White Flight?

belmont square said:
NYC...and all of the other successful cities in the US (SF, Boston, DC, Chicago, etc).

I don't think New York is an anomaly. Successful cities may be an anomaly, but I'm seeing the same increase in families in other cities that I see in NYC.
Click to expand...
"Successful cities" is not an anomaly. The successful cities are the ones that really are cities. They have rail transit, are walkable, and they're relatively free of urban-fabric-shedding parking lots.

van mentioned Buffalo and Indianapolis. Would anyone interested in urban living choose to move to such places for the urban vibe? Those aren't cities.

You can add Atlanta, Denver and Phoenix to your list. These places are gaining population, but it's for economic reasons, not urban enthusiasm.

The only bigger North American cities that can be regarded as having urban characteristics are: NYC, BOS, SFO, PHL, CHI, WAS, MTL, TOR, VCR.

Chauvinistically I omitted Mexico, also in North America. I know Mexico is full of cities, but this gringo can't compile a meaningful list of them without more effort than he's presently willing to expend.
 
ablarc: not Seattle, Portland, Pittsburgh, or Minneapolis/St. Paul?
 
Waal ... they're in the running ... but do they qualify as "bigger" ... and have they arrived at the finish line?

Pittsburgh was once a city --and a bigger one at that. Then they improved it after the mills closed.

Some folks would have rooted for Baltimore's inclusion, but it's pretty severely broken. Ditto Cleveland and Cincinnati.

Minneapolis: when I was a kid --too long ago to mention but not remember-- Minneapolis was already not a city. I had been to Paris, London and New York...
 
I can think of two you forgot. New Orleans and Miami. N.O. is half of what it used to be but certainly it has CHARACTER....and it is again, growing. And while Miami has its downsides, few natives, a pathetic central core, the "city" and environs are distinct in North America...with 3million+. For that reason, alone, it needs to be included. Miami is not Dallas, Phoenix, or San Jose.
 
The best and most urban part of greater Miami isn't Miami at all; it's the separate municipality of Miami Beach --especially South Beach. And you're right; downtown Miami is pathetic. Actually, I found Little Havana to be equally boring, while Coral Gables was nice like Brookline is nice; and Coconut Grove was an open air shopping mall. The heavy rail metro seemed perfectly pointless.

Having recently visited New Orleans, I considered including it, but it isn't "bigger" anymore; barely bigger than Savannah.
 
^^ Would you say Miami has the potential to become urban if it did a lot of infill projects?
 
Miami is not urban? Are you kidding? My definition of "urban" is how long it takes me to get to work...regardless of the suitability of public transportation. I live 11 miles from downtown Miami and some days it takes me two hours to get to work. Lots of lights, people, buses, accidents, construction etc. Having worked in Boston for 20 years only REALLY bad days were akin to this. And that would be when there was a huge accident in the tunnel or lanes were blocked on the Tobin.

BTW-I love Miami but I will always miss Boston......the most interesting, one of the most beautiful, the most European of American cities. Only SF can rival it.
 
FLAindy, traffic does not = urban. If anything, it's an indication that a place is a slave to the automobile. Plenty of suburban hellholes have awful traffic.

Guys, you are missing a big point on the children in NYC issue. There are plenty of baby carriages, sure, because the inconvenience of dragging children around cities v. suburbs is only marginally higher. But once those kids hit school age, all of Park Slope that can't afford private education or get their kids into a specialized elite public school like Stuyvesant bolt for Bergen or Westchester counties.

Anyway, Tom Toles highlighted this whole phenomenon with much fewer words over a decade ago:

toles.jpg
 
FLAindy said:
My definition of "urban" is how long it takes me to get to work...regardless of the suitability of public transportation. I live 11 miles from downtown Miami and some days it takes me two hours to get to work. Lots of lights, people, buses, accidents, construction etc.
Click to expand...
You're describing Suburbia. Suburbia is not urban.

Even the census bureau no longer believes Suburbia is urban, praise the Lord.

