Becky Harris What a thought-provoking ideabook. First you had me smiling, remembering a lecture I saw MacLean give years ago where he described flying the plane, scouting and shooting the amazing photos all at once (what a multi-tasker!)

The Greenfield neighborhood made me think at first it was a Randall Arendt-style clustered neighborhood - I wish there were more of those to unearth on Google maps.

Then I thought of how we used to refer to some neighborhoods as "Poltergeist neighborhoods" at my old job.

Finally I thought of what strikes me every time I fly into Atlanta, the shocking amount of ghost cul-de-sacs - new neighborhoods that sprawl out miles beyond the city, that began right before the housing crash and were never completed - developments are cleared, roads are half paved, may have a house or two and then several empty streets. I thought of one I spied from the air a few weeks ago where one cul-de-sac had become an illegal dumping ground. It was full of trash.

Hi-Lite Manufacturing Co. You are eerily ahead of your time. Like 2,000 years ahead of your time.

You and Bob Dietrich set me on my course towards studying architecture. You have just planted the city planning seed and I'm mildly resentful (that I have to research so much!!), but eternally grateful.

Thank you again for your work!

the_misfit This is really interesting. But I have to take issue with the last comment - "live more responsibly without living in cities." First of all, I think trendy people need to fight harder the temptation to think that living in cities is the gold standard of human virtue. Second, the idea doesn't even make sense on the basis of the author's own criteria, as I understand them. This ideabook implicitly criticizes having a large house or a large yard or relying heavily on your car to get around. So, living in a tiny apartment in Manhattan would be perfect: no space, no yard, no car. But I think this needs to be examined more closely. Cities are not how we naturally or historically lived, first of all. Secondly, the population density in major cities creates its own sorts of over-consumption. There's the gridlock, and resulting excess pollution. Running water and electricity to skyscrapers (and keeping them running when they need repair!) has its own challenges. Garbage trucks and snowplows fight a battle to provide services. Waste disposal is a pretty big issue in general. In the event of a major disaster (or even a moderate one, like Sandy), the per-person impact is shocking. Rapid human evacuation is impossible. Above-ground parking is nonexistent; cars are parked in below-grade spaces that flood in heavy rain. Manhattan is also an island, so the reliance (even of those who use public transportation) on a few main arteries is enormous. The city doesn't produce any food, so an infrastructure compromise would threaten to starve 10 million people (obviously, the poorest first). Land is at such a premium that outdoor space is an enormous luxury. But oxygen-breathing life forms (like people) need plants nearby. And on the subject of the poor - if you have limited means, living in a city means almost no space; living in disrepair (possibly even a building that is structurally hazardous); no reliable maintenance - meaning unreliable access to heat, electricity, and water; possibly no reliable elevator, even if you have impaired mobility and live on a higher floor; and let's not even start on crime and violence. (How many ghettoes have you heard of in rural Nebraska?)

According to the definition of "responsible living" offered (other than the diversion to aggrandize big cities), I would say living in a village in which you can walk to church, school, the library, the post office, the drugstore, the grocery store, the hospital, and your friends' homes, but you still have a yard to spend time in, a single-family house to give your family some room to breathe, and a car in case you need to go somewhere distant (in other words, how I grew up!); or living in a rural area where you have extensive (but inexpensive!) property that provides many of your regular necessities (a well, a septic field, growing some of your own food) would be the really "responsible" options.

John Hill the_misfit - It seems that most of what you're saying is in reference to your own statement that "living in a tiny apartment in Manhattan would be perfect." That's a bit of a leap from the statement of mine that you quote, and seems to be addressing my Ideabook on "My Micro NY" rather than this one. Further, that same statement of mine does imply that living in cities is more responsible than in suburbs (I stand by that, regardless of your lengthy explanation), but the intention was not to say city living is the only way to live responsibly. And did you realize that the village scenario you're promoting is what the last three examples are proffering? Hence my statement about living responsibly, more responsibly than the traditional suburban models presented above them.

typingmonkey Great article. I live in a traditional suburban-urban grid developed in the '20s. I'm fortunate enough to be on an alley so have a nice bit of space between me and my neighbor to the east. The alleys serve as a nice walkway midway in some of the blocks, and I enjoy the kids, couples and dog walkers ambling down it. My neighbor and I talked about putting a bench out there for folks. My dream however is to homestead on a couple of acres up north. Haven't decided if this is selfish or noble.

Stephen Houdlette @the_misfit

"Secondly, the population density in major cities creates its own sorts of over-consumption"

This characterization is only true if you're talking about aggregate amounts. On a per-person (or any economic scale, like per $ gdp) rate, cities are vastly more efficient and less polluting than other built environments.

What that means is that in terms of consumption of all things (energy, water, land, etc) places like Manhattan are more efficient. If you compare the energy efficiency of a suburban tract home with a skyscraper you'd be surprised how much waste there is.

Andrew Lai It's also worth noting (regarding the_misfit's comment) that there's often confusion between per-capita energy/resource usage and total resource-usage. On the whole, cities obviously suck up a lot of energy, but when you look at energy consumption *per person* resource consumption in dense, major metropolises is below that of those living in suburbs. The cost of providing water, sewage, electricity and other utilities *per person* is far higher in new subdivisions than in existing city neighborhoods simply because you need more infrastructure per person there.

As for the ideal, I also agree that it's pretty nice to live in a community where you can walk to "church, school, the library, the post office, the drugstore, the grocery store, the hospital, and your friends' homes," but that emphatically does NOT describe the majority of American suburbs -- in the vast majority of postwar and especially post-1970s 'burbs, you have to drive to every single one of those needs. (It also doesn't describe a lot of American urban neighborhoods, either, but for different reasons.)

Finally, I feel there's often a false dichotomy between shoebox Manhattan living and suburban sprawl. There are cities in North America where you can live an urban lifestyle with more space, more greenery, a car if you'd like (not as easy as the exurbs, but it's possible to have one) but still be close to urban amenities. The discussion always seems to polarize between a 500 sq ft tenement on the Lower East Side and a 4000 sq ft Sunbelt McMansion, which I find very unhelpful to the discussion.

midmodfan I am probably the only German regular on Houzz, and yet I know one of the communities in these photos: the 'canal-front homes in Palm Valley'. They are actually called 'lagoon-front' and are in the old part of Ponte Vedra Beach, less than a quarter mile from the ocean to the east. We own a home a mile to the south, opposite of the Sawgrass Village shopping center.

While our community is very walkable when it comes to shopping and dining, we (and many others) have to drive to the beach. The neighborhoods are only connected to main thoroughfares and not among each other. Preserves and landscaping effectively seperate small subdivisions and gated communities. A situation very similar to some of those you mentioned, John.

