Recent from talks
Contribute something
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Suburb
View on Wikipedia
A suburb (more broadly suburban area) is an area within a metropolitan area. They are often where most of a metropolitan area's jobs are located, although some suburbs are predominantly residential.[1][2] They can either be denser or less densely populated than a large city, and they can have a higher or lower rate of detached single family homes than the city as well.[3][4][5] Suburbs can have their own political or legal jurisdictions, especially in the United States, but this is not always the case, especially in the United Kingdom, where most suburbs are located within the administrative boundaries of cities.[6] In most English-speaking countries, suburban areas are defined in contrast to central city or inner city areas, but in Australian English and South African English, suburb has become largely synonymous with what is called a "neighborhood" in the U.S.[7] Due in part to historical trends such as white flight, some suburbs in the United States have a higher population and higher incomes than their nearby inner cities.[8]
In some countries, including India, China, Argentina, Brazil, New Zealand, Canada, the United Kingdom, and parts of the United States, new suburbs are routinely annexed by adjacent cities due to urban sprawl. In others, such as Morocco, France, and much of the United States, many suburbs remain separate municipalities or are governed locally as part of a larger metropolitan area such as a county, district or borough. In the United States, regions beyond the suburbs are known as "exurban areas" or exurbs; exurbs have less population density than suburbs, but still more than rural areas. Suburbs and exurbs are sometimes linked to the nearby city economically, particularly by commuters.
Suburbs first emerged on a large scale in the 19th and 20th centuries, as a result of improved rail and road transport, which led to an increase in commuting.[9] Most suburbs are less dense than inner city neighborhoods within the same metropolitan area, and residents routinely commute to other suburbs and city centers or business districts via private vehicles or public transit; including industrial suburbs, planned communities, and satellite cities. Suburbs tend to proliferate around cities that have an abundance of adjacent flat land.[10][11]
Etymology and usage
[edit]The English word is derived from the Old French subburbe, which is in turn derived from the Latin suburbium, formed from sub (meaning "under" or "below") and urbs ("city"). The first recorded use of the term in English according to the Oxford English Dictionary[12] appears in Middle English c. 1350 in the manuscript of the Midlands Prose Psalter,[13] in which the form suburbes is used.
Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa
[edit]
In Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa, suburban areas (in the wider sense noted in the lead paragraph) have become formalized as geographic subdivisions of a city and are used by postal services in addressing. In rural areas in both countries, their equivalents are called localities (see suburbs and localities). The terms inner suburb and outer suburb are used to differentiate between the higher-density areas in proximity to the city center (which would not be referred to as 'suburbs' in most other countries), and the lower-density suburbs on the outskirts of the urban area. The term 'middle suburbs' is also used. Inner suburbs, such as Te Aro in Wellington, Eden Terrace in Auckland, Prahran in Melbourne and Ultimo in Sydney, are usually characterized by higher density apartment housing and greater integration between commercial and residential areas.
North America
[edit]
In the United States and Canada, suburb can refer either to an outlying residential area of a city or town or to a separate municipality or unincorporated area outside a town or city.[citation needed][14]
Although a majority of Americans regard themselves as residents of suburban communities, the federal government of the United States has no formal definition for what constitutes a suburb in the United States, leaving its precise meaning disputed.[15][16]
In Canada, the term may also be used in the British sense, especially as cities annex formerly outlying areas.[citation needed]
United Kingdom and Ireland
[edit]
In the United Kingdom and Ireland, the term suburb simply refers to a residential area outside the city centre, regardless of administrative boundaries.[9] Suburbs, in this sense, can range from areas that seem more like residential areas of a city proper to areas separated by open countryside from the city centre. In large cities such as London and Leeds, many suburbs are formerly separate towns and villages that have been absorbed during a city's expansion, such as Ealing, Bromley, and Guiseley. In Ireland, this can be seen in the Dublin suburban areas of Swords, Blanchardstown, and Tallaght.
