The nail in the coffin of suburban development?

[Coolyfett]

Give me my back yard, not a concrete jungle.
Not everyone wants to live stacked on top of each other, I rather prefer to mow my yard and and breath much cleaner air.
Not all of us want to be bombarded by neon signs, some of us actually prefer being able to see the milky way with our naked eyes from our back porch.


Even if gas goes to 100$ a gallon, my career would allow me to work entirely from home, negating the need to move into a city.

Its fine that most on here want us to live all in cities, but not everyone shares that same sentiment. I would much rather live by myself on 100 acres than have a neighbor close by. The suburbs are a good compromise for my current line of work and my lifestyle needs.

Anti social?

[jandar]

Anti social?

No, I am actually an extrovert. I just enjoy space more than people.

[zoo]

why are you reading and/or responding to a thread posted on the "urban neighborhoods" board? check out "the burbs" section where you can enjoy the chatter of other suburban extroverts.

[uptowngirl]

why are you reading and/or responding to a thread posted on the "urban neighborhoods" board? check out "the burbs" section where you can enjoy the chatter of other suburban extroverts.

Uhmmmm read the title

[thelakelander]

Jandar's position is an additional reason to refocus the city's future growth on older sections of town where the infrastructure is already in place.  Our community should be able to offer residents a variety of living and lifestyle choices.  Right now it does not.  If our growth patterns don't change and continue to follow the path of outward development, neighborhoods that people like Jandar enjoy will eventually lose their appeal and end up like the city's older suburbs (ex. Arlington, Emerson/Philips, University Blvd., Edgewood Avenue, etc.).  Right now, we have the chance to learn from our past mistakes and develop a different strategy for growth.   If we play our cards right, all residents, both urban and suburban, will benefit.

[Coolyfett]

Jandar's position is an additional reason to refocus the city's future growth on older sections of town where the infrastructure is already in place.  Our community should be able to offer residents a variety of living and lifestyle choices.  Right now it does not.  If our growth patterns don't change and continue to follow the path of outward development, neighborhoods that people like Jandar enjoy will eventually lose their appeal and end up like the city's older suburbs (ex. Arlington, Emerson/Philips, University Blvd., Edgewood Avenue, etc.).  Right now, we have the chance to learn from our past mistakes and develop a different strategy for growth.   If we play our cards right, all residents, both urban and suburban, will benefit.

Isn't that just "white flight" all over again?

I agree there should be more options, but the downtown option does it even exist in Jax? I know there are few condos and lofts here and there, but still downtown is a ghost town.

[thelakelander]

No, repopulating and redeveloping areas of town with a decent amount of infrastructure already in place is not white flight.

However, I agree that the downtown option right now is not ideal for a metro of 1.3 million people.  We have a lot of work to do here before it becomes a viable living alternative for most urbanites.

[Joe]

I would much rather live by myself on 100 acres than have a neighbor close by. The suburbs are a good compromise for my current line of work and my lifestyle needs.

The Brookings Institute released a study that showed roughly 1/3 of Americans feel basically like you (suburban/rural). Another 1/3 of Americans prefer urban. The remaining 1/3 don't have a strong opinion.

In a city like Jacksonville, less than 1% of new development is truly urban (I'd wager far less) thanks to all sorts of stupid market distortions by our government. This implies that our city is underserving at least 32% of our population. For that matter, it means that your suburban paradise is crowded with somewhere between 100%-200% more people than it needs to be. If we actually had realistic urban options available, the suburbs wouldn't die - they would just have less people, less traffic, and more open space - which is exactly what the 1/3 who prefer suburbs should want.

That alone should make the true suburbanites the most passionate urban development supporters of all!

[Lunican]

If you enjoy rural living, you should definitely be in support of urban living. More people living in cities equates to less people living around your rural land.

[jandar]

Jandar's position is an additional reason to refocus the city's future growth on older sections of town where the infrastructure is already in place.  Our community should be able to offer residents a variety of living and lifestyle choices.  Right now it does not.  If our growth patterns don't change and continue to follow the path of outward development, neighborhoods that people like Jandar enjoy will eventually lose their appeal and end up like the city's older suburbs (ex. Arlington, Emerson/Philips, University Blvd., Edgewood Avenue, etc.).  Right now, we have the chance to learn from our past mistakes and develop a different strategy for growth.   If we play our cards right, all residents, both urban and suburban, will benefit.

Good post.

It is the benefit of all to make a strong urban core, so that it can benefit everyone, including antisocial outcasts like me who enjoy more countrified air.