4 ms·

An interesting question to ask is why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? Leon Krier's Drawing For Archite

An interesting question to ask is why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? Leon Krier's Drawing For Architecture contrasts over-expansion both with excessive density and excessive sprawl and by duplication. It seems to me that if it were legal to do so there are plenty of tiny towns that could grow to the size of a small city like Arlington or Buffalo.

anonymouskimmer 4y ago
As long as we don't have teleportation there are network effects to concentration. I don't like it though, and would take a pay cut to move to a more roomy area.
- Ozzie_osman 4y ago
  It's not just about the money/jobs though. People have roots. They have family and friends, they have kids in schools, they have communities.
  - anonymouskimmer 4y ago
    This is a good point. But the flight to cities with jobs does add to it.
slothtrop 4y ago
> we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? Not sure why you aren't figuring urban sprawl into this equation.
toast0 4y ago
> An interesting question to ask is why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? That would be increasing the density of the rural area the new small town springs up in. New towns do spring up in places where they can, but it's usually either some company drops a facility there and then housing pops up to support the facility as people decide they'd like a shorter commute, etc; or it's in the outskirts of built up areas, but then people complain about sprawl.
epistasis 4y ago
> why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns We result don't expand by increasing density, this has been generally banned by zoning over the past 60 years. We mostly expand with sprawl, which causes long commutes, massive pollution, social isolation, bad health, and all sorts of other things. Which for people who want it, great, enjoy! But we ban density, and don't ban sprawl. As for expanding other towns, this must be done by those with the capital to buy a house, or start a business to offer jobs, etc. Young people starting our do not have these things, and we need to accommodate them somewhere. To everyone who suggests building in a different small town, I suggest that they be the change they wish to see and move out to make room for somebody else.
bluGill 4y ago
Because cities give so many more opportunities. We sortof do what you suggest, but the new small towns are called suburbs, and being close to the city is their draw.
bobthepanda 4y ago
Most small towns are not thriving despite the lack of legal barriers to their development. Usually the reason is a lack of reasons to locate there. Even in the WFH era there are reasons to locate where existing good services and amenities are; a lot of amenities (niche business or cultural stuff, etc.) needs a critical mass of people to support it, and small towns generally don't have the mass. It is really hard to start up brand new septic or water delivery or whatnot in the middle of nowhere. Also, consider that it doesn't take that many people to overwhelm a small town's population. What I hear in the Western states where remote WFH is becoming popular, is now WFH workers are pricing out existing residents, because rural salaries cannot compete with WFH wages. So WFH has mostly just resulted in exporting the housing crisis without significant easing in the places that had this problem pre-WFH.
HWR_14 4y ago
> why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? By "establishing small towns" I assume you mean suburbs. It seems to be the opposite. Cities with tons of flat land around them (e.g. Houston) tend to expand their footprint and maintain density. It's mostly areas that cannot (e.g. SF, LA, NYC) that increase density. Once you hit natural limiting boarders, you have to build up.
- ianburrell 4y ago
  I was noticing that west coast cities have higher density than rest of country. One cause is that many had big booms in the 20s and 50s which gave them walkable suburbs. Second is natural and legal boundaries that slowed growth. Bay Area and Los Angeles are surrounded by mountains. Third is that land prices were high and it was most profitable to squeeze in houses. The problem the west coast has is not replacing housing once things got full and prices increased.
- ticviking 4y ago
  No I mean small towns with their own urban/town center. They wouldn't be as dense as a cities downtown but would support 2-4 story mixed use in a walkable core. Every suburb I've ever lived in has been prone to ever-increasing low-density sprawl and resists building even a 2nd story for anything other than residence. I can drive past miles of 1 story strip-malls in virtually every suburb in America, and only rarely do I see an 2 story doctors office, or maybe a 3 story apartment or office building.
yterdy 4y ago
You have it backwards. We DO grow by establishing new "small towns" (better known as "housing developments" or "mixed-use developments"). Increasing density in a way that resembles older "small town" development would certainly be preferable, but is difficult with the transit policy status quo in much of the country. TODs are an example of attempts to do so anyway, with mixed results. The uncomfortable truth of our housing policy woes is that they're intertwined with transit policy and everything connected to that (American manufacturing and business, energy, political legacies, etc.).
ianburrell 4y ago
New towns are less efficient than densifying existing cities. With new town, have to build all the infrastructure. New roads, new schools, new utilities. The transport is less efficient by driving everywhere. Single-family homes are less efficient than multi-family. Small town doesn’t have all the services so people drive to the Walmart or hospital. Or city if they need something special. The same housing in Arlington is super efficient. Tear down house, build apartment building. Connect to sewer, roads, etc. The residents walk to the Metro stop. A lot of the small town problems also apply to sprawl and exurbs. It is possible to build more efficient small towns, older ones have a walkable core.
rayiner 4y ago
As others have said, that’s what we do. The area west of Arlington, VA is a great example. In the movie houseboat it’s depicted as “the country.” Even when I was growing up in the 1990s, it was heavily farmland after you got west of Reston. Today, Reston is a major employment center and all the farmland in Loudoun county has half a million people.
CPLX 4y ago
> why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns When we grow population we increase density. The two concepts have a direct linear relationship there’s no other thing that can possibly happen. The only relevant question is where the density increases. A new small town in a rural area is an increase in density for that area. Your argument thus reduces, entirely, to “why don’t people go somewhere else instead of where I live?”
roenxi 4y ago
Dunno why anyone downvoted you, it is an interesting question. It also has an interesting answer - turns out we get a much more complex and pleasant society if we cram everyone in tightly in a city. The is a lesser-known branch of economics called economic geography that studies what happens when you have big concentrations of people. Turns out you get much better services and it is cheaper to support everything (eg, one big trainline which costs a lot but gets huge amount of use, one big market where you can buy and sell everything, etc). The short of it is that small towns are not a bad thing, but if you want to live a comfortable life with lots of services and material luxuries then you had best seek a city.
- ticviking 4y ago
  This is at least a real answer to the question. Understanding that there is a mutual dependence between the countryside and the cites, it seems like in the past the limit on city growth has always been sanitation and the ability of the agricultural base to support the urban population with the labor that is available in the country. I'm curious if you know any good entry-level or popular books on this topic.
  - roenxi 4y ago
    Alas no. I forget how I was even introduced to the subject. Possibly Wikipedia.