History
[edit]The history of suburbia is part of the study of urban history, which focuses on the origins, growth, diverse typologies, culture, and politics of suburbs, as well as on the gendered and family-oriented nature of suburban space.[17][18] Many people have assumed that early-20th-century suburbs were enclaves for middle-class whites, a concept that carries tremendous cultural influence yet is actually stereotypical. Some suburbs are based on a society of working-class and minority residents, many of whom want to own their own house. Meanwhile, other suburbs instituted "explicitly racist" policies to deter people deemed as "other", a practice most common in the United States in contrast to other countries around the world.[19] Mary Corbin Sies argues that it is necessary to examine how "suburb" is defined as well as the distinction made between cities and suburbs, geography, economic circumstances, and the interaction of numerous factors that move research beyond acceptance of stereotyping and its influence on scholarly assumptions.[20]
Early history
[edit]The earliest appearance of suburbs coincided with the spread of the first urban settlements. Large walled towns tended to be the focus around which smaller villages grew up in a symbiotic relationship with the market town. The word suburbani was first employed by the Roman statesman Cicero in reference to the large villas and estates built by the wealthy patricians of Rome on the city's outskirts.
Towards the end of the Eastern Han Dynasty, until 190 AD, when Dong Zhuo razed the city, the capital Luoyang was mainly occupied by the emperor and important officials; the city's people mostly lived in small cities right outside Luoyang, which were suburbs in all but name.[21]
As populations grew during the Early Modern Period in Europe, towns swelled with a steady influx of people from the countryside. In some places, nearby settlements were swallowed up as the main city expanded. The peripheral areas on the outskirts of the city were generally inhabited by the very poorest.[22]
Origins of the modern suburb
[edit]Due to the rapid migration of the rural poor to the industrializing cities of England in the late 18th century, a trend in the opposite direction began to develop, whereby newly rich members of the middle classes began to purchase estates and villas on the outskirts of London. This trend accelerated through the 19th century, especially in cities like London and Birmingham that were growing rapidly, and the first suburban districts sprung up around downtowns to accommodate those who wanted to escape the squalid conditions of the industrial towns. Initially, such growth came along rail lines in the form of ribbon developments, as suburban residents could commute via train to downtown for work. In Australia, where Melbourne would soon become the second-largest city in the British Empire,[23] the distinctively Australasian suburb, with its loosely aggregated quarter-acre sections, developed in the 1850s[24] and eventually became a component of the Australian Dream.

Toward the end of the century, with the development of public transit systems such as the underground railways, trams and buses, it became possible for the majority of a city's population to reside outside the city and to commute into the center for work.[22]
By the mid-19th century, the first major suburban areas were springing up around London as the city (then the largest in the world) became more overcrowded and unsanitary. A major catalyst for suburban growth was the opening of the Metropolitan Railway in the 1860s. The line later joined the capital's financial heart in the City to what were to become the suburbs of Middlesex.[25] The line reached Harrow in 1880.
Unlike other railway companies, which were required to dispose of surplus land, London's Met was allowed to retain such land that it believed was necessary for future railway use.[note 1] Initially, the surplus land was managed by the Land Committee,[27] and, from the 1880s, the land was developed and sold to domestic buyers in places like Willesden Park Estate, Cecil Park, near Pinner and at Wembley Park.
