Read on Twitter
Been casually watching this show called City Vs. Burbs where couples decide whether to buy a home in the city or the suburbs (one is team city, the other suburbs).
Obv this is reality tv, but there are some interesting commonalities across the couples re: housing preferences.
Obv this is reality tv, but there are some interesting commonalities across the couples re: housing preferences.
First, I’ve noticed that some planners & urbanists have a tendency to idealize ‘the city’ & condemn those who choose suburbs.
Yes, urban density helps limit outward growth, increase transit viability, emissions reductions, sociability, health, etc. Limiting sprawl is imperative.
Yes, urban density helps limit outward growth, increase transit viability, emissions reductions, sociability, health, etc. Limiting sprawl is imperative.
The “team city” ppl all talk about wanting to avoid long commutes, being able to walk to work, enjoy amenities, see friends more often, feel like they’re part of something, enjoy experiences over material assets, clean less floor area, etc.
Most of the team city ppl were women.
Most of the team city ppl were women.
The team city women described the value of trip chaining (but not using that term). They brought up how they don’t like the idea of being dependent on a car. They don’t like the idea of being isolated.
I get this. This resonates with me.
But on “team suburbs” there was a lot of talk around getting more bang for your buck in the burbs, enough room to raise a family (the difference in sqft is stark), closer to nature. I can also see this perspective too.
But on “team suburbs” there was a lot of talk around getting more bang for your buck in the burbs, enough room to raise a family (the difference in sqft is stark), closer to nature. I can also see this perspective too.
I think too often team burbs is dismissed as just not seeing the ‘magic’ of urban life, but I think there’s some important takeaways from their perspective & real equity implications.
1st I think about the value proposition.
1st I think about the value proposition.
All of the city options on the show were ~600sf apartments (except for 1 townhouse). For the same price or less, they could get 2000+sf in the burbs.
Anything above 1000sf in the City blew their budget.
Anything above 1000sf in the City blew their budget.
Yes, there’s the lifestyle costs associated with living further away (mostly related to car ownership) that may cancel out savings, but the perception of value was a common theme.
Maybe part of this comes from the fact that the true cost of suburban dev. isn’t reflected in the cost of housing? Maybe it comes from the fact that many cities create artificial scarcity by limiting dev density to single family only housing so that options are $ SFH or dt apt...
(A reminder that single family only zoning is rooted in racism & classism. It was meant to keep ‘others’ out. It was meant to create divisions. We can see this today when ‘nbhd character’ is weaponized & used as a euphemism for exclusion.)
Who feels welcome in our cities?
Who feels welcome in our cities?
2nd amenity space. Team suburbs always brought up how they preferred the amenity space of the suburbs. They felt like they were closer to nature.
This speaks to the imp. of adequate green space in cities. What does the distribution look like? Who has access, who doesn’t?
This speaks to the imp. of adequate green space in cities. What does the distribution look like? Who has access, who doesn’t?
I feel lucky to live near #Yeg’s river valley, but how would my experience of city life differ without that access? I imagine this becomes an even more important calculation when the possibility of children enter the picture.
3rd. I think about family-friendly housing. Do cities offer family-friendly housing options beyond $$ single family homes? The size of the city option homes were almost always too small for their needs.
I found myself yelling at the TV - the Missing Middle is still missing! https://twitter.com/sallyann_12/status/1174064687375364097
I found myself yelling at the TV - the Missing Middle is still missing! https://twitter.com/sallyann_12/status/1174064687375364097
Many cities are still struggling to offer affordable, multi-bedroom homes, with access to amenity space, mostly because it’s been rendered illegal by zoning bylaws.
The one time missing middle housing (3br townhouse) was shown on the show, they went for it.
Big surprise.
The one time missing middle housing (3br townhouse) was shown on the show, they went for it.
Big surprise.
It was really refreshing to see ‘non-urban planning nerds’ having the city vs suburbs convo.
It’s a good reminder that we all experience urban life differently, yet most of us value similar things: access to green space & opportunities to experience tranquility...
It’s a good reminder that we all experience urban life differently, yet most of us value similar things: access to green space & opportunities to experience tranquility...
...access to amenities & opportunities to experience leisure & entertainment, affordability, proximity to employment, housing options that meet us at different life phases & stages, cnx to community & a sense of belonging.
As much as I believe in the benefits of urban life & that macro level forces require us to live in more compact & sustainable human habitats, I don’t think it’s right to condemn people who choose suburbs.
It’s an opportunity to reflect on who our cities are serving & who is forgotten. What needs are being prioritized and to who’s benefit?