Aerial photography has always faszinated me and whenever we fly, I have to have a window seat. If I had to choose only one 'thing' to bring to a desert island, I'd choose Google Earth. Endless pleasures and lots of things to think about.

marvinone Thanks for a well illustrated article. I live in the Midwest (the_misfit...I grew up in rural Nebraska), and a two car household is necessary - that's pretty much a fact for 90% of the people in the midwest with the exceptions of the very large cities (Chicago). I would love a large lot with a single family house on it (mid century modern style of course!), but I want that lot to be within the city limits, not the edges of the city. I may have to get in the car to drive to the store, but it will be on a two lane road instead of the 8 lane roads I see developing on the edge of my current area (Des Moines, IA). And that road will take me to a diverse development of cafe's, service providers, and retail stores which line a city street, not the enclosed super mall.

I'm currently house hunting - it's nearly impossible to find anything outside of the first few pictures you included - that make me sad. I wished that among our cities that there was an even mixture of all of these so everyone could get what they want and utimately provide a very diverse community. Instead I find it heavily leaning to the wide-street, car-centric builder developments.

Smaller cities and rural towns simply need to be considered under a different set of criteria - comparing their walkability to a city's is not equal in my opinion.

A. Peltier Interiors Very interesting. Thanks for the analysis.

astraea Very interesting breakdown .. love arial photography! I grew up in Brooklyn, NY .. urban grid with 25' x 100' lots & postage stamp backyards. But there's even less individual greenery in the photos ID's as "new urbanism" and "sustainable urbanism". I've lived in the suburbs for 30 years now, and I don't think I could ever go back to an urban environment. I love having wildlife on my property, and having a buffer from the neighbors. You're lucky if you have good neighbors .. but there's no guarantee of that! The Jersey shore is a string of what I suppose you could call "villages"; not always walkable, but not sprawling either. And there's plenty of "canal housing" in NJ too .. it didn't fare well during Superstorm Sandy.

JAN MOYER If we're done with suburbia bashing, consider a few facts. To build a multi unit condo type dwelling is far more costly, converting existing warehouse type buildings is hugely expensive. Meaning the consumer trades the higher price for the glamour/convenience of urban living. Even small house inner ring suburbs of the sixties meant a drive to the market, a long walk to school, a drive to the hospital, shopping for clothes, wherever. The reason is simple. Small groceries, hospitals, and shops cannot survive economically against the broader services and selection of their bigger version. The village concept while quaint, with it's little shops, library, cute ice cream or bakery means exorbitant rents for the privilege of being in the "village" where traffic can become as choked as Manhattan even in mid sized more rural areas. Last, the whole concept is a joke when you consider the idea book "conversations" that take place on this site. "Where can I put it, how do I store it, show me cute mud entrances, how do I get rid of it, my kitchen is tiny, where should my appliances go, and on and on". Spend some time on the L.I.E as people escape Manhattan weekends all summer, and then spend some time in the traffic choked Hamptons if you ever GET there. Everyone wants some "green space" , four walls and roof to call their own. Maybe it doesn't need to be 3000 square feet..... but Jack and Johnny will be sharing a room... and a bath. Mommy isn't getting a tub the size of a lake. Let's see how all that works with the one car garage too. We're never going back, barring total economic collapse.

markjbecker Half right with Columbus Ohio and greenfield. Go north and east and the wealthiest central ohioan are pushing the limits. South and west it is people looking for cheaper housing.

I live in a fairly dense (by Ohio standards) urban neighborhood. By far the number 1,2,3 reason for couple leaving the neighborhood is to find a good school district (except for relocation of course). I have often wondered if American's were given a true choice in education for their children what would happen to places like Columbus? Interesting the same people who extol the virtues of dense urban centers are cheerleaders for the monopoly that is public education.

astraea Often the people who extol the virtues of dense urban centers, as the ones at the top of the "food chain". If I could live like Donald Trump .. penthouse w/private outdoor space, chauffeured vehicles, little concern for store prices .. I'd probably love Manhattan too.

JAN MOYER astrea,
You are sooooooo right. If you're very young and don't mind living like a stacked rat with roomies, if you're wealthy (very) and can afford to let $$$$ pave the way to a driver, and all the conveniences and some adequate space and storage, it is fabulous. But for the masses, trudging in a rainstorm with your grocery purchases from the local, small, slightly GRUNGY supermarket is not a thrill with your dry cleaning tossed over your shoulder to boot. Life without a lot of money in many urban and exciting cores... starts to feel like nothing more than a battle for survival of the fittest and fastest. And for THAT challenge, you will pay more as well. Do it when you're young, or wait for the thrill until you've accumulated wealth. The "middle" is a lot less than it is cracked up to be. Hence........ suburbia!

Rick Hay Let's face it, suburbia is bad for the environment and bad for health, two factors at the top of my priority list, but I have to admit that relaxing on a deck overlooking a golf course does have its appeal.

kateskouros "Green acres is the place for me.
Farm livin' is the life for me.
Land spreadin' out so far and wide
Keep Manhattan, just give me that countryside..."

our rural enclave 55 miles south of NYC and just 6 miles from the beach feels to us like a very responsible move. especially for our two children who attend great schools, have a large backyard -and their choice of eleven county parks in which to play.

that, plus the cat-sized rats and cockroaches just didn't do it for us.

i enjoyed living in manhattan in my pre 9/11 younger days, but everyone changes.
to each his own.

astraea Jan – I went to college in Manhattan, commuting by subway from Brooklyn. In the 1970s, since the school had no dorm, out-of-town students rented God-awful 6-floor walk-up apartments in the East Village! One friend had the bathtub in the main room, with a sheet of plywood over it to make a “table”, the other had roaches roaming the countertops. More recently, a cousin’s 30-something daughter was sharing a Greenwich Village apartment .. with 4 friends, so they could afford it! Anyone who watches “Selling NY” on HGTV, knows how little you get even for $1.5 million in Manhattan, and “something nice” is easily in the $2 - $3 million range.

@KateSkouros – sounds like you’re down my way, by the description. I live at the SE tip of Monmouth County; view of the Manasquan River. I totally relate to the beautiful area it is; horse farms within a short drive from the beach! Ever see the “shaggy beasties” in Middletown? I don't know how anyone can think suburbia isn't good for your health.

gcanty We live on 13 acres 30 minutes outside of a good sized southern city. It is wonderful to us to not have close neighbors, plenty of room for a nice little garden, chicken and rabbits and a little new orchard with huge trees for grandchildren's swings.

We did the city for a small time, 2 years, but reverted back to our rural roots. I plan and combine trips to town while my husband is happy to do the quick pick up on the way home from work.