In 1912 it was suggested that a specially formed company should take over from the Surplus Lands Committee and develop suburban estates near the railway.[28] However, World War I (1914–1918) delayed these plans until 1919, when, with the expectation of a postwar housing-boom,[29] Metropolitan Railway Country Estates Limited (MRCE) formed. MRCE went on to develop estates at Kingsbury Garden Village near Neasden, Wembley Park, Cecil Park and Grange Estate at Pinner and the Cedars Estate at Rickmansworth and to found places such as Harrow Garden Village.[29][30]
The Met's marketing department coined the term Metro-land in 1915 when the Guide to the Extension Line became the Metro-land guide, priced at 1d. This promoted the land served by the Met for the walker, visitor and later the house-hunter.[28] Published annually until 1932 (the last full year of independence for the Met), the guide extolled the benefits of "The good air of the Chilterns", using language such as "Each lover of Metroland may well have his own favorite wood beech and coppice — all tremulous green loveliness in Spring and russet and gold in October".[31] The dream as promoted involved a modern home in beautiful countryside with a fast railway-service to central London.[32] By 1915 people from across London had flocked to live the new suburban dream in large newly built areas across north-west London.[33]
Interwar suburban expansion in England
[edit]
Suburbanization in the interwar period was heavily influenced by the garden city movement of Ebenezer Howard and the creation of the first garden suburbs at the turn of the 20th century.[34] The first garden suburb was developed through the efforts of social reformer Henrietta Barnett and her husband; inspired by Ebenezer Howard and the model housing development movement (then exemplified by Letchworth garden city), as well as the desire to protect part of Hampstead Heath from development, they established trusts in 1904 which bought 243 acres of land along the newly opened Northern line extension to Golders Green and created the Hampstead Garden Suburb. The suburb attracted the talents of architects including Raymond Unwin and Sir Edwin Lutyens, and it ultimately grew to encompass over 800 acres.[35]
During World War I, the Tudor Walters Committee was commissioned to make recommendations for the post war reconstruction and housebuilding. In part, this was a response to the shocking lack of fitness amongst many recruits during World War One, attributed to poor living conditions; a belief summed up in a housing poster of the period "you cannot expect to get an A1 population out of C3 homes" – referring to military fitness classifications of the period.
The committee's report of 1917 was taken up by the government, which passed the Housing, Town Planning, &c. Act 1919, also known as the Addison Act after Christopher Addison, the then Minister for Housing. The Act allowed for the building of large new housing estates in the suburbs after the First World War,[36] and marked the start of a long 20th century tradition of state-owned housing, which would later evolve into council estates.
The Report also legislated on the required, minimum standards necessary for further suburban construction; this included regulation on the maximum housing density and their arrangement, and it even made recommendations on the ideal number of bedrooms and other rooms per house. Although the semi-detached house was first designed by the Shaws (a father and son architectural partnership) in the 19th century, it was during the suburban housing boom of the interwar period that the design first proliferated as a suburban icon, being preferred by middle-class home owners to the smaller terraced houses.[37] The design of many of these houses, highly characteristic of the era, was heavily influenced by the Art Deco movement, taking influence from Tudor Revival, chalet style, and even ship design.
Within just a decade suburbs dramatically increased in size. Harrow Weald went from just 1,500 to over 10,000 while Pinner jumped from 3,000 to over 20,000. During the 1930s, over 4 million new suburban houses were built, the 'suburban revolution' had made England the most heavily suburbanized country in the world, by a considerable margin.[9]
North America
[edit]New York City and Boston spawned the first major suburbs. The streetcar lines in Boston and the rail lines in Manhattan made daily commutes possible.[38] No metropolitan area in the world was as well served by railroad commuter lines at the turn of the twentieth century as New York, and it was the rail lines to Westchester from the Grand Central Terminal commuter hub that enabled its development. Westchester's true importance in the history of American suburbanization derives from the upper-middle class development of villages including Scarsdale, New Rochelle and Rye serving thousands of businessmen and executives from Manhattan.[39]
Postwar suburban expansion
