The Death of the Fringe Suburb

We are lucky to live in a 1950's-1960's neighborhood that has sidewalks everywhere and connects to streets that have sidewalks. Since it is a lower income area with lots of residents who only have 1 car in their household, there are tons of walkers. Our city also emphasizes walkability by spending money on maintaining sidewalks and expanding the sidewalk network. They do this in part by selling bonds for transportation projects, a big chunk of which goes to sidewalks and transit. They also expand the sidewalk network through zoning laws. When developers build a new project, they are required to construct sidewalk along their frontage. That is a fairly common requirement among municipalities in my state.

I checked the walkability score - 66. I forgot about the diversity of dining and groceries in the neighborhood (or on the periphery at least). 3 latino markets, 7 asian groceries, 1 middle eastern grocery, an african grocery, and a conventional grocery store, and 2 fish markets. 5 mexican restaurants, a Honduran restaurant, a panaderia, 2 vietnamese restaurants, a thai restaurant, an australian restaurant (Outback steakhouse lol), 2 pancake/waffle restaurants, 3 fast food burger joints, a starbucks, 3 chinese restaurants (2 are great!), 5 pizza places, a fried seafood restaurant, and many more I'm sure I have missed. Of course I would be 300 pounds if I ate at all these places regularly. Even if I walked to them. :)

Many days we never drive. Multiple parks, community center, library and the kids' school are all in the neighborhood. I take the bus to work. Shopping and dining and banking are all a couple blocks away.
 
Last edited:
Interesting and accurate results for me. My town scored a 23, not surprising. I walk for exercise, drive for everything else.
 
My cookie cutter suburban neighborhood here on the southside of Savannah GA gets a walking score of 20. It is a pleasant place to walk the dog but too far away from most businesses to do any shopping without driving the car. Jones Street which is in the historic district and has been called the most beautiful street in America by Southern Living magazine has a walking score of 92. The historic district is indeed a wonderful place to walk. At least once a week we get in the car and drive there solely for the purpose of walking. We really have considered how it might be nice to live in a place where you do not need to drive to get anywhere.
 
I got a big 17....

And I would not want to walk to a number of the places that were listed...


Edit to add... when I lived in NYC, it was a 98... I do wonder how to get a 100...

After typing in some addresses where I have previously lived, I'm not sure that my definition of walkability is the same as theirs at all. :)


I agree... the 17 I got had places to walk that I would not go... like a 7-11 type as a grocery store... and one is a drive thru place that sells beer and other junk... the only place that I would walk would be the local elementary school and I do not have to go there except to drop off kids...


And the 98 seems 'low'.... the building I lived in had a movie theater, a gym, a post office, a hardware type store... a grocery store was across the street, many places to eat within a block... Lincoln center a couple of blocks away where you could go and watch free stuff (or pay and watch the good stuff)... I could literally do most everything I wanted within 5 to 10 blocks of where I lived... so I do not see how you could not get a 100 on that...

PS... you could walk to the History Museum, but it was a bit longer to get there... and the art museum was on the other side of the park... maybe that is the problem :)
 
Our current house has a walk score of 2 and really I don't see how it gets even that. It is a gated subdivision and is hilly and I don't even walk much within the subdivision let alone to anywhere else. It is a good 12 minutes by car to the closest gas station...

On the other hand, it shows my old townhouse in HOuston as having a walk score of 73 and I think they are dreaming. Yes, some of that stuff is theoretically less than a mile away but with the heat and humidity I sure didn't see many people walking to them....
 
I don't think it takes terrain or humidity into account.
 
Are we ready for the boomer tsunami? I'll be downsizing and hope avoid driving, as my urban condo is withing walking distance to most things. I bought my condo four years ago and now other condos in the building are selling for nearly 100k more. I see the trend continuing as more baby boomers retire. DH and I still maintain two residences at present until I am retired, then I'll be happily ensconced in the urban lifestyle I prefer.
 
As a suburbanite, what I find troubling is most of the current Electric Vehicle crop has a range of 80 miles.

Not sure if this is b/c there is a technology barrier between range vs battery weight, or if the auto manufacturers have already written off suburban/exurban commuters as a shrinking minority.
 
As a suburbanite, what I find troubling is most of the current Electric Vehicle crop has a range of 80 miles.

Not sure if this is b/c there is a technology barrier between range vs battery weight, or if the auto manufacturers have already written off suburban/exurban commuters as a shrinking minority.