It is clean and quiet and right for us. I just hope others don't decide to give it a try! :-)

jaxsue I have lived in very small towns, city cores, and suburbia. Each place has its pros and cons. As for living in city centers being "ideal," that is a good subject for debate.
My roomate's parents' families lived in NYC in the early-mid 20th century. They were among the waves of immigrants from Russia and settled into the lower east side of Manhattan. They lived in tenements and put up with things very few of us would. And talk about mixed-use - one family had an egg store on street level and lived above it!
I agree with what previous posters have said: living in a place like Manhattan is great if you are very young or very wealthy. As for me, 51 yrs old, expecting me to be happy living in a 400 sf walk-up that's bleeding me dry, no thanks (with an autistic son, no less).
I would love to be able to live in a perfectly sustainable, trendy environment. But guess what? Anything in that category is expensive! Create some truly affordable (south of $400k) options and maybe more of us would bite.
Until then, most of us are trying to keep our heads above water.

I want to add: i found the pictures fascinating. I am an arch geek, and although I do not have a degree in that field I enjoy the learning process.

robert kelly I was recently in China and it looks like they (every city I went to) are building high density housing in the center of cities connected to pbulic transport. Our way of living is unsustainable

Associated Design Studio, L.L.C. Very interesting. Thanks for this!

brant3 The reminder of alleyways bring back great memories. Think how completely different homes could be designed with driving and services access to the back. Lots could be much deeper and narrow on the front, thus the cute neighborhoods in the old sections of town without the overbearing driveways and garage doors. It seems a land developer would consider this idea more often which could add lot frontage possibilities to the equation.

JAN MOYER A service drive sounds great, in a great climate... but in the snow belts NOT SO MUCH!!! Double the plowing, double the de-icing. And in the best of scenarios, double the pavement and the lighting and expense. Your school bus, your friends, the postman, the deliveries still at the front too.

gaunch Seaside Fl is certainly nice and there are numerous subdivisions or developments similar in the immediate area. You might want to considered cost. Seaside is built out. 2000 sqft home around 1.5 mill. Nearby project similar Watercolors, lots 250 to 750k. So what is that cost per person in the city? Oh there are no offices or any high paying jobs to support owning one of these houses. Matter of fact 90% are second homes. People don't even live in them. So much for utopia. It's all crap. Everyone desires something different in where they live. The majority of people like where they live regardless of what the design is. They gravitate toward what they like. This guy is advocating everyone should live like the chinese in Hong Kong. One the most dense citys and be happy.

andrewrxxx It would be interesting to see aerial views of planned communities (reston va, columbia md, irvine ca, etc) and if they share any traits visible from above

marybeth6201 Great article. Fantastic photos. Thank you for delivering a macro prospective of our various living patterns. It has clearly stirred a vibrant conversation thread about density - ecological responsibility - and land use.

Becky Shankle Great article, & really well illustrated with the aerials, thank you!

It didn't come across to me that you were bashing anything - just that you were highlighting the differences & what might be good or bad about both, especially in the bigger picture of coexisting with the planet.

I'm a city dweller, downtown in a multi unit building. As a designer, there are many things that I notice - good and bad - about this lifestyle. Almost all the things suburbia dwellers like about suburbia can be achieved in a well designed, mixed use, efficient public transportation availability and open space integrated city.

There is a huge range of the sizes of area suited to this kind of urban design: it doesn't have to be Suburbia OR Manhattan with nothing in between. Neither of those ends of the spectrum lend themselves to intimate community. However, it should be noted that if we swing from being social creatures to a desire for solitude, an urban setting is really the only one that has both at arm's reach.

Urban living designs especially need attention to the quality of private space. Not to make it bigger, but to make it truly private. Homes in a city desperately need to have sound insulation more than any other single factor. They need to be insulated from adjacent neighbors AND from outside noise. Both of those noise sources are beyond our control, and having control over your environment - especially your personal space - is a too long ignored aspect of sane, dense living design. If we have a comfortable place of retreat from city madness WITHIN the city, we can control whether & when we want company or not.

I think it boils down to communities we need & enjoy as a healthy society. The older I get, the less I want to drive - both in town and out to see friends in suburbia. I grew up in suburbia, with the sprawl under construction all around me. My community was only as far as I'd ride my bike. Probably about 5 square miles.

Living in the city, I now realize the same things I enjoyed as a kid roaming those cul-de-sacs are also here: birds & bugs, hawks, weather, raccoons & opossums, feral cats, trees, chickens & gardens. There are also small streams & creeks - you have to look a little harder, but they're there. And there are also stores & bars & people & bowling alleys & movie theatres, parks & libraries. Not all of them are walkable, but we've got a free bus line that gets me to almost all of them.

Are there things I wish we had in the city? Of course! I wish we had more corner grocery & hardware stores instead of driving out to big box land when I need a light bulb or something to go with dinner. I wish I didn't have to hear the train out back unless I wanted to. I wish I couldn't hear my neighbor's home theatre system occasionally. I wish we had a subway or light rail so the only times I had to drive was to a jobsite where I needed my tools with me.

Sorry for the rambling monologue.

Admittedly I prefer being a city dweller. I think living locally is the most responsible way to respect this planet & its systems that everything living depends on. We're making it harder on ourselves and the planet by spreading out. If we just thought a little more about what we really like/want/need, I think the urban setting would be the answer.

Julie Fisher I have lived in several types of communities across the country: From close suburb in Chicago, to sprawl in DFW, San Francisco Bay area and now rooted in Denver, Colorado. What I find amazing is that we have a country that can build designs for living for each person's taste. That could be cramped living in NYC, oceanside in CA, or big yards in the midwest. Currently I miss my roots of the 'village' style living growing up in Mt. Prospect, IL. Walkable access to the train station, pedestrian friendly to shops, library, schools, restaurants and groceries. Living in the sterile mega mansions of the suburbs has driven me to the belief that I still need a village lifestyle for my children. We recently put a contract on a home in the Park Hill neighborhood in Denver, moving away from the suburbs of Boulder. I have to say its like a breath of fresh air and I cannot wait to relocate my family to such a wonderful neighborhood. Another aerial photo that should be considered for future urban planning is Stapleton in Denver. Recycling the airport and creating a cross between urban and village living, with expansive open parks and pedestrian access, (future) light rail to downtown and airport, current bus routes, and shopping, medical and entertainment venues are popping up like crazy. This model may just be one of the most popular designs for our future.

wantsideas Well written and informative article with amazing aerial photographs. But you lost me with your last paragraph. Like viewing news anchors of decades past, I prefer to be presented with facts and draw my own conclusions than be preached at with current political correctness of responsibility.

cyndie UN Agenda 21 is likely the origin of the recent plethora of dialogue and policy that is now aimed at "sustainability" (economic, environmental, etc). It calls for private land ownership to be a thing of the past (as it is an indicator of wealth and therefore unfair distribution of resources). This country, and the world, may look very, very different by the time my children are adults. I'm not sure what the answer is, but I would urge folks to read it for themselves.

cshe Thank you for this. Whatever we may think of these photos, you remind us that design (and lack-of-design) affects how we live our daily lives, how we use our resources and how we build community. All of us too often opt out of this public side of residential design.... it's easier on the head and heart to think about wallpaper, tile, and our own private little homes.

tshome What a silly argument. So your preference to live in a cramped apartment and not drive a car somehow makes you more responsible than most of America that lives in an area with room to breathe and the ability to see the stars at night? Having the ability to drive myself anywhere I want to go and the ability to choose to leave whenever i want to leave gives me a sense of independence, no amount of 'walkability' could ever suffice.