Once upon a time folks used the oxymoron "urban sprawl", but thankfully those days are over. Nowadays, people recognize that "urban" is exactly where there's no sprawl. That's how you know you're in an urban place.

Miami is not urban. It is sub-urban.

South Beach is urban.



(But it's not part of Miami.)
 
FLAindy said:
Miami is not urban? Are you kidding? My definition of "urban" is how long it takes me to get to work...regardless of the suitability of public transportation. I live 11 miles from downtown Miami and some days it takes me two hours to get to work. Lots of lights, people, buses, accidents, construction etc. Having worked in Boston for 20 years only REALLY bad days were akin to this. And that would be when there was a huge accident in the tunnel or lanes were blocked on the Tobin.

BTW-I love Miami but I will always miss Boston......the most interesting, one of the most beautiful, the most European of American cities. Only SF can rival it.
Click to expand...

that's cuz its auto dependent and has crazy cuban drivers
 
I beg to differ. Miami is one big urban mess. There are really no suburbs to speak of here. The sprawl extends for 75 miles...all the way to West Palm Beach. (Atlantic Ocean to the east, the Everglades to the west). While sprawl is a good description of suburbian areas in the NORTH, most cities in the SOUTH are defined by sprawl...and it is not pretty as we all agree. But Ablarc is right in describing Miami neighborhoods. South Beach is the only place with character...even 8th Street is nothing exciting, nor is Coconut Grove, nor Key Biscayne, nor Ft. Lauderdale. Although where I live, in North Miami Beach near Surfside and Bal Harbour also has some redeeming qualities. But one cannot honestly say that Miami is not urban. Ridiculous. Drive 15 miles from Boston and you have quiet, leafy towns. Drive 15 miles from Miami..its no different from downtown.

My point about traffic was tongue in cheek but as much as we hate to admit it....it is a fact of life in urban areas. If traffic and street lights and pedestrians in Miami represent sprawl....are Cairo and Delhi not urban? They have that stuff in spades.
 
Cairo and Delhi are not as car oriented though, they both have extensive mass transit systems, unlike Miami, and while Miami's density is even throughout (similar to Los Angeles), that just means even the downtown is suburban in nature, since almost all trips, even in the downtown, are made by car and there is little street life in downtown
 
FLAindy said:
My point about traffic was tongue in cheek but as much as we hate to admit it....it is a fact of life in urban areas. If traffic and street lights and pedestrians in Miami represent sprawl....are Cairo and Delhi not urban? They have that stuff in spades.
Click to expand...
You have a thoroughly antiquated definition of "urban" that these days not even planning departments and the census bureau believe in. It's not traffic and street lights. It is pedestrians. Many urban places have both (Champs-Elysees, Newbury Street, Collins Avenue) and remain urban.
 
Unless you work for the census bureau, I think 98% of Americans would consider Miami "urban". Like I said before, it isn't necessarily pretty, but it does have its bright spots. Boston it ain't. That's the point.
 
Public misconceptions and the truth are different things. The definition of "urban," like so much else architectural, has been overly intellectualized, to the point where architects, planners, and urban enthusiasts no longer speak the same language as the general public.

To the average suburbanite, "urban" simply means a place with tall buildings where people commute to. It's up to architects, et al., to educate the public about these changing values, and avoid scholastic elitism when they do it.

I know it from experience, as I got into quite the debate with a peer over the urban value of St. Louis - it was very frustrating to find out for the first time, that my personal definition of a city (that which we preach on this forum) was not the commonly accepted definition.
 
Thanks Kennedy. That was exactly my point. It DOES sound elitist when those of you very knowledgeable about urban planning, architecture and design (most members of this Board) try to educate. Don't get me wrong....I've read this Board for 7+ years now and I have learned a hell of a lot.......thanks to you all. But, when someone tells me Miami is not urban...I think...WOW! Where have I been????

You all need to try harder though!

Ablarc...How far do I have to walk? Not far. Point well taken.
 
Is Brattleboro, Vermont urban? Sure feels that way when you walk down Main Street, but it's a tiny place with 12,000 residents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top