people to over-report preferring high-density living, especially on a survey conducted by someone trying to prove their case that people prefer high-density housing.
Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs
#29Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs
#30What a load, I've never been to a city that wasn't a disgusting concrete nightmare. God forbid you want to raise kids, say goodbye to playing outside. I'll take my cozy yard and breathable air, thanks