[edit]The suburban population in North America exploded during the post-World War II economic expansion. Returning veterans wishing to start a settled life moved in masses to the suburbs. Levittown developed as a major prototype of mass-produced housing. Due to the influx of people in these suburban areas, the amount of shopping centers began to increase as suburban America took shape. These malls helped supply goods and services to the growing urban population. Shopping for different goods and services in one central location without having to travel to multiple locations, helped to keep shopping centers a component of these newly designed suburbs which were booming in population. The television helped contribute to the rise of shopping centers by allowing for additional advertisement through the medium in addition to creating a desire among consumers to buy products that are shown being used in suburban life on various television programs. Another factor that led to the rise of these shopping centers was the building of many highways. The Highway Act of 1956 helped to fund the building of 64,000 kilometers across the nation by having 26 billion dollars on hand, which helped to link many more to these shopping centers with ease.[40] These newly built shopping centers, which were often large buildings full of multiple stores, and services, were being used for more than shopping, but as a place of leisure and a meeting point for those who lived within suburban America at this time. These centers thrived offering goods and services to the growing populations in suburban America. In 1957, 940 shopping centers were built and this number more than doubled by 1960 to keep up with the demand of these densely populated areas.[41]
Housing
[edit]

Very little housing had been built during the Great Depression and World War II, except for emergency quarters near war industries. Overcrowded and inadequate apartments was the common condition. Some suburbs had developed around large cities where there was rail transportation to the jobs downtown. However, the real growth in suburbia depended on the availability of automobiles, highways, and inexpensive housing.[42] The population had grown, and the stock of family savings had accumulated the money for down payments, automobiles and appliances. The product was a great housing boom. Whereas an average of 316,000 new non-farm housing units were constructed from the 1930s through 1945, there were 1,450,000 constructed annually from 1946 through 1955.[43] The G.I. Bill guaranteed low-cost loans for veterans, with very low down payments, and low interest rates.
With 16 million eligible veterans, the opportunity to buy a house was suddenly at hand. In 1947 alone, 540,000 veterans bought one; their average price was $7300. The construction industry kept prices low by standardization—for example, standardizing sizes for kitchen cabinets, refrigerators and stoves allowed for mass production of kitchen furnishings. Developers purchased empty land just outside the city, installed tract houses based on a handful of designs, and provided streets and utilities, while local public officials raced to build schools.[44] The most famous development was Levittown, in Long Island just east of New York City. It offered a new house for $1000 down and $70 a month; it featured three bedrooms, a fireplace, a gas range and gas furnace, and a landscaped lot of 75 by 100 feet, all for a total price of $10,000. Veterans could get one with a much lower down payment.[45]
At the same time, African Americans were rapidly moving north and west for better jobs and educational opportunities than were available to them in the segregated South. Their arrival in Northern and Western cities en masse, in addition to being followed by race riots in several large cities such as Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Detroit, Chicago, and Washington, D.C., further stimulated white suburban migration. The growth of the suburbs was facilitated by the development of zoning laws, redlining and numerous innovations in transport. Redlining and other discriminatory measures built into federal housing policy furthered the racial segregation of postwar America–for example, by refusing to insure mortgages in and near African-American neighborhoods. The government's efforts were primarily designed to provide housing to White middle-class and lower-middle-class families. African Americans and other people of color largely remained concentrated within decaying cores of urban poverty creating a phenomenon known as white flight.[46]
After World War II, the availability of FHA loans stimulated a housing boom in American suburbs. In the older cities of the northeast U.S., streetcar suburbs originally developed along train or trolley lines that could shuttle workers into and out of city centers where the jobs were located. This practice gave rise to the term "bedroom community", meaning that most daytime business activity took place in the city, with the working population leaving the city at night for the purpose of going home to sleep.