Batteries (and therefore extra range) are very costly, and an 80 mile total range is sufficient for the vast majority of daily commuting.

According to this site, as of 2003 the average commute was 15 miles each way, and only 11% of people traveled more than 30 miles each way.
(graph below is from the web page above). So, an EV with a total range of 80 miles would easily do the trick for 90+% of commuters. Well, provided they didn't want to use a heater or AC, but that's another issue.

The electric vehicle aren't selling well now (compared to their projections), in part because of their prices. Increasing the size of the batteries (and therefore the vehicle price) probably won't help things.

Heck, with over 50% of people commuting less than 10 miles each way, bicycles would be a perfect answer for many people if weather and safety (adequate bike paths?) weren't such big factors.

On a typical day, how many miles one-way do you travel from home to work?

Excel | CSV | Table Version
figure_02_figure_02_16596_image001.gif
SOURCE: US Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Omnibus Household Survey. Aggregated data cover activities for the month prior to the survey.
 
Last edited:
The question is of course the life style one prefers. A cramped Urban style or the spacious semi rural style? It is nice that the neighbors are 200 feet away. If one is retired, then one can avoid rush hours, (of which in a smaller town there are very few), and drive when there is less rush.
 
Thought this site might be relevant to this thread:
Get Your Walk Score - Find Walkable Apartments and Rentals
28. I don't know how well this website handles Manhattan, but it doesn't do very well in Central Oahu.

It doesn't seem to understand topography or roads. It's true that we're less than a mile from the nearest Costco, but that's just using dividers on the chart. The reality is a steep climb down into a gulch and a tall hike out on private roads. Most people drive the 4.7 miles that it takes to get to the bridge over the gulch. I've been jonesing for a zipline.

The website doesn't know any of the neighborhood parks (or bars, for that matter), it doesn't know Wal-Mart or two local grocery stores, and it thinks that the nearest entertainment is Hawaii's Plantation Village.

If I wanted to walk, it's about 30-40 minutes uphill to the shopping center. We have several neighbors do it on our street for their exercise & groceries. I'd bicycle the route without breaking a sweat.

But, hey, at least it knows where to go to catch Da Bus.
 
As a suburbanite, what I find troubling is most of the current Electric Vehicle crop has a range of 80 miles.

Not sure if this is b/c there is a technology barrier between range vs battery weight, or if the auto manufacturers have already written off suburban/exurban commuters as a shrinking minority.

The question might be assume you had retired, how many miles would you need to drive to get things done? Of course its kind of hard to do any economic justification on an electric vehicle, even with cheap electricity, as they tend to have a long payout, as indeed do hybrids. With the increasing mileage as cars go to 4 cylinders with a turbocharger, and stopping the engine when the car is stopped with a foot on the brake mileage will get somewhat better.
 
Maybe Midpack can do a survey to see how many folks here either returned to a city from the suburbs or plan to. We all know he puts together many interesting surveys.

DW and I have absolutely no desire to be in a big city. A 55+ retirement community sounds pretty good if and when we downsize from the suburban mega mansion. We may visit one of those communities this weekend, which also happens to be located in our town.

Your perspective is shared by a fair number of Boomers who don't want to put up with "diversity" in their day-to-day lives. They want to be around people their own age and economic level so that they won't feel out of place in the constant ebb and flow of city centers. The newer 55+ retirement communities are a far cry from those of yesteryear, with many more physical activities available beyond golf, tennis and swimming.
 
Even though we live in very walkable place, in my imaginary life I would have a second little house in a very unwalkable but very peaceful and quiet place far from a business district, and just go back and forth as my soul required.
 
Even though we live in very walkable place, in my imaginary life I would have a second little house in a very unwalkable but very peaceful and quiet place far from a business district, and just go back and forth as my soul required.

The proverbial "cabin in the woods"? Sounds nice if you buy one in an unspoiled area that's fairly cheap. My guess is that there are plenty of places like that in flyover country. I wouldn't mind owning one in the Rockies.

I'd still want running water (even if from a well), electricity (solar?) and a phone (cell tower nearby?) This last point is somewhat negotiable, but it's always good to communicate with others in case of an emergency.
 
Personally I just can't see any happiness in doubling my housework, bills, property tax, possessions, upkeep, and maintenance. I wouldn't get enough out of a second home to make all that worthwhile. But for those who want one, I say go for it!
 