The truth of the matter is that those who live in urban areas, also support high taxes so that others can pay for their sources of entertainment and their other needs because they are less responsible than those who live in the open spaces.

But in all honesty if that is your preference, more power to you. Just quit bashing those who prefer a more independent lifestyle.

sclawson This aerial views remind me of an artist I encountered once at an art fair. Wish I remembered her name because her ceramic art was based on views like this. All the pieces were quite large, so not something I could purchase and use in my space, but they were very intriguing. For instance, huge bowls with an aerial view of a city or neighborhood incised into the inside bottom and glazed in wonderful colors. I chatted with her, and she said views from an airplane are what her art was based on, that she'd been fascinated with that from the time she was a child.

Olga Kraus Undeniably, urban density is a more efficient use of land and resources. Humans however are natural beings that thrive on a connection to nature. We need food for survival that, in a perfect world, should be grown locally thereby making our homeplace self sufficient. New and sustainable urbanism can design for this. Human health should be one of our primary considerations in choosing where to live.

Jeff Feece As some have alluded to above our communities need to provide a wide range of options for the wide diversity of ways in which people choose to live. I believe across all the spectrums of density from urban to suburban we can and must do better to make these communities more sustainable. With our dependence on liquid fossil fuel and in light of the limited nature and polluting aspects of this resource I'm not sure that it can be argued that we can do better on all fronts.

I believe the TOD, New Urbanism and Sustainable Urbanism type of developments mentioned are not attempts to dictate to all the ideas by which we should develop our communities but should be offered and taken as attempts to provide more options in a more sustainable fashion.

midmodfan The most independent lifestyle I ever lived I live now: in a big city. Not in the core, not cramped, very private, with shops, markets, restaurants, and plenty of public transportation just around the corner. After 23 years of country living I thoroughly enjoy not to depend on a car anymore.

Many people move to the cities here, closer to good infrastructure. Not those who always lived in the countryside, but those who grew up in a city and later often raised their families in suburbia. As empty-nesters they come back to enjoy a more vibrant lifestyle. It also 'helps' that gas costs ca. $8 a gallon (1,50 Euros per liter). ;-)

cdg4ahappyhojme Very interesting and thought provoking. Here's a twist on the aerial views in this article. Has any one every heard of Yvonne Jacquette? I have a coffee table book that is filled with her aerial art!! Wonderful!! The book is called "Aerial Muse" The Art of Yvonne Jacquette. For 30 yrs. she has been depicting the landscape from elevated vantage points...high rise buildings, commercial jets, private planes. Views of cities, farmland, suburbs etc. from Maine to California, to Tokyo and Hong Kong....really worth a look. Enjoy!!!

mrsobbs I appreciate these examples, but wish it had included a Conservation Community where the developed vs. non is a predetermined formula. Homes are clustered (but with elbow room up to an acre or more) - utility sprawl condensed and sites are intentionally placed to balance a) doing the least ecological resource harm; with b) permitting a scenic view. These communities are often on larger acreages and the undeveloped 75% plus protected in perpetuity (from future change of heart) by a conservation easement that follows the deed. Ownership in the undeveloped green space is shared by all. It's a way to save farms, forest watersheds and open space and with these shared conservation values, to build cohesive generational & diverse cultural communities.

ganado I am really surprised and disappointed by some of the comments of the writer in regard to these photos. And I can tell from the comments that this person is not familiar with aerial photo reading.

example: Photo 5 Greenfield house. 'end of the power line' comment. First you can see that the power lines do continue if you look closely. Second, this is a 500 kv power line. To terminate it there would be a huge receiving facility that is not there. What do you suppose the power does? Stop at the end of the line? Not being able to see the next tower does not mean that the power line terminates.

I think the author also fails to take into consideration crime. Many urban communities appear chopped up and meandering because statistically efficient road ways means efficient ways for criminals to escape and those areas statistically have higher crime rates.

I get the point of having the desire to live within walking distance of work and shopping and living in a small sustainable community I think that there are more fundamental ideas that will have to change in order to do this. I am so tired of hearing the term 'live responsibly' from people who are unwilling to be responsible for the underlying conditions and beliefs that got us where we are today.

Beliefs that value getting ahead over community. I am not advocating giving up individualism or free speech. But I am advocating examining your choices. If you work for a company that has its housing close by then when you stop working for that company you then have to move. What the author doesn't cover in places like Boulder is that most of the people who live in those walking neighborhoods get in their cars and commute weekly. Where is the living responsibly in that? Please don't continue to make an ideal out of a wet dog.

mcd53 For 25 yrs we raised our family in a wonderful home on an acre with neighbors we always got along with because we didn't live on top of each other. We moved 20 minutes out on 9 acres because our daughter rode horses and we have love it for almost 10 yrs. because of of a serious health problem we have to move closer to town. After looking at homes that were built during the boom(beautiful house's where you could look out your window and see what your neighbor was eating for dinner...with granite countertops) we got lucky to find an acre and are finally building. Which is such a shame since out of the 9 homes on a acre at least 4 were up for sale or in foreclosure. Homes sitting empty with the sinks, countertop, air conditioners, everything that could be taken look very different from an ariel view.

3D-Tile-Design - Bertram Tasch This is a very interesting article and I enjoyed to read every single statement. In my opinion the "City-People" are always in a rush, have never time for a chat, drink their coffee always in between something and think mostly just about themselves. In a nutshell they are totally different than "Urban-People"

My wife and I and our 4 children grow up like "the_misfit" and I must say I definitely prefer this kind of living. It is just way more relaxing. If you are getting older you start thinking about your own life and what is important for you. And living in a city would be definitely not important for me.