anonymouskimmer 4y ago

As long as we don't have teleportation there are network effects to concentration. I don't like it though, and would take a pay cut to move to a more roomy area.

Ozzie_osman 4y ago
It's not just about the money/jobs though. People have roots. They have family and friends, they have kids in schools, they have communities.
- anonymouskimmer 4y ago
  This is a good point. But the flight to cities with jobs does add to it.

slothtrop 4y ago

> we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? Not sure why you aren't figuring urban sprawl into this equation.

toast0 4y ago

> An interesting question to ask is why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? That would be increasing the density of the rural area the new small town springs up in. New towns do spring up in places where they can, but it's usually either some company drops a facility there and then housing pops up to support the facility as people decide they'd like a shorter commute, etc; or it's in the outskirts of built up areas, but then people complain about sprawl.

epistasis 4y ago

> why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns We result don't expand by increasing density, this has been generally banned by zoning over the past 60 years. We mostly expand with sprawl, which causes long commutes, massive pollution, social isolation, bad health, and all sorts of other things. Which for people who want it, great, enjoy! But we ban density, and don't ban sprawl. As for expanding other towns, this must be done by those with the capital to buy a house, or start a business to offer jobs, etc. Young people starting our do not have these things, and we need to accommodate them somewhere. To everyone who suggests building in a different small town, I suggest that they be the change they wish to see and move out to make room for somebody else.

bluGill 4y ago

Because cities give so many more opportunities. We sortof do what you suggest, but the new small towns are called suburbs, and being close to the city is their draw.

bobthepanda 4y ago

Most small towns are not thriving despite the lack of legal barriers to their development. Usually the reason is a lack of reasons to locate there. Even in the WFH era there are reasons to locate where existing good services and amenities are; a lot of amenities (niche business or cultural stuff, etc.) needs a critical mass of people to support it, and small towns generally don't have the mass. It is really hard to start up brand new septic or water delivery or whatnot in the middle of nowhere. Also, consider that it doesn't take that many people to overwhelm a small town's population. What I hear in the Western states where remote WFH is becoming popular, is now WFH workers are pricing out existing residents, because rural salaries cannot compete with WFH wages. So WFH has mostly just resulted in exporting the housing crisis without significant easing in the places that had this problem pre-WFH.

