Cost of Suburban Sprawl

it depends how you define 'sprawl'. Many cities in ontario are quite small physically, its just the 'empty areas' that are filling up. I just walked to the other end of my city and back in an hour and a half. The services I get is the exact same as downtown, in fact one big complaint is that services are far better in the suburbs. A new subdivision just went up that literally is a city unto itself complete with a giant brand new school. Meanwhile the schools downtown are crumbling and being closed. The newest recreation part also went in our subdivision, far from the downtown, and we live literally minutes from the largest mall. So we have services the downtown doesn't have. Perhaps somebody can help me with this, there was a show, or a documentary, or a book that was saying that 'subdivisions are killing us'. I think it had to do with water problems, air pollution and pesticides but I can't remember. Any ideas?

[QUOTE BY= peacedove] Since the late 1980’s, both the US and Canada have been experiencing problems with suburban sprawl. One of the main reasons for it is the assumption that the cost of living in the suburbs/outskirts is cheaper than the city/downtown. In a sense, it is correct to some degree, especially with the cost of housing. However living in an area of suburban sprawl actually has higher costs of its own. One issue is transportation. In the suburbs people have to drive longer distances and spend more on gas. Also, every suburban family needs at least two cars. In the downtown area, you only really need one. In some cases you do not even need a car since you can walk or use the public transportation. Housework is another issue. Many people in suburbs have huge backyards. It is too much work. So you have to be a mini tractor to mow the lawn. Also you have bigger driveways. It is too much work to shovel the snow. Solution is to buy a snow blower. In the city all you need is a regular lawnmower and a shovel. Services are an issue. It is true that you pay higher taxes in the city. However you receive more services with that. On the outskirts you receive less services so you have to pay more out of your pocket for them. Housing is not always necessarily more expensive in the city. In fact in my city of Winnipeg, there are houses in the inner city that are selling for less than $80,000. They decline in value with age. In the newer areas, which are all just about suburban sprawl, houses are being sold for over $200,000. [/QUOTE] I believe houses in Winnipeg are also declining in price due to crime in some areas. As for sprawl, it has IMO been a problem for more like 45+ years, not 20 years.

[QUOTE BY= Marcarc] it depends how you define 'sprawl'. Many cities in ontario are quite small physically, its just the 'empty areas' that are filling up. I just walked to the other end of my city and back in an hour and a half. The services I get is the exact same as downtown, in fact one big complaint is that services are far better in the suburbs. A new subdivision just went up that literally is a city unto itself complete with a giant brand new school. Meanwhile the schools downtown are crumbling and being closed. The newest recreation part also went in our subdivision, far from the downtown, and we live literally minutes from the largest mall. So we have services the downtown doesn't have. Perhaps somebody can help me with this, there was a show, or a documentary, or a book that was saying that 'subdivisions are killing us'. I think it had to do with water problems, air pollution and pesticides but I can't remember. Any ideas?[/QUOTE] With empty space, expansion, laissez-faire liberalism and special interests, individual greed and whatever else as an excuse, over 50% of Canada's best farmland in southern Ontario has been paved over for unsustainable development. This is a huge threat to our food and water supply as well as the natural habitat birds and other animals depend on. It is also noisy and unsightly in some areas, but most importantly IMO it forced us to import food from unsfae sources in much larger amounts than would otherwise be necessary. I think you might be thinking of this (I believe American documentary) on North American sprawl--The End Of Suburbia: <a href="http://www.endofsuburbia.com/">here</a> Since World War II North Americans have invested much of their newfound wealth in suburbia. It has promised a sense of space, affordability, family life and upward mobility. As the population of suburban sprawl has exploded in the past 50 years, so too has the suburban way of life become embedded in the American consciousness. Suburbia, and all it promises, has become the American Dream. But as we enter the 21st century, serious questions are beginning to emerge about the sustainability of this way of life. With brutal honesty and a touch of irony, The End of Suburbia explores the American Way of Life and its prospects as the planet approaches a critical era, as global demand for fossil fuels begins to outstrip supply. World Oil Peak and the inevitable decline of fossil fuels are upon us now, some scientists and policy makers argue in this documentary. The consequences of inaction in the face of this global crisis are enormous. What does Oil Peak mean for North America? As energy prices skyrocket in the coming years, how will the populations of suburbia react to the collapse of their dream? Are today's suburbs destined to become the slums of tomorrow? And what can be done NOW, individually and collectively, to avoid The End of Suburbia ? Hosted by Barrie Zwicker. Featuring James Howard Kunstler, Peter Calthorpe, Michael Klare, Richard Heinberg, Matthew Simmons, Michael C. Ruppert, Julian Darley, Colin Campbell, Kenneth Deffeyes, Ali Samsam Bakhtiari and Steve Andrews. Directed by Gregory Greene. Produced by Barry Silverthorn. Duration: 78 minutes

