Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting and important series of articles this week at Strong Towns. They are focusing on suburban poverty.
Why does this matter? Several reason, but most important IMO:
When the central cities started emptying out starting in the 1960’s (i.e…”white flight”), the poor and disadvantaged were at least left behind to neighborhoods that had decent transit and some walkable amenities and housing/apartments that were built to last decades. It certainly wasn’t ideal, but those were the realities.
Fast forward to today. As the tread begins to reverse and people return to the cities, the poor will find themselves pushed out to the edges of metros to cheaply built housing with little or no amenities/services within walking distance and very poor transit options.
This is a bad situation…much worse than when the “flight” took place in the other direction. New blogs on this topic will be published all week. Here is a sampling:
Good intro:
Quote:
Consider an America where the affluent inhabit our core cities and the poor are left behind on our suburbanized outskirts.
It’s hard to imagine a more despotic environment to be poor in than America’s suburbs. The ante of an automobile is required for a base existence, but we’re seeing more and more families struggle to afford one, let alone the two or three that a family with kids often needs. That means trudging miles on foot to the nearest big box store or gas station for employment or daily essentials, circumnavigating drainage ditches and screening berms on roads designed without any thought given to those outside of an automobile.
Interesting and important series of articles this week at Strong Towns. They are focusing on suburban poverty.
Why does this matter? Several reason, but most important IMO:
When the central cities started emptying out starting in the 1960’s (i.e…”white flight”), the poor and disadvantaged were at least left behind to neighborhoods that had decent transit and some walkable amenities and housing/apartments that were built to last decades. It certainly wasn’t ideal, but those were the realities.
Fast forward to today. As the tread begins to reverse and people return to the cities, the poor will find themselves pushed out to the edges of metros to cheaply built housing with little or no amenities/services within walking distance and very poor transit options.
This is a bad situation…much worse than when the “flight” took place in the other direction. New blogs on this topic will be published all week. Here is a sampling:
The "return to the cities" is overplayed and overhyped. Moreover it's irrelevant given the growth of the "suburbs".
Why does anyone believe housing/apartments were built to last decades in cities vs. those away from a city center? Sounds a bit arrogant and inaccurate. Housing quality varies greatly based upon date of construction regardless of where it is located. The so-called "quality" of homes in cities is one of the reasons people leave cities - they want nicer homes.
The "return to the cities" is overplayed and overhyped. Moreover it's irrelevant given the growth of the "suburbs".
Why does anyone believe housing/apartments were built to last decades in cities vs. those away from a city center? Sounds a bit arrogant and inaccurate. Housing quality varies greatly based upon date of construction regardless of where it is located. The so-called "quality" of homes in cities is one of the reasons people leave cities - they want nicer homes.
If you aren't aware that homes generally are built cheaper today than they were 100 years ago, you've obviously have never done any rehabilitation of homes...or just paid attention. This isn't really debatable. Again...I'm talking in generalities here. The old saying, "they just don't build them like the use to" has real merit.
Also, look at how well a 30- 40 year old strip mall ages compared to a series of buildings fronting almost any main street in the US. That should also tell you something.
Regardless, this was only a minor point I chose to comment on. As the other poster suggests, this item doesn't explain away the trend of suburban poverty that is occurring and the fact that the way suburbs are generally built/laid out, means some tough times for the poor and disadvantaged in the coming decades. There are new articles being posted each day on the Strong Town's website so I'd suggest you take in a few and see how complex this issue really is.
Last edited by capitalcityguy; 08-17-2016 at 07:17 AM..
Here is quick one-page read for anyone that questions the legitimacy of this topic. Acknowledging that Brooking's can be a left-leaning source, it is pretty straightforward analysis with supporting facts/figures:
Today, more poor people live in the suburbs than in America’s big cities or rural areas. Suburbia is home to
almost 16.4 million poor people, compared to 13.4 million in big cities and 7.3 million in rural areas
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,570 posts, read 81,147,605 times
Reputation: 57792
That's not what is happening in Seattle, we just don't see any suburban poverty. The more suburban, lower income outskirts have become gentrified, with the decrepit old homes bulldozed for new condos. I don't know where the truly poor have gone, though there is certainly a big increase in the homeless on the streets and under the freeways. Meanwhile, the more affluent suburban eastside cities are growing fast, with new developments of million dollar homes, some with as many as 150 being built after clearcutting the woods.
Here is quick one-page read for anyone that questions the legitimacy of this topic. Acknowledging that Brooking's can be a left-leaning source, it is pretty straightforward analysis with supporting facts/figures:
Of course, but that requires a little finagling of the statistics. More people live in the burbs than live in the cities, by a wide margin.
Poverty and Growth: Retro-Urbanists Cling to the Myth of Suburban Decline - The Daily Beast "both the 2010 Census and other more recent analyses demonstrate that America is becoming steadily more suburban: 44 million Americans live in America’s 51 major metropolitan areas, while nearly 122 million Americans live in their suburbs. In other words, nearly three quarters of metropolitan Americans live in suburbs, not core cities.
The main reason there are now more poor people in the suburbs is that there are now many more people in the suburbs, which have represented almost all of America’s net population growth in recent years. Despite trite talk about “suburban ghettos,” suburbs have a poverty rate roughly half that of urban centers (20.9 percent in core compared to 11.4 percent in the suburbs as of 2010)."
That's not what is happening in Seattle, we just don't see any suburban poverty. The more suburban, lower income outskirts have become gentrified, with the decrepit old homes bulldozed for new condos. I don't know where the truly poor have gone, though there is certainly a big increase in the homeless on the streets and under the freeways. Meanwhile, the more affluent suburban eastside cities are growing fast, with new developments of million dollar homes, some with as many as 150 being built after clearcutting the woods.
Isn't the east side of the Seattle area the wealthiest part of the metro? I think some of the southern suburbs are poor; Tukwila has a poverty rate of 24%. Everett to the north has some poverty too.
That's not what is happening in Seattle, we just don't see any suburban poverty. The more suburban, lower income outskirts have become gentrified, with the decrepit old homes bulldozed for new condos. I don't know where the truly poor have gone, though there is certainly a big increase in the homeless on the streets and under the freeways. Meanwhile, the more affluent suburban eastside cities are growing fast, with new developments of million dollar homes, some with as many as 150 being built after clearcutting the woods.
Go in a direction other than east and you'll find them. Federal Way is close to Seattle in terms of people under the poverty limit, Auburn is above Seattle, Lynwood is double Seattle, Everette 1.5x
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