Economic growth in the United States encouraged the suburbanization of American cities that required massive investments for the new infrastructure and homes. Consumer patterns were also shifting at this time, as purchasing power was becoming stronger and more accessible to a wider range of families. Suburban houses also brought about needs for products that were not needed in urban neighborhoods, such as lawnmowers and automobiles. During this time commercial shopping malls were being developed near suburbs to satisfy consumers' needs and their car–dependent lifestyle.[47]
Zoning laws also contributed to the location of residential areas outside of the city center by creating wide areas or "zones" where only residential buildings were permitted. These suburban residences are built on larger lots of land than in the central city. For example, the lot size for a residence in Chicago is usually 125 feet (38 m) deep,[48] while the width can vary from 14 feet (4.3 m) wide for a row house to 45 feet (14 m) wide for a large stand–alone house.[citation needed] In the suburbs, where stand–alone houses are the rule, lots may be 85 feet (26 m) wide by 115 feet (35 m) deep, as in the Chicago suburb of Naperville.[citation needed] Manufacturing and commercial buildings were segregated in other areas of the city.
Alongside suburbanization, many companies began locating their offices and other facilities in the outer areas of the cities, which resulted in the increased density of older suburbs and the growth of lower density suburbs even further from city centers. An alternative strategy is the deliberate design of "new towns" and the protection of green belts around cities. Some social reformers attempted to combine the best of both concepts in the garden city movement.[49]
In the U.S., 1950 was the first year that more people lived in suburbs than elsewhere.[50] In the U.S., the development of the skyscraper and the sharp inflation of downtown real estate prices also led to downtowns being more fully dedicated to businesses, thus pushing residents outside the city center.
Worldwide
[edit]While suburbs are often associated with the middle classes, in many parts of the developed world, suburbs can be economically distressed areas, inhabited by higher proportions of recent immigrants, with higher delinquency rates and social problems, reminiscent of the inner cities of the U.S. Examples include the banlieues of France, or the concrete suburbs of Sweden, even if the suburbs of these countries also include middle-class and upper-class neighborhoods that often consist of single-family houses.
Africa
[edit]Following the growth of the middle class due to African industrialization, the development of middle class suburbs has boomed since the beginning of the 1990s, particularly in cities such as Cairo, Nairobi, Johannesburg, and Lagos.
In an illustrative case of South Africa, RDP housing has been built. In much of Soweto, many houses are American in appearance, but are smaller, and often consist of a kitchen and living room, two or three bedrooms, and a bathroom. However, there are more affluent neighborhoods, more comparable to American suburbs, particularly east of the FNB ("Soccer City") Stadium and south of the city in areas like Eikenhof, where the "Eye of Africa" planned community exists.[51] This master-planned community is nearly indistinguishable from the most amenity-rich resort-style American suburbs in Florida, Arizona, and California, complete with a golf course, resort pool, equestrian facility, 24-hour staffed gates, gym, and BMX track, as well as several tennis, basketball, and volleyball courts.[52]
In Cape Town, there is a distinct European style originating from European influence during the mid-1600s when the Dutch settled the Cape. Houses like these are called Cape Dutch Houses and can be found in the affluent suburbs of Constantia and Bishopscourt.
Australia
[edit]Large cities like Sydney and Melbourne had streetcar suburbs in the tram era. With the automobile, the Australian usage came about as outer areas were quickly surrounded in fast-growing cities, but retained the appellation suburb; the term was eventually applied to neighborhoods in the original core as well. In Australia, Sydney's urban sprawl has occurred predominantly in the Western Suburbs. The locality of Olympic Park was designated an official suburb in 2009.[53]
Bangladesh
[edit]Bangladesh has multiple suburbs, Uttara & Ashulia to name a few. However, most suburbs in Dhaka are different from the ones in Europe & Americas. Most suburbs in Bangladesh are filled with high-rise buildings, paddy fields, and farms, and are designed more like rural villages.
Canada
[edit]Canada is an urbanized nation where over 80% of the population lives in urban areas (loosely defined), and roughly two-thirds live in one of Canada's 33 census metropolitan areas (CMAs) with a population of over 100,000. However, of this metropolitan population, in 2001 nearly half lived in low-density neighborhoods, with only one in five living in a typical "urban" neighborhood. The percentage living in low-density neighborhoods varied from a high of nearly two-thirds of Calgary CMA residents (67%), to a low of about one-third of Montréal CMA residents (34%).