Thanks, that's probably it. Ironically, almost immediately upon moving from our apartment downtown to the suburbs we regretted it. It was as noisy at night, you could hear the main highways, cars ripping up the street, same as downtown, kids partying when their parents were away and parents in hot tubs til all hours watching television. I'd move back downtown in a minute. The reason we bought it is because we knew it would appreciate and we won't be here long.

The issue of housing is one of my 4 key issues for Victoria in the upcoming federal election. The 4 key issues are housing, education, healthcare and the environment and the reason that I mention them all is that they are inter-related. In Victoria as in other major urban centres the cost of housing is rising at an incredible rate. The expansion of development into the Highlands and other rural areas is increasing as well. What is needed is a number of strategies. Knocking down apartment buildings or small single family houses to build more condominiums is not the answer. Increasing the density of existing neighbourhoods is one approach. However the problem is much more complex than that. We live in a 'culture of entitlement'. It is not just the Liberal Party, or all of the politicians in Ottawa. No, look in the mirror for your answer. Most canadians live in large houses, and use at least two vehicles (note: I did not say own as many are leased), and feel entitled to new furniture, large entertainment centres, all the latest gadgets and toys, as well as a winter vacation and a summer vacation. Granted, we are a large and sparsely populated northern country but that is not reason enough or an excuse for our rising use of fossil fuels. We need to turn the 'culture of entitlement' into the 'culture of enlightenment' and build smaller, more energy efficient housing 'closer in' to our urban centre. We need to break our reliance on our cars and start walking and cycling and using mass transit. We need to start thinking in terms of quality not quantity, and that bigger is not necessarily better. When communities thrive, the individuals in the communities feel that they are part of something. Neighbourhood children can walk to school. Elderly people can remain in their homes. By changing the way we look at things we can change the way things are. But we have to start in our own backyard. Fred Mallach Marijuana Party candidate Victoria, BC

There are no 'have to's' in politics. A large house can be made more energy efficient than a small one, lots of personal possessions need not be sacrificed for any reason. I can furnish my house on refinished furniture from neighbours, I can buy local furniture that helps my local economy. There are many issues in suburban sprawl and it depends where you are. In our city the central point is that we have a very limited water supply, increasing salt in our water, and the sprawl is going on right over the moraine where the water is naturally treated. The answer seems quite obvious-stop the massive growth. More to the point-offer a mechanism so that people can DECIDE their population and growth rate. That doesn't exist and is a central reason why we need direct democracy at the local level-Ottawa and provincial capitals aren't contributing to these problems, our local government is (not that the others can't play a part)

