Tuesday, February 17, 2009

The Screwed Urbanism


David Brooks gets confused about the concept of popularity. Hilarity ensues.

Meanwhile, predictions of the revitalization of urban cores are less about taste than necessity. I don't think that far-flung exurbanites in 4,000 sq. ft. McHouses particularly want to move to nearer communities; I just suspect that economic circumstances will eventually give them no choice. Gas prices are already inching back up, despite the continued decline of the broader economy. The financing options that allowed so many white-collar workers of moderate income to buy too-large, too-expensive homes are dead. Also, the white-collar workers are all going to lose their jobs. Meanwhile, Denver, one of Brooks' exemplar Western pseudo-cities, has the seventh (or so) highest foreclosure rate in the nation. Orlando, Tampa, San Diego, Austin, Phoenix . . . all within the top (bottom) twenty-five or so metro areas by this measure. The only city mentioned without a major problem is Seattle, whose presence in Brooks' list is almost inexplicable, since Seattle is a more traditional Eastern-European city with a strong, populated urban core, mass transit, and so on . . . a city that along with its dyke sister Portland is perhaps as close as America gets to reviled Amsterdam.

17 comments:

paul from the clue-by-four said...

Seattle is a more traditional Eastern-European city

Thus the popularity of microbrew borshch amongst the city's hipster élite.

sahibulqahwa said...

Excuse me, but they're about to give a press conference about still-missing white child Haleigh Cummings. Can we focus, please?

Mr.Fundamental said...

oh yes, I live for a day when Escalades are driven around with ironic detachment by fat, goateed, Starter jacket wearing hipsters.

flip the world on its head! lol. and collect the change that falls out of its pockets.

Aaron said...

Seattle is a strange, and moderately disfunctional place. While it has mass transit, Metro can't hold a candle to Chicagoland's CTA, RTA and Metra, and so it's easier to drive if you have any real distance to go.

Anonymous said...

Seattle is a more traditional Eastern-European city with a strong, populated urban core, mass transit

Absolutely not. I don't own a car, but Seattle is one of the few places I rent one when I visit. There's no light rail, no subway, and a complicated bus system. It's nearly impossible to get around with a car.

It is a shame, because the geography of Puget Sound has created a number of highly-walkable urban neighborhoods, separated from each other by hills and water and spaced miles apart. A train evening out those distances would be perfect, and I understand they have one in the works.

dhex said...

the bus system isn't that bad (speaking as a one-off visitor) but they drive like total cunts.

MikeWebkist said...

I don't think that far-flung exurbanites in 4,000 sq. ft. McHouses particularly want to move to nearer communities

But I'm not convinced all of those exurbanites really wanted to live in Manassas, VA either. Driving to where you can afford wasn't most people's dream.

Montag said...

Driving to where you can afford wasn't most people's dream.

i wonder how much of it was 'where they could afford' as opposed to 'what type of home they felt their education/salary/job title entitled them to.' how many made the choice between a smaller place in close and that 4,000 sq. ft. house in the suburbs?

stephen said...

sometimes 'what you can afford' is a rental. peoples up in this beyatch are going to be doing alot more of that real soon.

Anonymous said...

There's no light rail, no subway, and a complicated bus system.

True there isn't much by way of non-bus transit that's because nobody has the balls to make a decision around here. Witness the monorail fiasco.

But the busses are quite good and I haven't needed a car in years and I have to commute 30 miles to work - which, by bus, is not as bad as it sounds.

Ashley said...

You can see my office in that picture.

The bus system is overly complicated but it's pretty good and I ride it almost every day because it's less expensive and less stressful than driving. Seattlites are pretty bad drivers but it's the BC tourists who are the real terror.

Brian said...

Montag said...

i wonder how much of it was 'where they could afford' as opposed to 'what type of home they felt their education/salary/job title entitled them to.' how many made the choice between a smaller place in close and that 4,000 sq. ft. house in the suburbs?

Montag I love you. I live in the EPICENTER of this attitude. (Outermost Bay Area suburbs). newer. BIGGER. More garages "Prestigious" 'cause it's got a fancy pseudo-mediterranean name and entry pillars. Sure...the schools are underfunded and the hour commute each way can be a bear, but we live in ANDALUCIA MANORS and it is all worth it.

Anonymous said...

The researchers at Pew asked Americans what metro areas they would like to live in. Seven of the top 10 were in the West: Denver, San Diego, Seattle, San Francisco, Phoenix, Portland and Sacramento.

Ha. You're welcome to it, you poor bastards.

I don't think Sacramento is a bad city, really, even having grown up in one of its more white-trashy satellites, but I can't imagine why anyone would want to live here.

Montag said...

Brian,

but do you have loudspeakers with piped-in birdsong? or snowmaking in the town square for holidays? while the moniker 'Andalucia Manors' is orgasmic, the title of "epicenter" might go to Celebration, Florida.

Brian said...

I want to put in a plug for Sacramento. Sure, the median high of 96 degrees in July sucks (as can the air quality), but:

You are less than an hour from skiing, the wine country, mountain hiking.

Housing is relatively cheap for California

The neighborhoods in the city itself can be lovely, with a nice range of classic post WWI cottages, bungalows, and even newer stuff if you need three car garages and cul de sacs.

rivers...and 45 miles of riverside bicycle paths-which interconnect downtown and the foothills and the Delta country. It is an amazing city for day to day cycling.

Street trees and gardens and parks-a fantastic park system (see above) and some of the best street tree programs in the country-helps ameliorate the heat a bit.

The restaurant scene has exploded during the past ten years. Sacramento has decent local coffee shop culture, great Asian food, fine dining, fantastic ethnic and specialty grocery stores (Corti Brothers!)

So...it ain't perfect (I live 1/3 hour west) but Sacramento certainly blows away most cities of its size and non-coastal location. The puter, trashy suburbs? You're right-not so nice. The City itself is pretty pleasant, though.

Brian said...

"outer" not "puter" suburbs.

無名 - wu ming said...

the problem with sac is that it compares itself to SF, and not fresno.