[Oilers99]

I mean, this page is going to attract people passionate about good urban planning and design/architecture. Which the suburbs don’t have a ton of.

And idk if elitist is the right word? Maybe condescending? But I don’t think it’s elitist when most of our cities elite and most wealthy people live in suburbs. Or when the avg home price per neighbourhood is higher in most new suburbs than central neighbourhoods.

And many of us see suburbs as holding many negatives, that’s why we don’t like them. Same way if someone told me they didn’t like alcohol I’d be like, yeah, that’s fair. Not for everyone and has a great list of negative outcomes caused by it including harm to people, safety, mental health, children, etc.

I also think there’s a difference between good suburbs and most Edmonton suburbs. Most of ours are pretty rough and will only get worse the next 2 decades as traffic increases, gas gets taxed more, mature areas revitalize to be way more interesting and enjoyable than most currently “fancy new burbs”.

The suburbs are not where the rich people live - they live in inner city (Glenora, Windsor Park, Skunk Hollow, Valleyview, etc.). The suburbs are now designed as entry level housing for people, through products such as zero lot line, townhouses and duplexes. Due to density requirements there are no longer luxury suburbs.

 

[soupcrate]

The suburbs are not where the rich people live - they live in inner city (Glenora, Windsor Park, Skunk Hollow, Valleyview, etc.). The suburbs are now designed as entry level housing for people, through products such as zero lot line, townhouses and duplexes. Due to density requirements there are no longer luxury suburbs.

From my understanding of things:

Rich people live in the suburbs and the desirable mature neighborhoods. There is plenty of entry level housing in our less desirable mature neighborhoods.

Well off folk that are blue collar tend to prefer the suburbs.

 

[Oilers99]

From my understanding of things:

Rich people live in the suburbs and the desirable mature neighborhoods. There is plenty of entry level housing in our less desirable mature neighborhoods.

Well off folk that are blue collar tend to prefer the suburbs.

This is a total incorrect generalization. There are various types of people living in the suburbs - both blue and white collar and people who are just purchasing their first entry level townhouse or duplex at $350k would not be considered well off. A lot of the sentiment here toward the suburbs is frankly completely incorrect, no wonder there is so much vitriol passed toward them.

 

[soupcrate]

This is a total incorrect generalization. There are various types of people living in the suburbs - both blue and white collar and people who are just purchasing their first entry level townhouse or duplex at $350k would not be considered well off. A lot of the sentiment here toward the suburbs is frankly completely incorrect, no wonder there is so much vitriol passed toward them.

You misunderstood me. I agree that folks of all stripes live in the suburbs.

What I meant is that well off blue collar folks buy expensive homes in the suburbs more often than expensive homes in mature neighborhoods. It just typically suits their lifestyle better (easy to have an RV, easier access to industrial areas, normally more storage) and there's a sort of self reinforcing status quo effect because the suburbs are where friends/co-workers typically buy.

I would expect that blue collar folks purchase skinny infill homes at a lower rate than the population at large.

This is just a generalization backed up by my personal anecdata, so I could be wrong. I don't mean any disrespect by it.

 

[roe_]

This is a total incorrect generalization. There are various types of people living in the suburbs - both blue and white collar and people who are just purchasing their first entry level townhouse or duplex at $350k would not be considered well off. A lot of the sentiment here toward the suburbs is frankly completely incorrect, no wonder there is so much vitriol passed toward them.

The problem with the vast majority of suburbs isn't that the people living there are less well off than people living in the core (which is also a totally incorrect characterization), the problem is that suburbs are generally auto-orientated, they are often cookie-cutter and lack authenticity, and they cost huge sums of public money to support and service. You can certainly believe that criticisms of modern suburbs are classist, but the fact is that there are real and legitimate criticisms of what is being built today.

 

[thommyjo]

The suburbs are not where the rich people live - they live in inner city (Glenora, Windsor Park, Skunk Hollow, Valleyview, etc.). The suburbs are now designed as entry level housing for people, through products such as zero lot line, townhouses and duplexes. Due to density requirements there are no longer luxury suburbs.

Bro. I literally grew up in multi million dollar homes in Windermere. Of course glenora and those places are expensive too. But there are dozens of 4+ million dollar homes in Windermere, jagar, keswick, etc.

And there’s also housing types. Detached homes in say an area like 149st-178st from whitemud to stony vs the same N/S outside the henday….much higher avg sale price outside the henday.

Yes the river valley creates a dozen or so desirable areas around the university and downtown with high value homes. But there are MANY luxury homes in the suburbs and they continue to be built. Again, go to Windermere, chapelle, keswick. Tons of stock over 800k.

If you read real estate reports, outside of the river valley core areas that sell high, the whole outer henday ring sells for more than the inner henday ring. Summerside beats mill woods. Windemere beats river bend. Jagar beats blue quill. Lewis estates beats la pearl. St. Albert beats britisnna youngstown. Anything north of 140th ave beats south of it basically.

 

[Oilers99]

Bro. I literally grew up in multi million dollar homes in Windermere. Of course glenora and those places are expensive too. But there are dozens of 4+ million dollar homes in Windermere, jagar, keswick, etc.