[QUOTE]peacedove: "Housework is another issue. Many people in suburbs have huge backyards"[/QUOTE] Not lately. The price of land has skyrocketed during the past 10 years here in Ontario and the lot sizes reflect this. Lately even expensive single-family homes have tiny backyards and the houses are very close together. [QUOTE]"It is true that you pay higher taxes in the city."[/QUOTE] I beg to differ. I live in Durham, East of Toronto, and my property taxes are more than double of what someone in Toronto pays for the same house and more than triple of the taxes they pay in Mississauga. To add insult to injury, our property taxes go up by more than 10% every year. We will probably move out of here for this reason alone. [QUOTE]Marcarc: "Ironically, almost immediately upon moving from our apartment downtown to the suburbs we regretted it. It was as noisy at night, you could hear the main highways, cars ripping up the street, same as downtown, kids partying when their parents were away and parents in hot tubs til all hours watching television. I'd move back downtown in a minute. The reason we bought it is because we knew it would appreciate and we won't be here long."[/QUOTE] Boy, you must have bought the wrong home. Next time when you look for a new home, scout the area on a weekend night and make sure the main streets are blocks away, shielded by other homes. Where we live, people are very quiet. The only noise we get is a main street a block away (yup, we will consider it next time), but we are used to it by now.

[QUOTE BY= Marcarc] Thanks, that's probably it. Ironically, almost immediately upon moving from our apartment downtown to the suburbs we regretted it. It was as noisy at night, you could hear the main highways, cars ripping up the street, same as downtown, kids partying when their parents were away and parents in hot tubs til all hours watching television. I'd move back downtown in a minute. The reason we bought it is because we knew it would appreciate and we won't be here long.[/QUOTE] I think if you want to have fun in the suburbs, you have to make sure it is not the unestablished DEEP suburbs. I don't know if you know Toronto, but in TO you can (if you can afford it) get a decent house in Scarborough or Etobicoke and still be either near the subway line or a 10-20 minute bus ride from the subway. You can also find quiet streets as highways are not as close. If you live WAY out there, it can get noisy, and the newer houses are not always built to last....

[QUOTE BY= Fred Mallach] The issue of housing is one of my 4 key issues for Victoria in the upcoming federal election. The 4 key issues are housing, education, healthcare and the environment and the reason that I mention them all is that they are inter-related. In Victoria as in other major urban centres the cost of housing is rising at an incredible rate. The expansion of development into the Highlands and other rural areas is increasing as well. What is needed is a number of strategies. Knocking down apartment buildings or small single family houses to build more condominiums is not the answer. Increasing the density of existing neighbourhoods is one approach. However the problem is much more complex than that. We live in a 'culture of entitlement'. It is not just the Liberal Party, or all of the politicians in Ottawa. No, look in the mirror for your answer. Most canadians live in large houses, and use at least two vehicles (note: I did not say own as many are leased), and feel entitled to new furniture, large entertainment centres, all the latest gadgets and toys, as well as a winter vacation and a summer vacation. Granted, we are a large and sparsely populated northern country but that is not reason enough or an excuse for our rising use of fossil fuels. We need to turn the 'culture of entitlement' into the 'culture of enlightenment' and build smaller, more energy efficient housing 'closer in' to our urban centre. We need to break our reliance on our cars and start walking and cycling and using mass transit. We need to start thinking in terms of quality not quantity, and that bigger is not necessarily better. When communities thrive, the individuals in the communities feel that they are part of something. Neighbourhood children can walk to school. Elderly people can remain in their homes. By changing the way we look at things we can change the way things are. But we have to start in our own backyard. Fred Mallach Marijuana Party candidate Victoria, BC[/QUOTE] I agree in part Mr. Mallach but I can tell you most Canadians don't live in big houses, in major cities well over 50% live in highrises. I also think that while it is better to have higher density housing, if the density gets TOO high it seriously reduces space. I know Marijuana Party and NDP candidate types rarely worry about conservative concerns like our low birth rate, but one could argue that the smaller living spaces of cities merely compound the problem--not to suggest those in houses have that many kids either. I think the major problem with highrises in big cities (unless you can afford a big condo) is they are not child friendly if people were some day to want bigger families again. I also think consumerism won't die until it has to, and people are still easily able to afford to fuel at least used cars, so you know....I'd worry more about preventing further sprawl, (especially more road construction) public transit, lowering the sulphur content in gas to the California emissions standard. Those to me are very doable.

