
What Will Save the Suburbs? - pg
http://arieff.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/what-will-save-the-suburbs/
======
bootload
_"... These insta-neighborhoods were not designed or built for flexibility or
change ..."_

I remember being critically aware of this when looking for a house and
choosing an area that was around 100yrs old. Doing this has a number of
advantages, pre-built infrastructure, transport, a variety of different shops
(remember main streets in towns?). So the idea was to find a place that had
already spent the dollars in the past. In these types of environments you
don't get mono-culture inhabitants. There is also a diversity in the ages of
the inhabitants which counter-acts the decline that naturally occurs as
population ages.

 _"... And after decades of renovation-obsession that has simply gotten out of
hand, it seems a prudent time to swap Viking ranges for double-paned windows
and high-efficiency furnaces. It’s the perfect moment to fix what we’ve got.
Despite their currently low numbers, green homes typically re-sell for more
money than their conventional counterparts. ..."_

I don't see this happening yet. The costs involved are high and the expertise
in re-building houses so they a) capture the water from the roofline, b)
capture the suns heat for hot water and power and c) keep the heat out in
summer and keep the heat in winter is simply not there, yet (Melb, Au is dry
and hot in summer, wet & cold in winter). I think the biggest hack would be if
new house designs could somehow be cheaply be modified before construction to
achieve efficiency.

Especially water.

~~~
jwilliams
_The costs involved are high and the expertise in re-building houses_

Water tanks and solar hot water seem quite prevalent in Melb - what's the
cost/experience gap that you're referring to? Afaik you still get a federal
rebate for installing a solar system. In VIC you get rebates for installing
tanks, showerheads, etc in existing buildings.

But yeah, I broadly see your point - the two construction issues that get to
me are (1) no verandas and (2) no trees. A veranda makes a big difference, and
a couple of properly placed trees can make a big difference to the amount of
(summer) solar radiation hitting a house.

~~~
bootload
_"... Water tanks and solar hot water seem quite prevalent in Melb - what's
the cost/experience gap that you're referring to? ..."_

If you want re-cycled water with minimal waste. Solar power hooked into the
grid selling back to the power companies. Houses re-fitted with better
insulation, access to high efficiency white-goods. Proper citing of properties
with north facing aspects. This all takes money.

To get the desired outcome, you have to think decentralised rather than the
centralised reliance we have now. Adding tanks & restricted showers is a
1950's solution to a much bigger problem. Btw where I grew up ~
[http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/sets/72157612299413869...](http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/sets/72157612299413869/)
a large portion of my school mates lived on tank-water and generators for
backup ~ <http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/245135326> So water tanks are
nothing new.

What I'm suggesting is a more radical thinking of dwellings, having the
capacity to capture and store drinking water. Installations of solar heating
and electricity. Power that feeds back to the grid during the day & pulled off
during the night. There is no effort like this being undertaken in Melbourne
save a few enviro-houses. This kind of redesign cannot happen without the
combined work of architects, local planners and local government. It's not an
easy task because

 _"... But yeah, I broadly see your point - the two construction issues that
get to me are (1) no verandas and (2) no trees ..."_

That is a problem. I think there is a definite disadvantage living where you
cannot add trees or verandas. The other is water. My current geo location gets
on average 20% more than the rest of Melbourne.

~~~
jwilliams
_If you want re-cycled water with minimal waste. Solar power hooked into the
grid selling back to the power companies. Houses re-fitted with better
insulation, access to high efficiency white-goods. Proper citing of properties
with north facing aspects. This all takes money._

Yup agreed - tanks and solar hot water are still a good idea, although I'll
agree they are only a step towards.

 _It's not an easy task because_

Not sure what you were going to say there :) .. What's the best mechanism for
this? Is water and energy just too cheap? Bump up the cost of both (with a
safety net) and put it into subsidies?

------
jimbokun
Is there any way to turn suburbs into small towns?

I never understood the mentality of people so against the convenience of
walking to the corner to buy a gallon of milk that they zoned properties in
such a way to make it impossible. I guess it's some masochistic thing, that
would just make life too easy.

The debate seems to be suburb vs. big city, evil vs. good (or vice versa). But
I grew up in a small town, and never realized what a privilege it was to walk
to my elementary and high schools, ball fields, play grounds, library, grocery
store, pharmacy, even friends' houses without crossing major highways.

Can we all just admit now that the people who invented suburbs were idiots and
find ways to make a subdivision more like a very small town? I'm afraid the
answer might be no, but maybe hope I'm overlooking some way this could work.

~~~
natrius
_"I never understood the mentality of people so against the convenience of
walking to the corner to buy a gallon of milk that they zoned properties in
such a way to make it impossible."_

If you build retail close enough to housing to walk to it, then people will
walk to it. If my house is near that retail, people will walk near my house.
People commit crimes. Walkable retail means I will get robbed.

Or at least that's how I assume their thought process goes.

 _"Can we all just admit now that the people who invented suburbs were idiots
and find ways to make a subdivision more like a very small town?"_

People are trying: <http://www.cnu.org/>

One such development that I've been paying attention to:
<http://muelleraustin.com/>

It's closer to the center of the city than what most people would call a
suburb, but it's in the midst of plenty of suburban density, segregated-use
development. The part that has been built is really pleasant to walk around.
Instead of giant garages being the primary architectural feature, the garages
are in the back on alleys. There aren't driveways every couple of feet with
cars blocking the sidewalk like there were in the neighborhood I grew up in.
When the "town center" part gets built, the neighborhood should be a pretty
amazing place to live.