About energy wasting and the responsibility for our environment, I would claim that my family takes way more care of that then most of the city people. We are originally from Germany and the environment awareness over there is way way higher than here in North America. Unfortunately the majority of the people here still don't care about wasting energy and resources.

Cheers Bertram

nwrain For another bird's eye look at suburban housing see Sarah McKenzie's oil paitings at sarahmckenzie.com

John Hill ganado - Thanks for pointing out my error regarding the power line; I just noticed how they take a slight right turn. That misreading doesn't mean I'm not familiar with aerial reading (do I need a degree in it?), nor does it change the fact these houses are built on land that was previously undeveloped.

vikk Thanks so much John for this very interesting article and for the comments it has generated. Every one has so different ideas and ways to live it makes for an interesting read. We live on a 5 generational farm, my worry is the spread of housing developemnts on to farm land. We cannot get it back into production and it seem a lot of the development in our area is this way. We have the best land and growing conditions in the world here and we cannot grow corp on rocks and poor land and expect good production. Thanks again.

ahfly Well, I guess to each his own. I like my "pedestrian unfriendly" monotonous neighborhood. What a pompous article. What makes one neighborhood more "responsible" than another? What the heck does "sustainable" mean when applied to this new "improved" neighborhood? I live "way out" in suburbia and it is not because that is as close as I can afford to the "city'. You see, I HATE the city. I prefer more trees, a place for a garden (now that's sustainable right??) My neighbors are wonderful and friendly, and we stand out in the street and talk (because we live in one of those terrible cul de sacs). My job is not right next to my home and I LIKE IT THAT WAY.

Norma Sassone Of course, where and how we want to live, varies greatly - no one way is necessarily better than another. I live in a very small city that also happens to be a state capital and it is a lovely place to live. You can be in a charming neighborhood with a veggie garden in your back yard, and your requisite three chickens, and walk to downtown in 20 minutes. Not that there isn't suburban sprawl here too, but neighborhoods have gone out of their way to have shopping and schools close by, even in suburbia. Drive another 30 minutes from town and you are in deep rural zones. I think many cities simply have grown too big and the suburbs have grown commensurate to the size of the cities they are outside of. In addition, housing is VERY affordable here as compared to the large city an hour north of us. In that city, a beginning teacher MUST move to the 'burbs' because she cannot afford the rent in town. If one is going to promote city living, one must also include much more affordable housing.

Also, using Southampton as an argument against the tranquility of small towns in a specious argument - not many small towns in America fill up with the super rich all summer long! I grew up on Long Island many years ago, when suburbia was just reaching it, but I can still go back to my home town, Port Jefferson, on the north shore and it retains its sleepy, small town feel - nothing like Southampton.

I think the byword here is planning - in a very intentional way - planning that gives residents an opportunity to choose their style of living in a way they can afford.

Penny V. We flew home from NY to Seattle after Christmas, and one thing that I noticed on the evening flight home, was that on the East Coast, most city streets have street lights, that form a grid pattern of lights, while home in Seattle, street lights are less common, and in stead of orderly grid lines of street lights, we see twinkling house lights, and the occasional glimmer of cars on highways forming lines across the landscape. The difference at night is remarkable. And makes me happy, as I live on the side of the continent where the lights look more like fairy lights and less like the triumph of human orderliness over nature's own quirks. I sound like a romantic fool, but so what?

calkelley Dear John,
OK, looked thru your article and wasn't going to say anything but ...

then you wrote: 'Further, that same statement of mine does imply that living in cities is more responsible than in suburbs (I stand by that, regardless of your lengthy explanation)'?

Really? Wow. I find that overly generalized and slightly condescending. I thought there was a tinge of it evident in your article and then you came right out and said it!
If we're deciding 'more responsible' living is to how many people we can cram into a small space, why don't we look to some of Tokyo's hotels where people sleep in a large drawer? Anything else is too much?

I live in a suburb surrounded by preserves and waterways and green areas (we have low costs housing options too). I can have my kids bike to the store without me worrying they'll be mugged or bothered by a gang or hit by the billion cars passing by. They breathe clean, sweet air (hmm, saving on medical bills later in life) from the massive amt of growing plants and trees we have surrounding us (keeping up that good ole CO2 to O2 exchange that can't be done per person in a city). They plant a garden, harvest fruit from the trees, recycle food waste into the land, and they can roam around on their own. I frequently don't drive more than 20 miles a week as it's all fairly close. I have neighbors with solar panels and turbines and other ways to live a smaller footprint. We are caretakers of the plants and animals that live on our land.

How much extra heat is generated these days, how much water is lost into oceans rather than in the land it falls on by cities' enormous hardscapes? How many species of animals have been threatened by areas not having linked green spaces for them to roam? And how much waste from cities isn't necessarily seen because it's put on huge barges every day and sent away, to say nothing of how'd'ya like to live near where it's put?
And if you don't have the luxury of living in a nice part of the city, your options grow smaller, and your problems way larger than anything a suburb can offer.
OK, wasn't going to say it but ...

lambypie While I enjoyed viewing the photos in this article, I don't agree with some of the comments made. For example, the caption under photo number five "probably serving homeowners that can't afford houses closer to urban or other commercial cores."???? Really? Do you assume that those homeowners living in houses "pushed to the edge" do so only because they can't afford to live closer to commercial development? Think again.

I live among the rural farms that grow your food, take your trash and allow your sewage to be disposed of among the fields. Your city living isn't as "green" as you'd like to think. While high density living might be convenient for some who prefer not to drive distances for things, thousands and thousands of trucks still must drive in and out of the city to deliver goods and remove waste to afford city dwellers that convenience.

Earth can heal the assaults we inflict upon her, if allowed to do so. In rural areas, we can grow our own food, compost our own waste and have our own wells and septic systems. The trees and greenery help to purify the air of exhaust or other pollution. The intense resource consumption of city dwelling is not conducive to allowing the earth to compensate. Think of it this way... a dog goes for a walk and urinates on a tree. The tree will probably be fine. However, if many dogs kept urinating on the tree over and over again.... you get the message.
I am not suggesting that everyone move out of the city, as I advocate free choice (and I don't like crowds here) but i do think you should line up your facts before giving your commentary.

sartarehare Wow, this idea book has created quite the stir!

I grew up in a 70s suburb of L.A., and have lived in very urban San Francisco, Portland and currently Seattle. I've got a teeny tiny 1920s craftsman bungalow, I've lived in tiny cramped apartments without light, I've given up my car for lack of parking and wasted countless hours of my life on public transportation (that I won't get back!).

There is NOTHING cool or trendy about not having enough space or living in inferior conditions (one of my old apartments in San Francisco DID NOT HAVE HEAT- no kidding!) just to live in the city. I'm so done with the urban density arguments already. Though I've gotta say that I loved living close to the action when I was in my 20s. Time changes people.