[QUOTE BY= Marcarc] There are no 'have to's' in politics. A large house can be made more energy efficient than a small one, lots of personal possessions need not be sacrificed for any reason. I can furnish my house on refinished furniture from neighbours, I can buy local furniture that helps my local economy. There are many issues in suburban sprawl and it depends where you are. In our city the central point is that we have a very limited water supply, increasing salt in our water, and the sprawl is going on right over the moraine where the water is naturally treated. The answer seems quite obvious-stop the massive growth. More to the point-offer a mechanism so that people can DECIDE their population and growth rate. That doesn't exist and is a central reason why we need direct democracy at the local level-Ottawa and provincial capitals aren't contributing to these problems, our local government is (not that the others can't play a part)[/QUOTE] The biggest reason why sprawl is happening in Ontario is immigration, another of of immigration's pitfalls. Developers want immigrants to sell houses to. North of Toronto there are subdivisions custom-made for the Chinese who are literally fresh-off-the-boat. Another major reason is speculation, as people see real estate as a safe investment.

The housing boom was fuelled by low interest rates. The health of the economy usually depends on the real estate market. Since there are huge job losses (especially in the US) in manufacturing, office work, IT and engineering due to offshoring, the banks are trying to mitigate the economic damage by boosting the housing industry. It provides jobs to a lot of people. Also home owners are taxed a whole lot more than apartment duellers, so making home ownership attractive is a way to increase tax revenue. If you are a home owner, you can't escape property tax increases, you just curb your spending and pay through your nose. On the other hand, if they put an end to suburban sprawl, the economy would crash. The banks are already experimenting with higher interest rates but sometimes have to undo it and lower the rates time and time again, to avoid a recession. It's pretty bad, I think. Of course, the other reason for the sprawl is one's natural desire to own a decent home. Apartment buildings are a lousy place to raise kids but the suburbs are great. Highrises tend to be a magnet for criminal elements, there is more noise from neighbors, have to adjust to people you want nothing to do with, keep the car outside, etc. It's so much nicer to live in a quiet suburb with low crime rate, wake up to birds chirping, only blocks away from farmland. Owning a house is also a good investment. House prices go up and down but in the long run they always go up. It's a pain to pay the mortgage but when it's paid for it's a great asset to have. A house that is paid for costs less to maintain than an apartment in a crowded, dirty, noisy, drug plugged city.

