Shattering the Illusion of 'Full Suburbs'

The Mirage of Suburban Congestion

In a world choking on the exhaust of congestion, the image of idyllic, spacious suburbs is rapidly fading. Across the globe, suburbs that were once the bastions of tranquility and space are being branded as 'full.' Politicians and locals alike point to clogged roads and strain on infrastructure as proof. Yet, beneath this façade of saturation lies a harsh truth, one rooted in our enduring love affair with the car.

Our suburbs aren't bursting at the seams; they are being suffocated by inefficiency. The ever-increasing demand for private cars has turned suburban roads into sluggish, congested arteries, creating an illusion of 'fullness.' When the vast capacity of roads is exhausted by the sheer number of cars, suburbs seem 'full.' But this is a mirage.

The Car: A Roadblock to Efficiency

There is a stark contrast between the number of people that can be moved through different modes of transportation. A lane of cars at peak efficiency can move around 1,500 people every hour. Contrast this with the far more efficient modes of public transport: a regular bus lane can accommodate around 5,000, bus Rapid Transit can move 9,000, pedestrian lanes can move 15,000, and a heavy rail line can transport up to 60,000 people per hour.

This mismatch between private and public transport becomes apparent when we look at how space is utilized in our suburbs. For a car-centric suburb to transport the same volume of people as a pedestrian-friendly suburb, it would need approximately ten times the space. When competing with a heavy rail line, it would need a staggering forty times the area.

Unmasking the Illusion

In places like LA's Venice Beach, for example, we see this pattern. Between 1960 and 2010, while LA's metro area's population grew by 91%, Venice Beach shrank by 20%. Over time, housing costs in Venice Beach skyrocketed, far surpassing LA's overall increase. Notably, this surge didn't stem from an influx of residents but rather from a stagnation in housing development, exacerbated by anti-growth activists who fought to maintain the suburb's "status quo".

And therein lies the crux of our global "full suburbs" crisis. From Redondo Beach in California to the tranquil suburbs of Europe, the "fullness" we perceive is an illusion, perpetuated by an over-reliance on cars and a resistance to densifying housing.

The paradox here is that many global cities have thrived with far denser populations. The apparent difference? They're not designed around cars. By learning from these cities, like Tokyo or Copenhagen, we can begin to mitigate the crisis of perceived congestion in our own backyards.

Let's face it: the growth of private vehicles on our roads has a downside. In addition to contributing to environmental degradation and increasing living costs, they impede the efficient movement of people, creating an illusion of overcrowdedness.

Moreover, car-dependent city planning has excluded many from fully participating in public life, especially those who cannot drive or afford a car. And this exclusionary nature is closely tied to housing policies, exacerbating housing scarcity and price hikes, affecting everyone from the struggling millennial to the retired baby boomer.

We need to redefine our understanding of "fullness". It's not about the number of people per square mile; it's about how efficiently those people can move within that space. This efficiency can be drastically improved by shifting our urban planning focus from cars to more sustainable, high-capacity means of transport like buses and heavy rail lines.

It's crucial to remember that if our cities and towns are to continue growing, they must do so in harmony with their infrastructural capacities. As the state of California is doing by cracking down on NIMBYism, governments worldwide need to encourage denser, sustainable housing development that better aligns with public transportation and less with personal cars.

The "full suburb" is indeed an illusion. But recognizing it as such is only the first step.

The second step, and arguably the more challenging one, is dismantling the policies, practices, and mindsets that have created and perpetuated this illusion.

One promising approach is to promote more organic growth in our neighborhoods, akin to what existed before World War II, where various housing types, from single-family homes to apartment buildings, could coexist harmoniously. Today's strict zoning laws often stand in the way of this organic growth, artificially limiting supply and inflating housing prices. In fact, California's recent steps to up-zone parts of San Francisco or expedite apartment projects in Santa Monica are indicative of a necessary policy shift to facilitate organic neighborhood growth.

A different perspective to consider is that of Japan. Japanese zoning laws, which are generally more flexible than those in many American or European cities, have been a significant factor in maintaining reasonable housing prices despite Japan's high population density. Japanese cities also prioritize public transportation, which is not only efficient but also widely accessible, reducing the need for cars and helping to prevent the "full suburb" illusion.

Yet, we cannot ignore the elephant in the room: our reliance on cars. Yes, cars offer convenience, flexibility, and a sense of individual freedom. But this shouldn't blind us to their downsides. It's time to face the uncomfortable truth that car-centric planning isn't just bad for the environment; it's bad for our communities and our wallets, too.

Efforts to shift away from car-centric planning need to take place at all levels. Policymakers must prioritize public transportation in their urban planning. Real estate developers and architects should design buildings and communities that encourage walking, biking, or taking the bus or train. Individuals can do their part, too, by choosing to live closer to work or school, using public transportation whenever possible, and advocating for better public transportation and zoning policies in their communities.

Charting a Path Forward

The "full suburb" illusion has long governed how we view and shape our communities. It's time we shattered this illusion, replacing it with a vision of more sustainable, equitable, and efficiently planned suburbs.

If we succeed, we won't just ease traffic congestion or lower housing prices. We'll also create more inclusive, accessible, and livable communities where everyone has a fair shot at enjoying a high quality of life. And that, surely, is a goal worth striving for.

The path towards these solutions will not be easy or straightforward. It will require political will, community engagement, and an acceptance that our suburbs are not "full" – they are merely inefficiently used. But if we can embrace this reality, we can begin to build a better future for all residents, not just those fortunate enough to afford a car or a waterfront view.

Every city, every town, every suburb has the potential for growth. It's time to rethink our approach, to challenge our preconceptions, and to move towards a more sustainable, equitable urban future. As we drive along the streets of our suburbs, let's not be blinded by the illusion of fullness. Instead, let's envision a future where everyone has a place, a future defined by efficient movement, affordable housing, and vibrant, inclusive communities.