And there’s also housing types. Detached homes in say an area like 149st-178st from whitemud to stony vs the same N/S outside the henday….much higher avg sale price outside the henday.

Yes the river valley creates a dozen or so desirable areas around the university and downtown with high value homes. But there are MANY luxury homes in the suburbs and they continue to be built. Again, go to Windermere, chapelle, keswick. Tons of stock over 800k.

If you read real estate reports, outside of the river valley core areas that sell high, the whole outer henday ring sells for more than the inner henday ring. Summerside beats mill woods. Windemere beats river bend. Jagar beats blue quill. Lewis estates beats la pearl. St. Albert beats britisnna youngstown. Anything north of 140th ave beats south of it basically.

Thank you for pointing out that you grew up in multi-million dollar homes in Windermere. The new subdivisions that meet the city's density requirements are catering to that type of product. Nonetheless, you obviously have some serious anger toward the suburbs. I am not trying to change your mind, I was pointing out the fact that the disdain for those that live there is strange.

 

[itom987]

Almost every suburban stormwater management pond has expensive houses lined around them. The entire length of the river valley system also has expensive houses along both sides.
Aside from that, suburban development is far more mixed in housing styles and budgets than your typical inner ring road neighbourhood.

 

[Platinum107]

Besides the economic and environmental arguments which have already been discussed, I also want to mention that suburban development and auto-oriented cities have their creation rooted in the idea of economic and racial segregation and "urban renewal" (a.k.a the gentrification and destruction of older inner-city areas). While the element of race is considerably less prevalent today (but still present), the physical form of low-density, Euclidian, car-based areas and the mindset they create sow beliefs around the undesirability of the inner-city and a fear of the unknown when it comes to urban living. Many nowadays just don't see the value of the good and bad aspects of an urban lifestyle as being over the good and bad aspects of a suburban one, and I believe that is one of the huge reasons why most of our older neighborhoods are in decline.

Please don't misunderstand this as me criticizing the average person living in the suburbs, rather I'm going after the government and private industries that crafted this "experiment" in city-building, the experiment which is failing our great cities.

 

[archited]

^^^^ The "experiment" as you say was crafted by the hands of Urban Planners and not by government and private industry per se. Moving away from the grid with cul-de-sacs and curvilinear streets were supposed to have been a way of promoting community self-identity and making them safe from marauding externalities that did "not belong". And that is one of the reasons that I have such an itch to scratch when it comes to "Planning Standards" and why I again say that Planning should be reactive to ideas, concepts, and proposals and not prescriptive -- the brain power never seems to be there for good outcomes. That is also one of the reasons I began to wince when Edmonton Planners began to water down the original concept for Blatchford Field.

 

[Platinum107]

The "experiment" as you say was crafted by the hands of Urban Planners and not by government and private industry per se.

Sure, the neighborhood zoning maps weren't handed down from the feds or General Motors, however the money and general support given for the "average" suburban design compared to something more radical in the America sphere paints a picture of the influences at play through things like lobbying imo.

 

[thommyjo]

Thank you for pointing out that you grew up in multi-million dollar homes in Windermere. The new subdivisions that meet the city's density requirements are catering to that type of product. Nonetheless, you obviously have some serious anger toward the suburbs. I am not trying to change your mind, I was pointing out the fact that the disdain for those that live there is strange.

I don't see it as a flex to say i grew up somewhere when I contributed nothing to "earning" the wealth for the home... My point is that you're very assuredly claiming something that I'm objecting to because it's simply not true. You can't say something is fact when it's not. Many suburbs are still building incredibly expensive, luxury homes. If you compare the average price points of detached homes in communities around our city, suburbs outside the henday are more expensive the majority of the time. Yes they feature some more diverse housing types thanks to density requirements. Condos and townhouses are great, although most are still completely car dependent and far from employment centres.

It’s not about hating on suburbs, it’s about recognizing their challenges and desiring to improve upon them. You can critique without hating. I’ve lived in a number of areas now in Edmonton, Toronto and Vancouver and experienced diverse neighbourhood forms, which has convinced me the way we build suburbs in Edmonton is detrimental to health, community, safety, the environment, our capital and operating budgets, and anyone who is lower income.

Cars cost on average 8-12k. Build suburbs that force car ownership is forcing a 10k dollar tax on someone, whether they make 35k or 135k a year. That’s unjust and will not lead to a prosperous city.

 

[thommyjo]

Here are the prices of our 10 most valuable neighbourhoods by overall stock. Obviously size of area is part of it, but some clear higher priced areas here.

Also, below are the median prices by neighbourhood. Many of the highest are outside the henday or quite close to it (very much car dependent suburb style nonetheless). ALL of the lowest are more core/central ones

 

[archited]

Sure, the neighborhood zoning maps weren't handed down from the feds or General Motors, however the money and general support given for the "average" suburban design compared to something more radical in the America sphere paints a picture of the influences at play through things like lobbying imo.

There are opinions and there are facts. In this case your opinion is entirely wrong.

 

[Platinum107]

There are opinions and there are facts. In this case your opinion is entirely wrong.

How could these private industries not have had an influence on the development patterns of our cities? Sure maybe I got the method wrong but it the central idea is still there.