[QUOTE]Also home owners are taxed a whole lot more than apartment duellers, so making home ownership attractive is a way to increase tax revenue.[/QUOTE] Actually, I lived in an apartment and was involved in discussion about these sort of issues and apartment dwellers are taxed at about FOUR TIMES the rate per square foot as homeowners. The taxes are simply hidden in the rent. The reason for this is apartments are taxed as commercial not residential properties as they are owned commercially, so the owner passes these taxes onto the renters who are in practice taxed at a higher rate. [QUOTE]If you are a home owner, you can't escape property tax increases, you just curb your spending and pay through your nose.[/QUOTE] Actually apartment dwellers can't escape property tax increases either--they get added in the next rent increase and they property owner can petition a court for above guideline increases for even the most minimal repairs. [QUOTE]On the other hand, if they put an end to suburban sprawl, the economy would crash. [/QUOTE] Not necessarily. That's impossible to know. The U.S.A. is relying on home renovations I've heard, not new construction. [QUOTE]Of course, the other reason for the sprawl is one's natural desire to own a decent home. [/QUOTE] Yes but you forget (and I'm going to bring this up again)--with 250,000 immigrants a year, sprawl has a lot to do with unnecessary mass immigration. They have to live somewhere. Also, whites fleeing the mass immigration need a place to escape the flood to. In the U.S.A. this was called "white flight". [QUOTE]Apartment buildings are a lousy place to raise kids but the suburbs are great.[/QUOTE] Only if you have a big family. Living downtown is great if you have some green space in some people's opinion. [QUOTE]Highrises tend to be a magnet for criminal elements, there is more noise from neighbors, have to adjust to people you want nothing to do with, keep the car outside, etc. [/QUOTE] That's pretty insulting. Of course in bad areas apartments can be a bitch--and I'm going to bring this up again--had we an intelligent immigration system, we would not be filling our apartments with criminal elements from around the world. [QUOTE]It's so much nicer to live in a quiet suburb with low crime rate.[/QUOTE] Many newer suburbs are worse than old ones near downtown cores. Suburbs actually have higher crime rates due to a lack of people around to see crime, easy getaways via automobile. [QUOTE]wake up to birds chirping, only blocks away from farmland. [/QUOTE] Until the next development ruins it. [QUOTE]Owning a house is also a good investment. House prices go up and down but in the long run they always go up. It's a pain to pay the mortgage but when it's paid for it's a great asset to have. A house that is paid for costs less to maintain than an apartment in a crowded, dirty, noisy, drug plugged city.[/QUOTE] Houses that are in the suburbs are often of very poor quality. Houses are nice but they never cost less than apartments to maintain as they are usually bigger. You pay for natural gas, water is not included. Come one. Did you just say "crowded, dirty, noisy, drug plugged city? <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/eek.gif' alt='Eek!'> Funny how the same guy who complains of overcrowding supports massive 3rd world immigration and the drug-trafficking gangs that have come with them. I guess like most people you support diversity from a distance. When I lived in an apartment many birds would land on my balcony. House Finches. Blue Jays. Cardinals. Birds of Prey like Red-Tailed Hawks, Merlins, American Kestrels and even Peregrine Falcons were visible.

[QUOTE]Funny how the same guy who complains of overcrowding supports massive 3rd world immigration and the drug-trafficking gangs that have come with them. I guess like most people you support diversity from a distance. [/QUOTE] All my non-white friends are decent people. Non of them are criminals. Cities do have higher crime rates and it's a direct result of cuts to social program and education and lack of meaningful jobs. There are also bad elements coming here from other countries. I never said I supported it, I am just saying that multiculturalism is great. Your problem is that your limited intelligence prevents you from understanding the difference between "criminal" and "immigrant". There is white trash out there too, most of them anglo. You want to deport them too, or perhaps that crime is OK, only crime committed by non-whites is not OK. It's a pretty limited view you've got there.

[QUOTE]All my non-white friends are decent people. Non of them are criminals.[/QUOTE] Most people don't tend to make friends with unpleasant criminals. [QUOTE]Cities do have higher crime rates and it's a direct result of cuts to social program and education and lack of meaningful jobs. [/QUOTE] Depends on what type of crime you are referring to. Suburbs like Missauga have high crime. Others might not. [QUOTE]There are also bad elements coming here from other countries. I never said I supported it, I am just saying that multiculturalism is great.[/QUOTE] In the public opinion polls the majority of Canadians disagree with you. [QUOTE] Your problem is that your limited intelligence prevents you from understanding the difference between "criminal" and "immigrant". [/QUOTE] I am willing to bet my intelligence stacks up very well. I never said all immigrants were criminals. I said in previous posts quite specifically that not all immigrants were criminals. [QUOTE] There is white trash out there too,[/QUOTE] I know. Once we deal with our problem of minority-itis, then we will deal with the white trash out there. [QUOTE]--most of them anglo. [/QUOTE] More white Canadians are Anglo. I will admit that Anglophones are a pathetic lot--but not for the same reasons. All cultures have trash. English Canadians however are much more civil, polite than many of the people from former Soviet Bloc countries--though there are also very gracious people from their as well. [QUOTE]You want to deport them too, or perhaps that crime is OK, only crime committed by non-whites is not OK. It's a pretty limited view you've got there.[/QUOTE] How is it limited? I wouldn't want mass immigration if all immigrants were saints. That said, our government knowingly allows in convicted terrorists and criminals that have records to immigrate to Canada. That is our most immediate problem. Harper's crackdown is very small scale.