In the Bay Area, Palo Alto's not so bad. You can't really walk anywhere unless
you live really close to downtown or the Middlefield shopping area, but at
least you can bike places without cheating death.

------
jwilliams
Before (urban) warehouses and lofts became popular they were used by
artists/startups (i.e. people more on the fringe) because they were so
cheap... Vibrant communities developed, they because popular (and eventually
the artists moved/were forced out).

This was the case here in Australia anyway, but I'm sure it applies in a lot
of other areas.

Surely this could be the case for the suburbs too? A whole suburb taken over
by people doing startups would be an interesting place.

~~~
jmackinn
I think the main problem with that idea is that the warehouses and lofts of
most cities were located in the run down downtown areas and often near the
waterfront of the city, as most cities old warehouses were originally used in
shipping. Suburbs on the other hand, and especially the ones in concern with
this article are in the middle of nowhere.

Artists/startups wanted to be located in the city and close to the things they
needed because, as with wanting cheap place to live, they didn't have money
for cars. The majority of these now abandon suburbs were entirely designed to
be used by cars. They are bedroom communities with nothing in or around them
but houses, and poorly built houses at that.

~~~
jwilliams
I think there is a counterpoint to that - in that there are a lot of artistic
communities that spring up in unexpected (often rural) areas.

I think the issue really is critical mass - Access to the city is great, but I
think what is required most of all is access to like-minded people. If you get
enough of that going, then the rest will (generally) come.

... All that said - I get your point - even these areas had something going
for them (e.g. the environment, surrounds, etc, etc).

~~~
astrec
The Heidelberg School was one such example, albeit from a somewhat different
time.

~~~
jwilliams
Exactly the one I was thinking of :)

~~~
whatusername
I love the fact that victorian's have just about taken over this
conversation.. (Although with population trends, etc - we're not likely to
have abandoned suburbs/houses any time soon). (As a point of note - my brother
in law - carpenter - is working heaps of overtime at the moment - partly in
Marysville, but the rest in the outer-outer-South-East... When the FHOG
dissapears, we will see what happens..

On the energy conservation note - Does anyone have some quick tips for how
best to utilise / retrofit a water tank? Last winter we filled an (existing)
pool with rainwater - and now I need to do something with the pipes...

------
flashgordon
Actually why do suburbs need saving?

~~~
tptacek
Because we've bulldozed wetlands and prairies and invested hundreds of
millions of dollars in non-renewable building materials to put them there?
"Save" might not be the best word here, though.

~~~
yummyfajitas
Just basic economics.

The Law of Sunk Cost: if you abandon a project, then all the money you sank
into it to begin with is lost! Therefore, never abandon a project, always
throw good money after bad.

~~~
tptacek
I'm sorry, I wasn't writing well. I'm saying, the point of the article is that
not all of those costs are sunk costs; some of it is reclaimable.

------
iigs
_Despite their currently low numbers, green homes typically re-sell for more
money than their conventional counterparts._

Until there's a way to measure it I certainly wouldn't get my hopes up. To
illustrate the issue, go to <http://www.zillow.com/> and try to select a house
for sale that you believe would be efficient or otherwise more suitable for
the "new future" -- it's basically impossible. It's not Zillow's fault either,
generally MLS services have such awful data that it's hard to trust anything
beyond the number of bedrooms. Until there's a way to look up your rating and
look down at your neighbor's, I wouldn't expect the people who currently
inhabit suburbs to make it a priority.

Furthermore, except for a few localized situations I believe that the suburbs
are safe for the forseeable future. There has long been the assumption that
fuel costs are inelastic, but 2008 has shown that to be untrue. America is,
for all intents and purposes, treating oil as if it's free -- the suburbs
drive to work one person per vehicle in passenger cars in the midst of a
horsepower war (Cadillac has a 550hp product in the "compact sedan" segment
and BMW's smallest cars, the "1-series", are available with a 300+hp engine!),
or trucks that make the commercial trucks of the 70s (not to mention the 40s!)
look downright weak. The 2009 F-150 (at one time called a "half-ton" pickup)
has a 1.5 ton payload capacity and can tow almost six tons. This vehicle is
routinely ignored by construction contractors and macho wanna-be alpha-males
who go straight to the "Super-Duty" models, capable of hauling _three_ tons
and towing _ten_ tons!

For all of the wankery we've heard recently about the end of life as we know
it, we've yet to begin to even try. There's a lot of easy belt-tightening to
do before people have to give up on their version of the American Dream.

On the flip side, all of the attention toward green living should hopefully
generally raise awareness and stimulate development of greener products,
definitely a win for everyone. We've needed a shock like 2008 for about 20
years now.

------
utnick
Are there really that many abandoned suburbs out there?

In Texas, suburbs are still going strong.

~~~
tokenadult
In the exurban counties around the Twin Cities, yes.

High enough cost of gasoline could probably kill off a lot of suburbs,
especially in places with traffic congestion such that commutes are already
annoying. When commutes are both annoying and unaffordable, the suburbs that
are only bedroom communities will be abandoned for places with a job base.

