Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

cityobservatory.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 143 posts

Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

#121

Post by graeme »

exelius wrote: post #112
graeme wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been to Cuba. There are old cities in the Spanish style, and new ones (1950s) in the american style. In the spanish cities you can walk comfortably. The buildings are tall enough and near enough to the sidewalk that you can always find shade. And everyone walks on the shaded side of the street. In the american cities the buildings are set back, and there is no shade. People still walk (they're poor), but there a…

Walking has never been feasible in the South US. It works in Cuba because Cuba is a small island with a lot of people. Density is forced, so you don’t need a car to get to everything — thus your walking trips are 10-20 minutes long. Living in the south, it would take me 15 minutes walking just to leave my neighborhood. And most neighborhoods remotely outside the cities do not have sidewalks. So it’s a chicken-and-egg…

That's a good argument: the development of cities post-AC and post-car strongly favours the current model.

But, is it possible that cities were small because the wrong building style was used? After all, the Spanish colonies to the south of the US are warmer than the South, but had large cities.

Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

#122

Post by IWeldMelons »

ausvisaissues wrote: post #120
jakecopp wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How more considerate? Noise wise?

With noise, with garbage sorting, etc... Japanese people tend to follow all rules, written and unwritten. I guess Americans follow only rules that can be enforced (cf. Uber, Airbnb, etc...) Probably from a culture of rebellion against Britain colonial government... In some cases it is good and in some bad. In Japan there is also no tolerance for the 1% that ruins public spaces for everyone (compare Tokyo subways agai…

I live in Central Asia, which is poor and people there are not very considerate or tend to follow the rules, yet cities are clean and relatively nice, especially the big ones. The reason why the cities are okay, because the people and especiallt governments know how to live urban life, how to plan properly etc.

Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

#123

Post by IWeldMelons »

squirrelicus wrote: post #79
Turing_Machine wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's see: Drunks/junkies/mentally ill people shitting, pissing, and vomiting everywhere, while verbally (and sometimes physically) abusing the passers-by. Noise. Breathing the stench of exhaust fumes, week-old garbage, and someone else's idea of cooking. Having no place for your children to sit on the grass without worrying about them finding someone's discarded needle or excrement. Having no space for gardens, hobb…

+1 My favorite part of the suburbs is that my kids are physically incapable of walking or biking to an urban area. When they have grown to acquire the sense to look out for themselves, then they coincidentally will have the freedom (e.g. drivers license) to go to an urban place. Until then, I love that I can let them just go outside without supervision and dick around. American urbanity is just not for families.

I kinda agree that American urbanity is not for families. However, Soviet/Post-Soviet is just fine. I live in a big city in Central Asia, and our schools get better the closer you get to the urban core, the neighborhoods get more affluent, there is a lot of large communal areas between houses, crime is low, parks and recreation areas are clean etc.

Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

#124

Post by IWeldMelons »

kraigie wrote: post #116
tokyodude wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in the suburbs. I guess I don't know what I was missing. There were parks, hobby stores, shopping centers, open lots where people made bike ramps and burms, we launched model rockets, went to arcades, raced slot cars, flew RC planes. Would also semi regularly ride bikes 2-4 miles away from home and sometimes 6 or 7. My impression of most high density cities would be that my options would be more limited as…

Berlin has all of those,(albeit it is one of the highest open space cites there are) hell London has over 20 skateparks that is just for skating that is before you consider a lot of the Thames bank serves as open parkside. With the only traffic pedestrians and boats on the water. High density doesn't have to mean no space, it does have to mean no space for autos though, they simply take up too much space. If you have…

Why are you saying "no space for cars"? You need to build multistory and underground garages here and there and you are all set.

Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

#125

Post by squirrelicus »

jacobolus wrote: post #94
squirrelicus wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 My favorite part of the suburbs is that my kids are physically incapable of walking or biking to an urban area. When they have grown to acquire the sense to look out for themselves, then they coincidentally will have the freedom (e.g. drivers license) to go to an urban place. Until then, I love that I can let them just go outside without supervision and dick around. American urbanity is just not for families.

I grew up in a suburb and I am sure glad my kid will be growing up in the city with access to transit and a wide range of amenities within walking distance, and streets/neighborhoods actually designed for walking around. American suburbs are awful for anyone under the age of 16 or anyone without a car. Kids can't do anything without being babied around by a parent.

A neighborhood optimizing for a 5 year old is very different than a neighborhood optimizing for a 15 year old. It makes sense that people set down roots in a child friendly suburb, and then their teens just deal with the fact that they live in a nice place that might be a bit boring. Parents deal with shuffling them around to whatever. It's really not a big deal. If I were uprooting the family when I had teens, okay, maybe urbanity is for us. Probably not though, because I'd rather deal with a bored surburban teenager than the safety and educational nightmare of American cities.

Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

#126

Post by jacobolus »

squirrelicus wrote: post #125
jacobolus wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a suburb and I am sure glad my kid will be growing up in the city with access to transit and a wide range of amenities within walking distance, and streets/neighborhoods actually designed for walking around. American suburbs are awful for anyone under the age of 16 or anyone without a car. Kids can't do anything without being babied around by a parent.

A neighborhood optimizing for a 5 year old is very different than a neighborhood optimizing for a 15 year old. It makes sense that people set down roots in a child friendly suburb, and then their teens just deal with the fact that they live in a nice place that might be a bit boring. Parents deal with shuffling them around to whatever. It's really not a big deal. If I were uprooting the family when I had teens, okay,…

The suburb is best for healthy childless people aged like 40–60 who have few social hobbies and enjoy commuting to work by car and then spending the rest of their time at home, e.g. doing carpentry in their garage, gardening in a large yard, or sitting on a couch watching a big TV. Or those who really love driving cars every day.

Someone age 2 or 6 or 12 or 17 or 23 generally has a better time in the city: more freedom, more things to do within walking/transit distance, less time wasted on car transportation, more people of all ages and interests to engage with.

The density of cities can support a higher density of parks, playgrounds, plazas, markets, museums, libraries, schools, art galleries, music venues, coffeeshops, restaurants, ice cream stores, churches, community centers, ...., which means these can all be easily accessed on foot.

In typical American suburbs everything is dispersed and there are oceans of concrete standing between any two points, so walking around is unpleasant and impractical. People who walk around are viewed with suspicion, and children walking around alone are often reported to the police. In many suburbs, almost nobody rides a bike or takes the bus. Instead, nearly all trips are taken by car, which adds a ton of time overhead to every trip and makes anyone without car dependent on someone else.

Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

#127

Post by mrep »

jacobolus wrote: post #126
squirrelicus wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A neighborhood optimizing for a 5 year old is very different than a neighborhood optimizing for a 15 year old. It makes sense that people set down roots in a child friendly suburb, and then their teens just deal with the fact that they live in a nice place that might be a bit boring. Parents deal with shuffling them around to whatever. It's really not a big deal. If I were uprooting the family when I had teens, okay,…

The suburb is best for healthy childless people aged like 40–60 who have few social hobbies and enjoy commuting to work by car and then spending the rest of their time at home, e.g. doing carpentry in their garage, gardening in a large yard, or sitting on a couch watching a big TV. Or those who really love driving cars every day. Someone age 2 or 6 or 12 or 17 or 23 generally has a better time in the city: more freed…

That doesn't match my experience growing up in a suburb. We biked by ourselves to each other's houses all the time and especially to parks where we would play ultimate Frisbee, football, and basketball games. Finding open park space to play those games sounds way harder in the city because the parks are always so packed due to the density.

And most of those other benefits you cited you cited would have been practically useless to me as a kid because I had hardly any desposable income.

Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

#128

Post by waldrews »

exelius wrote: post #112
graeme wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been to Cuba. There are old cities in the Spanish style, and new ones (1950s) in the american style. In the spanish cities you can walk comfortably. The buildings are tall enough and near enough to the sidewalk that you can always find shade. And everyone walks on the shaded side of the street. In the american cities the buildings are set back, and there is no shade. People still walk (they're poor), but there a…

Walking has never been feasible in the South US. It works in Cuba because Cuba is a small island with a lot of people. Density is forced, so you don’t need a car to get to everything — thus your walking trips are 10-20 minutes long. Living in the south, it would take me 15 minutes walking just to leave my neighborhood. And most neighborhoods remotely outside the cities do not have sidewalks. So it’s a chicken-and-egg…

Cuba is small? The length, just under 800 miles, is about the same as the distance from New York to Chicago.

Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

#129

Post by SerLava »

tokyodude wrote: post #98
ausvisaissues wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is also culture that plays a big part. I've lived in very high density housing in Japan (20 floor manshion type apartment) and medium density in US (2 level apartment). Higher density in Japan is much more pleasant due to the culture of being considerate of others. If I have to live in the US, I will choose suburbia for that reason.

I live in Tokyo and well, I'm not so sure. Maybe you just got lucky or I got unlucky. I've lived in places where they neighboring couple would scream and throw things at 3-4am for 30 minutes every couple of weeks. Lived in a place across the kanda river from the Chou line where the trains were so loud I couldn't hear the TV when they went by. My current place is nice enough but I feel I have to tiptoe all the time wh…

Not being able to walk across your own home at night is reason 1 of 100 why I choose suburban sprawl over high density. It's like a damned prison.

Re: The myth of revealed preference for suburbs

#130

Post by Turing_Machine »

matchbok wrote: post #106
Turing_Machine wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And millions of them don't. Educational outcomes, crime (both as victim and perpetrator), and mental health are all worse for those who grew up in cities, and not just slightly worse. Much worse.

Where is the opioid crisis right now? Thought so.

> Where is the opioid crisis right now?

Pretty much everywhere in the country, but heroin et al have been problems in the cities for generations.

Post reply on HN