While I'd never buy a McMansion and I absolutely hate the burbs (commute), my happy medium will be found on the very boarders of this city I live in. I have finally learned that unless you have money, inner city living is just a drain. And by the way, I'm not exactly poor but decent housing in these lands I've lived in is not cheap (well, Portland is reasonable, comparatively).

sartarehare I'd like to add to my previous point about the wonders of city living.
So if anybody is familiar with Seattle, I live in West Seattle, which is considered a pretty nice little area. Yesterday afternoon in my "quiet little urban neighborhood" with the little fixed-up 20s-40s homes and their lovely alleyways, my neighbor's home was SHOT AT in a drive by. Yep. That's city-living! Last year there was a manhunt in those alleyways, involving dogs and helicopters over a close-in store robbery (all those great walkable places.....). Our cars have been broken into countless times over the years. My kid's xmas toy packages were stolen off the porch this year. Do you get the picture? And this is Seattle! I've lived in far more crime-ridden places than this.

Sheila Schmitz When I look back on the places where I've lived, my best memories come from the places where I could get around easily on foot. Now that I have a car and live in a sprawling metro area, I drive to work and the store, and do my walking for exercise on closed loops around the neighborhood. I still choose to live here for many reasons, including quality of life. Choice is good! So I'm intrigued by the idea of rethinking our ideas about street patterns to make it easier to connect with the across-the-fence neighbor or walk to the cafe and corner store. Would love to see more examples where planners are thinking about this — city, suburb or wherever.

Laurel Ennis Take a look at Portland Oregon's Ladd's Addition. It forms a big 'X' from the air. It's a quaint neighborhood from the 20's grouped around central rose gardens. I think it rivals Carmel, CA for quaintness.

astraea I think people sometimes get overly nostalgic about being close to neighbors. When I moved here 4 years ago, 4 of the 5 neighbors on our 2 small cul-de-sacs, came for a housewarming party. I never saw the 2 couples on the back street again, and wouldn't recognize either of them, if I bumped into them now. I've never had occasion to lean over the fence, talking to the people whose property is adjacent to mine.

Becky Harris The attitude and ideas everyone is reading into John Hill's lines is blowing my mind. If you don't like the city, it's OK. He's not saying you must move to Manhattan in order to be the best person anyone can possibly be in the universe. I'm pretty sure he didn't say the words "cool" or "trendy" with regard to city dwellers. He's sharing ideas ideas about how to make development, particularly in the suburbs, more environmentally responsible and give them a better sense of community. He's sharing the existing, widespread, not-so-great patterns from our past and ideas for improving the patterns in the future.

It takes stories like this one to try and break us of us accepted patterns (patterns people came up with back when we worshipped the car, planned everything around it, didn't worry about oil or pollution, and threw trash right out of said car window without a thought. I'm talking pre-Woodsy the Owl times).

Here's a favorite old urbanism aerial view - anyone recognize it? It was very walkable and had lots of alley systems behind the housing for cars/garages. Hint: It has a Graeter's Ice Cream Shoppe in the town center.

John Hill calkelley - Did I say anything in this Ideabook that defines more responsible living to be "how many people we can cram into a small space"? No, I did not. You mention Tokyo's capsule hotels (without mentioning that they cater to hardworking professionals who missed the last train and need a place to sleep for the night, not for tourists), but what about Tokyo's large areas of low-scale neighborhoods? Do those count? Of course they do, and they work just as well, if not better, than the inner cities that you and others are gravitating to in their comments.

lambypie - Do I "assume that those homeowners living in houses 'pushed to the edge' do so only because they can't afford to live closer to commercial development?" No, not only. Do I think the developers building those tracts of housing are catering to such? Yes, and that's an important distinction that gets to one issue with the suburbs eating up too much land, though I'll admit it wasn't really worded clearly enough in my description. And when you say you "live among the rural farms that grow your food," you're hitting on the very important fact (yes, it's a fact) that urban and rural areas are interdependent. Sure cities can't be fed without those rural farms (but cities, NYC included, are certainly trying to feed themselves a little bit, if only to have access to healthier foods), but can rural farms survive without cities buying their food? Probably not. William Cronon's "Nature's Metropolis" is a great read along these lines.

Becky - You use the past tense. Is it no longer like that? Has it changed substantially? Not sure where it is…yet.

-------

From the comments it sounds like this Ideabook, which presents the variety of suburban housing conditions and a few alternatives to it, needs a followup, an urban version of the same. Cities are as diverse as the suburban conditions above (Buffalo and Denver hint at that), and it's probably important to address some fairly narrow views of the city.

Rick Hay I have to agree with Becky. I am surprised by how personally people have taken John's comments. My read is that he was pointing out, among other things that some residential development patterns have a greater impact on the environment than others. He didn't say that everyone should love living in the city. We make tradeoffs when we choose a place to live. If you choose low density, your larger environmental footprint will be traded off for say greater affordability or a big backyard.

cdg4ahappyhojme Oh, people, people.....make nice, recycle, reuse, be kind to the plant and your neighbor! Be he/she in the city or the country...we will always have a "country mouse" and a "city mouse"...read the children's book. Just be aware and open to different hopefully better ideas to put people in the best living situations. Remember, there are some that don't have a roof over their heads, urban or rural.

corinan Great article. Vikk, I totally agree with your concerns about loss of productive land. This is happening in my city, as new subdivisions are build on former farm land. As someone once said, they aren't making land anymore. The developments are prompted by large areas of the city having to be abandoned because of EQ damage and flood risk.

Also, many people here (New Zealand) like the idea of moving to a "10 acre block" to have room for a large house, a pony, and maybe rent out some land for grazing or crop production. We could have done this (had to move post EQ) but our concerns were around commuting time and increasing costs of running a car. Gas is about $2.20 a liter, rough calculation is multiply by 4.5 to get a gallon. It is probably not going to get cheaper. One friend who lived out of town and worked in the city did 1000km per week.

Well designed urban living options would give people more choice. There is a good one in Adelaide, South Australia, that addresses sustainability, transport and community.

jaxsue The NY Times had an interesting article (today, I think) about what it means to be middle class in Manhattan. Very informative. The average apt now costs $3973 a month, and the average home $1.46 million.

I would love to live in a pre-war flat in the Village, but there is no way I could afford it.