Personally I just can't see any happiness in doubling my housework, bills, property tax, possessions, upkeep, and maintenance. I wouldn't get enough out of a second home to make all that worthwhile. But for those who want one, I say go for it!

My second house is imaginary, W2R, and so is the incredible nest egg I would have to take care of running it. :)
 
Even though we live in very walkable place, in my imaginary life I would have a second little house in a very unwalkable but very peaceful and quiet place far from a business district, and just go back and forth as my soul required.

I just close my eyes and pretend the sound of cars driving by the house are waves crashing on the beach. Much easier when one is laying in a hammock. :D
 
I just saw a note in the local edition of our Chicago paper that said that the sizes of new homes trended up last year. Apparently the downsizing trend predicted by the National Association of Realtors may have been a recession driven blip on the general trend. Or not. We'll know in 10 years or so.
 
I just saw a note in the local edition of our Chicago paper that said that the sizes of new homes trended up last year. Apparently the downsizing trend predicted by the National Association of Realtors may have been a recession driven blip on the general trend. Or not. We'll know in 10 years or so.
A little early to conclude it was/is a "recession driven blip?"
These facts lead to an interesting question: how can the average home be getting bigger, more expensive, and have more amenities when the housing market remains weak and the overall economy is yet to see a robust recovery? The answer is simple: it comes down to who has been buying homes. In the last couple of years, a typical home buyer had to have a 20% down payment, a high credit score, well-documented income, and stable employment history in order to qualify for a mortgage.

As a result, and not surprisingly, many first-time home buyers were left out of the home-buying game, leaving the market dominated by a segment of buyers who tend to buy better-than-average homes. It is entirely feasible that when buyers with less stellar bank accounts and credit scores are able to strongly reenter the housing market, the scales will shift down and size and amenities will retreat.
Could the housing boom days of outrageous McMansions be making a comeback?

At first glance, new data point to yes. The average size of a newly built home rose last year, according to just-released data from the Census bureau, cited on MSNBC. The average new American home last year was 2,480 square feet, an increase of 88 square feet from 2010. The average size of a new home peaked at 2,521 square feet in 2007 when many Americans were at the height of a home-buying frenzy fueled by easy credit. New home-builders constructed ever larger McMansions to cater to demand.

This time around, the growth in home size is much less democratic: Rich people are driving the trend to bigger homes. According to the National Association of Home Builders, last year rich people bought bigger and more luxurious homes. They had the right idea: It's a good time to buy, if you can afford it and have the credit rating to secure a mortgage. Home prices are still languishing at low levels.
Size Matters: Newly Constructed Home Trends in 2011 | RISMedia
Average Home Size Rose 4 Percent In 2011
 
A little early to conclude it was/is a "recession driven blip?"
Whew, what a relief. I was afraid it was because multi-generation family members were having to move back into ohana housing.

An acquaintance of ours is demolishing their 2000 sq ft home down to the foundation and rebuilding a 4000 sq ft two-story manse. They'll continue to live on the brand-new ground floor with a split-floorplan upstairs option which will allow either one (or both) of their kids the flexibility to move back home to help take care of Mom & Dad. At $250K they think it's cheaper than long-term care insurance premiums...
 
An acquaintance of ours is demolishing their 2000 sq ft home down to the foundation and rebuilding a 4000 sq ft two-story manse. They'll continue to live on the brand-new ground floor with a split-floorplan upstairs option which will allow either one (or both) of their kids the flexibility to move back home to help take care of Mom & Dad. At $250K they think it's cheaper than long-term care insurance premiums...
I hope they checked the idea out with the kids first. :rolleyes:
 
interesting thread but too long to read all posts. We are very lucky that we are able to cover most of the housing possibilities by owning several personal use homes. Have a nice urban condo in a very walkable ( literally hundreds of restaurants within a mile) in downtown Toronto, a " cottage" by the lake where I am now-within a couple hour drive from Toronto, a house in the beautiful town of Canmore in the Canadian rockies, as well as a great house in Paradise Valley in Arizona. Not representative I know but other than a place on the beach I think we have it covered.
We have really noticed a move to downtown living in the last few years but not sure if this is a trend or not. There are literally dozens of cranes building condos in downtown Toronto. Can't last at this pace.
 
Back
Top Bottom