When Shaun Yandell proposed to his long-time girlfriend Gina Marasco on the doorstep of their new home in the sunny suburb of Elk Grove, California, four years ago, he never imagined things would get this bad. But they did, and it happened almost overnight.

Yandell’s marriage isn’t falling apart: his neighborhood is.

Devastated by the subprime mortgage crisis, hundreds of homes have been foreclosed and thousands of residents have been forced to move, leaving in their wake a not-so-pleasant path of empty houses, unkempt lawns, vacant strip malls, graffiti-sprayed desolate sidewalks and even increased crime.

In Elk Grove, some homeowners not only cut their own grass but also trim the yards of vacant homes on their streets, hoping to deter gangs and criminals from moving in…

While the foreclosure epidemic has left communities across the United States overrun with unoccupied houses and overgrown grass, underneath the chaos another trend is quietly emerging that, over the next several decades, could change the face of suburban American life as we know it.

This change can be witnessed in places like Atlanta, Georgia, Detroit, Michigan, and Dallas, Texas, said Leinberger, where once rundown downtowns are being revitalized by well-educated, young professionals who have no desire to live in a detached single family home typical of a suburbia where life is often centered around long commutes and cars.

Instead, they are looking for what Leinberger calls “walkable urbanism” — both small communities and big cities characterized by efficient mass transit systems and high density developments enabling residents to walk virtually everywhere for everything — from home to work to restaurants to movie theaters.

The so-called New Urbanism movement emerged in the mid-90s and has been steadily gaining momentum, especially with rising energy costs, environmental concerns and health problems associated with what Leinberger calls “drivable sub-urbanism” — a low-density built environment plan that emerged around the end of the Second World War and has been the dominant design in the U.S. ever since.

Changing demographics are also fueling new demands as the number of households with children continues to decline. By the end of the next decade, the number of single-person households in the United States will amost equal those with kids.

Most Western nations never got round to aping exurbanite Levittown. They never destroyed rail systems. Trashing inner city communities in the name of Urban Renewal never achieved a political mandate.

More than ever before, the cost of energy and transport may begin to govern living trends in the United States – again.




  1. MikeN says:

    Mustard is enjoying the wave of home foreclosures, because he and his hard envirocrazy friends want to force people into cities. Apparently he hates suburbs because he once had bad food at Olive Garden.

  2. Mister Mustard says:

    #33 Lyin’ Mike

    >>Apparently he hates suburbs because
    >>he once had bad food at Olive Garden.

    Naw, my experiences at Olive Garden (few though they may be) haven’t been all that bad.

    I dislike suburbs because they have turned our nation into a seething cauldron of parasitic leeches, guzzling gas, destroying the environment, and for what? The ability to live in a $700,000 house that looks exactly like all the other $700,000 houses in the subdivision.

    If those dummies didn’t have to pay $100 to fill up each of their 3 gas tanks a couple of times a week to drive everywhere they go, maybe they could pay the mortgage, and wouldn’t be getting foreclosed on.

    Sheesh.

  3. bobbo says:

    #34–Mustard, while what you say is true, in America for quite some time with only rare exceptions, “downtown” was not an attractive place to be. Bad schools, noise, fumes, no parks etc. So, there has long been a pull from the suburbs, and a push from the cities.

    Sure seems to me that if cities were planned to be lived in there would be green beltways, jogging and bike trails, adequate grocery shopping and all the rest–as well as larger sized living quarters?

    Like so much in america, “someone” decides suburbs are the future and then cities are let go to rot.

    Good regional planning would provide a mix of all choices all working together well. That can’t be done with Standard Oil buying up mass transit, trashing it, and forcing people into cars==etc.

  4. Mister Mustard says:

    #35 Bobbo
    >>Sure seems to me that if cities were planned
    >>to be lived in there would be green beltways,
    >>jogging and bike trails, adequate grocery
    >>shopping and all the rest–as well as larger
    >>sized living quarters?

    Check out Minneapolis sometime, Bobster.

    >>That can’t be done with Standard Oil buying
    >>up mass transit, trashing it, and forcing
    >>people into cars

    Well, it couldn’t happen with $1.59 gas. But now maybe with the soccer moms and hockey dads having to pay $100 a pop to fill up their SUVs, enough pressure can be brought to bear. You never know.

  5. morram says:

    No subways here but we have a few buses and shuttles. I use a motorbike and spend about $15 a week for the 150mile weekly commute. Recently we’ve seen empty houses and unkempt lawns, but to tell the truth we knew a lot of these folks would be leaving because they could never afford the payments and moved into these houses because it was cheaper than renting in the sub standard area. Add to that a lot of the vacants are due to people being allow to buy 3,4 or even 5 houses during the cheap loan spell and are now losing all of them since even renters have moved on. Living in Elk Grove myself I’ve hardly seen an increase in graffiti-sprayed desolate sidewalks or even an increased crime, that I believe is all media bullshit. Honestly more of the “graffiti-sprayed desolate sidewalks” I’ve seen are still downtown Sac or in the South area, just as with the increased crime since a lot of the folks that have been displaced from Elk Grove have moved back to the poor South areas of the city.

  6. Mr. Fusion says:

    #21, James,

    I’m the most interesting thing around here.

    Sort of on the same level as the Elephant man or the Fat Lady at the circus.

  7. philwade says:

    What is even better is to do what my daughter is doing – going from an apartment in Alexandria, VA with no easy transit access to a condo further out for less than 1/2 the appraised value that sits one mile from the rail station (not Metro). So her payment is well under her rent, her gas bill disappears and the gov’t subsidizes her transit and her parking bill goes way down. Only downside is having to mow a yard.

  8. Thinker says:

    I saw this article on CNN’s site, and my read was it was dealing with neighborhoods that were mostly these people. Not established ones that had a healthy turnover of houses/families. But certainly something to watch.

  9. MikeN says:

    They should allow more development in the cities. Instead, they restrict housing developments, shut down parking(Greg Easterbrook wrote that 10% of the driving in NYC is looking for parking.

  10. Wally the Engineer says:

    I live 20ish miles from where I work. I would:
    a) Love to work in the town I live in
    – or –
    b) Love to Live in the town I work in.
    On the other hand, I have a car that gets decent gas mileage.
    If I didn’t have a small child, I could see living in one of the renovated condo’s going up, in our Downtown area. Too bad they are going for twice what my 2000+ sqft home with over an acre of land can be sold for. No “luxury condo” should cost 2x what a free standing house with land costs in the same area.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 11588 access attempts in the last 7 days.