I moved from Bergen County to Middlesex County (NJ) last year. I chose my town carefully. I can easily walk to virtually everything I need, and I do. "Sprawl" does not describe my town. It was founded in the 1600s, way before the concept was born. With some people, anything outside the city core is suburban sprawl. I beg to differ.

astraea @jaxsue - small world; I moved from Brooklyn to Bergen County in 1979, and down to Monmouth County in 2008!

vikk Corinan..My sister lives in Waikenae, spent 19 week with her two years ago. It seem every one walks to the shops and I was amazed that the average age of these people seem to be in their 70's or older. Beautiful yards and healthy seniors, is there something I can learn from this?

Emelie Koshland This is a fantastic article. Thank you for sharing what you take so much time clearly carefully looking at these great examples of development. It is informative and very well described. It really is just a very complete and interesting and well written article. Bravo.

ahfly Instead of trying to laugh off a rather bothersome article, as I've been unsuccessfully trying to do, I'll be direct. While I'm sure this analysis applies to Chicago, NYC and many other truly metropolitan areas, it does not apply to all "cities". It is a shame that this otherwise interesting article was written in such a condescending style. I DO take offense at some of the implications...ie...people who live in suburbs with cul de sacs do so because that is the best they can do and "better" suburbs are on the horizon. OK, I get it, this is simply a "green" argument...a gasoline issue, a community involvement issue....at least for those who live in the cities. In my boring suburb (yes, in the south, a different animal from the north) it is ridiculous to think we need to improve street layout so that people who back up to each other with fences will learn to "talk" and meet each other. Bless your heart. We all know each other from our local public school's PTA (that's Parent/Teacher Association for the uninformed). And, by the way, THAT is the main reason we run from the city core to the suburbs...better public schools. And speaking of kids, that's why we like cul de sacs...our kids can ride bikes up and down our community streets with less fear of encountering someone traveling 50 MPI in a 25 zone. We, here in the south, build speed bumps in areas without cul de sacs to simply slow people down. We call them "cut through streets" and if you are unfortunate enough to be on one in your neighborhood, it will cost you at least $10,000 when you sell your house.

We are very car dependent in our state because there is no public transportation other than city buses that run infrequently and on routes that don't accommodate most. And unless the rest of the country wants to foot the bill, that is all we will be doing in the foreseeable future. We do carpool, and many work from home these days. You don't really have to live next to your work, you know.

As for encroaching on farm land, I'm sure that is evident in NYC and Chicago. Where I live, there are many acres of farm land just sitting there, as so much of our food is imported. There are acres for miles and miles that the federal government pays to just sit there, unused. If you want to take up a green cause, take up that! Most of my family is begging for someone to stop the flow of cheap beef from Mexico, and buy local. Their land is sitting there unused. Eventually they sell to developers because they need the money.

And finally, someone mentioned seeing a trash strewn cul de sac in an undeveloped neighborhood near Atlanta. Don't worry, those areas will be thriving soon. Real estate is beginning to boom again in the south. By the way, don't y'all have any trash in any of those great alleys in the city?

I hope in future articles, a truly country wide view will be presented, and the "responsible" and "sustainable" buzzwords will be replaced with words which actually describe without implicating that others are somehow NOT responsible or that they DON'T care for the environment.

I did like Houzz because I felt we were all equals in that we loved our homes. I won't continue to log on if my choices are implied to be "lesser" than those more "informed". And yes, that was very directly implied. I recycle and do as much to protect the earth as anyone else. I laugh when people gut their houses to make it "green". That construction refuse rolling down the street doesn't look responsible to me. Looks more like a decorating fad.

That's just my take. Thanks for reading.

P. S. - I love my McMansion and our 3 car garage. I especially like the granite in my kitchen. And I know every person on my street, even if a degreed city planner didn't figure out the layout.

herivelto It's ok, it's clear very nice. But I think I going to need someone to take the pictures. Bcause I'm afraid of hights.

Marcy Holmes Another great planned suburban development is Fairview Village in Oregon. Unfortunately the county didn't agree with the zoning necessary so the shops in the village are a library, an accountant, and a couple beauty/spa type things - no coffee shop, grocery, or anything food-related. But it's extremely walkable. We even walked out of the neighborhood to the shopping center next door quite a few times, but the vast majority of the time we drove.

Now I live next to a golf course development and can't really get out of my neighborhood without driving. We made the trade-off for a quiet street with no streetlights, no traffic, and it's relatively close to the freeway which gets us back to the city, but I sure wish there were more walkable developments with mixed-density being built near light rail.

astraea In the "you can lead a horse to water .. " category .. I live in an area with a lot of small towns & each has its downtown shopping. So where do people shop? They get in their cars & drive to the big box stores with cheaper prices & greater selection! So how can a neighborhood hardware store survive, if most of the time people go to Home Depot? How can a neighborhood grocery survive, if people go to mega markets or Wal-Mart & Costco?

mrsobbs I can't help romanticizing about living in a clean, safe and walkable, mid-size city or small town. It's the sweet movie version, the amber glow of summer sunsets on the quaint front porch for a visual. Look, there's a perky Meg Ryan.. (like that).
Mankind (and kind writers) might benefit from a smidgeon less us & them polarization and more practicality.
My life snapshot is likely unsustainable, but it's a chapter in a remote paradise until my own or my spouse's physical decline herald a new day. I juxtapose our slight carbon footprint w/a 100 mile R/T for groceries (in a hybrid vehicle). I garden, put-up vegetables, we harvest a deer off our square mile and raise lamb (Joel Salatin method) for our own consumption. The home we're building is strawbale insulated and the wood timbers were milled onsite. Bully for us aye?
But at some point, this will end, unless we're successful in building an Intentional Community. That remains the goal.
My county government is on the brink, unable to offer meaningful county services to those 50 miles outside urban growth boundaries (UGAs). So those within the UGA whose service footprint nets out to XX dollars subsidize the lifestyle choices of those well outside the UGA on resource land. It takes 3.25 hours minimum for a building inspector to find me, check off my progress and return. In the city, the same service is 25% the cost (& time). Plowing snow for school buses on meandering rural roads is costly, and the buses themselves visit financial burden. Meanwhile kids walking to school within the UGA are relatively county-risk, fuel, and overhead free.
These issues are complex, and our perspectives lean ego-centric, and folks plod along, work to weariness, try and sleep in readiness for another day. I think we can all admit, no one way is the perfect snapshot. And it strikes me that John's well-written article and thought (& comment) - provoking photos never presumed he had it all dialed in either.

Becky Shankle People's choices of where to live is not & should not be a black & white thing. Some like 'burbs, some like cities, & some like something in between. And you know what? All of those choices are ok.

We do not all have to be identical clones - and I don't think anyone here is suggesting or recommending that!

In some ways it's an apples & oranges comparison.

sartarehare Ahfly, I loved your post! Though I don't live in the 'burbs, I've gotta tell you that your farm argument is so right on. Tariffs, anyone?