HWR_14 4y ago

> why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns? By "establishing small towns" I assume you mean suburbs. It seems to be the opposite. Cities with tons of flat land around them (e.g. Houston) tend to expand their footprint and maintain density. It's mostly areas that cannot (e.g. SF, LA, NYC) that increase density. Once you hit natural limiting boarders, you have to build up.

ianburrell 4y ago
I was noticing that west coast cities have higher density than rest of country. One cause is that many had big booms in the 20s and 50s which gave them walkable suburbs. Second is natural and legal boundaries that slowed growth. Bay Area and Los Angeles are surrounded by mountains. Third is that land prices were high and it was most profitable to squeeze in houses. The problem the west coast has is not replacing housing once things got full and prices increased.
ticviking 4y ago
No I mean small towns with their own urban/town center. They wouldn't be as dense as a cities downtown but would support 2-4 story mixed use in a walkable core. Every suburb I've ever lived in has been prone to ever-increasing low-density sprawl and resists building even a 2nd story for anything other than residence. I can drive past miles of 1 story strip-malls in virtually every suburb in America, and only rarely do I see an 2 story doctors office, or maybe a 3 story apartment or office building.

yterdy 4y ago

You have it backwards. We DO grow by establishing new "small towns" (better known as "housing developments" or "mixed-use developments"). Increasing density in a way that resembles older "small town" development would certainly be preferable, but is difficult with the transit policy status quo in much of the country. TODs are an example of attempts to do so anyway, with mixed results. The uncomfortable truth of our housing policy woes is that they're intertwined with transit policy and everything connected to that (American manufacturing and business, energy, political legacies, etc.).

ianburrell 4y ago

New towns are less efficient than densifying existing cities. With new town, have to build all the infrastructure. New roads, new schools, new utilities. The transport is less efficient by driving everywhere. Single-family homes are less efficient than multi-family. Small town doesn’t have all the services so people drive to the Walmart or hospital. Or city if they need something special. The same housing in Arlington is super efficient. Tear down house, build apartment building. Connect to sewer, roads, etc. The residents walk to the Metro stop. A lot of the small town problems also apply to sprawl and exurbs. It is possible to build more efficient small towns, older ones have a walkable core.

rayiner 4y ago

As others have said, that’s what we do. The area west of Arlington, VA is a great example. In the movie houseboat it’s depicted as “the country.” Even when I was growing up in the 1990s, it was heavily farmland after you got west of Reston. Today, Reston is a major employment center and all the farmland in Loudoun county has half a million people.

CPLX 4y ago

> why do we always seem to grow by increasing density rather than establishing new small towns When we grow population we increase density. The two concepts have a direct linear relationship there’s no other thing that can possibly happen. The only relevant question is where the density increases. A new small town in a rural area is an increase in density for that area. Your argument thus reduces, entirely, to “why don’t people go somewhere else instead of where I live?”

roenxi 4y ago

Dunno why anyone downvoted you, it is an interesting question. It also has an interesting answer - turns out we get a much more complex and pleasant society if we cram everyone in tightly in a city. The is a lesser-known branch of economics called economic geography that studies what happens when you have big concentrations of people. Turns out you get much better services and it is cheaper to support everything (eg, one big trainline which costs a lot but gets huge amount of use, one big market where you can buy and sell everything, etc). The short of it is that small towns are not a bad thing, but if you want to live a comfortable life with lots of services and material luxuries then you had best seek a city.

ticviking 4y ago
This is at least a real answer to the question. Understanding that there is a mutual dependence between the countryside and the cites, it seems like in the past the limit on city growth has always been sanitation and the ability of the agricultural base to support the urban population with the labor that is available in the country. I'm curious if you know any good entry-level or popular books on this topic.
- roenxi 4y ago
  Alas no. I forget how I was even introduced to the subject. Possibly Wikipedia.