My favorite is watching builder/speculators rip up cute little old homes and put 3500 sq ft "green" buildings ("modern" green McMansions with the ugly flat or butterfly roofs) right back on top of that land. It happens all over this city and it is destroying history, ensuring that these neighborhoods (mainly working class to middle; the upper income neighborhoods are well-preserved) will lose what charm they have had over the years. "Green building" is an oxymoron around here. There are very few companies here willing to redesign existing structures, but man do I ever appreciate those guys!

Then there's the city density movement with new condos/apartments replacing beautiful old churches and historic buildings, ripping very large trees out of every neighborhood (including the downtown). Such a blight on the city landscape. All so that we don't have to build OUT (which is happening anyway). Unfortunately, all of these new green structures are only affordable by top earners in each tier. Middle and bottom earners are pushed to the outskirts of the city or into the suburbs (gentrification). This is true in every city I have lived in.

Since there is also a mix of section 8, low income housing, working class to middle folks with families often CHOOSE to live in the 'burbs to have access to better schools (YES), fresh air and a garden plot. This has historically been the case in every major US city that I can think of (you can all call me out if you wish) since the inception of the modern suburb.

I am one of those who can technically afford to still live close-in to the city but I take a hit on the quality of home I can buy since housing prices have exponentially increased in relation to incomes in the last number of years. My husband and I earn more than most of the neighbors who bought homes 10 years before we did but we own the smallest home on the block.

After years of city living, I grow weary of paying taxes for public schools that I can't use (I pay the amount of a small mortgage to send my child to private school) and of the lack of land to grow veggies (yes, I am part of a community garden and I buy at the farmer's market and local co-op.) Eventually I'll probably cave and buy a plot of land to escape from Seattle just like my parents did to escape from L.A.

See my earlier post about crime.

Becky Shankle mrsobbs that straw bale house sounds really interesting. Would love to hear more. Feel free to email me.

John Hill ahfly, mrsobbs, and others presenting some "on-the-ground" stories - You have hit on one of the (indirect) aspects of this article: a "top-down" perspective (both literally, in terms of the aerial photo, and in terms of planning lingo that prioritizes larger plans over individual experiences) is not adequate to tell the whole story. I'm not trying to cover every aspect of suburban housing and living, but I am trying to illustrate how personal choices, in the form of individual houses, make up part of larger patterns that can be read in different ways from above. These aerials can help to see, for example, how efficiently land is being used (compare the Tract Mansions to the 2nd photo in Buffalo) or how dwellings are connected (or disconnected) from each other, among many other things. In this sense, a look from above is helpful, though not intended to be totally comprehensive.

Ingrained woodworking Inc I personally am thankful to have come accross this article. I think tweaking how we live,work, and play is going to be a serious topic in the years to come. I'm a fan of shared spaces, bike and walk paths (recently rode the greenway in Roswell georgia.), public transportation, interacting with my neighbors, however I do like having a little buffer space like where I live in upstate ny. Albeit, driving to go everywhere does

ajj35 very interesting and well written article. loved the arial photos of the various housing developments. they almost look like artwork from a distance.

tshome Ahfly, don't leave. There are so few of us independent thinkers left who aren't afraid to speak their own mind instead of repeating the same ole' grand new idea speak. I loved your posts.

Mr. Hill, I'm sure you've heard the old saying you can attract more bees with honey than with vinegar. You might want to think about that before trying to sell your next grand new idea. Did you know that different people can look at the clouds and see different things? The same concept applies to aerial photos.

Still, I did enjoy looking at the photos and would have enjoyed your controversial comments even more without the condescension. I actually enjoy reading other's viewpoints even when they are wrong . . . undeniably.

dwagener Looks can be deceiving.

Despite the lack of an enjoyable walking path to the grocery store on the left of the Bloomington, Indiana photo; this neighborhood is actually heavily walked, it includes a variety of housing types, and it is close to a variety of shops and services.

The multifamily units in the center are student oriented apartments – the IU campus is about a mile away. The pink roofed building at the top of the photo is a transit stop where you can get a cup of coffee, and where you’ll see dozens of students exiting and boarding busses just about any time of day.

The buildings at the bottom of the picture are senior housing. Just outside the shot are several restaurants, a movie theater, a hardware store, College Mall, Renwick (a TND), and medical offices with walking paths into the neighboring single and multi-family neighborhoods.

The city of Bloomington, Indiana and its citizens should be commended for their work toward walkability.

John Hill Thanks, dwagener. It's good to know all that.

Becky Harris I'm still not seeing the "condescending" in this informative and interesting article ...

John, The aerial shot I shared is of Mariemont, right outside of Cincinnati, Ohio. A classic Old Urbanism precedent for New Urbanism, and one of the most charming places I've ever visited.

John Hill Thanks, Becky. I've always thought of Chicago as a good precedent of New Urbanism as well. (It's actually home to CNU now.) There are 8 blocks to a mile, and every 4 blocks (half-mile) is a commercial street, meaning that one's house is never more than 2 blocks (or 1/4-mile, a 5-minute walk) from groceries and other shops. There are variations created by natural features and diagonal streets, but the grid makes for very walkable neighborhoods.

Ingrained woodworking Inc Seeing the images from above is also interesting in the sense that we all tend to see the world up close, we make our choices to be unique and different from one another and yet, from far away we tend to be very similar. Just an observation. That said, I do think we all have our own preferences, needs, likes, etc. that makes any one approach the right approach not possible. However, studying all the different types of communities may in fact yield ideas to improve upon each type of setting so diversity still exists but is steadily improved upon.

shagelau Every single time that I pass by those god awful subdivisions I tell my husband that they planted house seeds and the neighborhood spring up. The endless rows of beige house houses with identical floor plans, landscaping, exterior trims...how can people live in those places? We just moved into a lovely neighborhood in the $300k to $800k range (meaning in the cheaper side for this area) and we have lots of diversity without any of the drawbacks that sometimes creep in. If you are buying a house for an investment, it is probably not a good idea to own what everyone else owns. 4br/2.5ba, 2 car garage, open concept plan with kitchen open to family rooms, stainless steel appliances and granite countertops. These are ubiquitous and you will not be able to sell in a sameness-y (yeah, I made that up) neighborhood well. If everyone has the same bones then you will have outfit yours better, make upgrades, landscape to a professional quality and, if you can't sell it because there's too much competition with your exact stats then you either upgrade, price lower or both.
Anyways, I think these lineup houses eat away at your soul. It's like wearing a uniform for your whole life. Do you REALLY love what House Hunters tells you to? Are you afraid to be different? Do you not wish for some identity and personality? These places scare me!