Large cities in Canada acquired streetcar suburbs in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Modern Canadian suburbs tend to be less automobile-centric than those in the United States, and public transit use is encouraged but can be notably unused.[54] Throughout Canada, there are comprehensive plans in place to curb sprawl.
Population and income growth in Canadian suburbs had tended to outpace growth in core urban or rural areas, but in many areas, this trend has now reversed. The suburban population increased by 87% between 1981 and 2001, well ahead of urban growth.[55] The majority of recent population growth in Canada's three largest metropolitan areas (Greater Toronto, Greater Montréal, and Greater Vancouver) has occurred in non-core municipalities. This trend is also beginning to take effect in Vancouver, and to a lesser extent, Montréal. In certain cities, particularly Edmonton and Calgary, suburban growth takes place within the city boundaries as opposed to in bedroom communities. This is due to annexation and a large geographic footprint within the city borders.
Calgary is unusual among Canadian cities because it has developed as a unicity – it has annexed most of its surrounding towns and large amounts of undeveloped land around the city. As a result, most of the communities that Calgarians refer to as "suburbs" are actually inside the city limits.[56] In the 2016 census, the City of Calgary had a population of 1,239,220, whereas the Calgary Metropolitan Area had a population of 1,392,609, indicating the vast majority of people in the Calgary CMA lived within the city limits. The perceived low population density of Calgary largely results from its many internal suburbs and the large amount of undeveloped land within the city. The city actually has a policy of densifying its new developments.[57]
China
[edit]In China, the term suburb is new, although suburbs are already being constructed rapidly. Chinese suburbs mostly consist of rows upon rows of apartment blocks and condos that end abruptly into the countryside.[58][59] Also new town developments are extremely common. Single family suburban homes tend to be similar to their Western equivalents; although primarily outside Beijing and Shanghai, also mimic Spanish and Italian architecture.[60]
Hong Kong
[edit]In Hong Kong, however, suburbs are mostly government-planned new towns containing numerous public housing estates. However, other new towns also contain private housing estates and low density developments for the upper classes.
Italy
[edit]In the illustrative case of Rome, Italy, in the 1920s and 1930s, suburbs were intentionally created ex novo to give lower classes a destination, in consideration of the actual and foreseen massive arrival of poor people from other areas of the country. Many critics have seen in this development pattern (which was circularly distributed in every direction) also a quick solution to a problem of public order (keeping the unwelcome poorest classes together with the criminals, in this way better controlled, comfortably remote from the elegant "official" town). On the other hand, the expected huge expansion of the town soon effectively covered the distance from the central town, and now those suburbs are completely engulfed by the main territory of the town. Other newer suburbs (called exurbs) were created at a further distance from them.[citation needed]
Japan
[edit]In Japan, the construction of suburbs has boomed since the end of World War II and many cities are experiencing the urban sprawl effect.
Latin America
[edit]In Mexico, suburbs are generally similar to their United States counterparts. Houses are made in many different architectural styles which may be of European, American and International architecture and which vary in size. Suburbs can be found in Guadalajara, Mexico City, Monterrey, and most major cities. Lomas de Chapultepec is an example of an affluent suburb, although it is located inside the city and by no means is today a suburb in the strict sense of the word. In other countries, the situation is similar to that of Mexico, with many suburbs being built, most notably in Peru and Chile, which have experienced a boom in the construction of suburbs since the late 1970s and early 1980s. As the growth of middle-class and upper-class suburbs increased, low-class squatter areas have increased, most notably "lost cities" in Mexico, campamentos in Chile, barriadas in Peru, villa miserias in Argentina, asentamientos in Guatemala and favelas of Brazil.
Brazilian affluent suburbs are generally denser, more vertical and mixed in use inner suburbs. They concentrate infrastructure, investment and attention from the municipal seat and the best offer of mass transit. True sprawling towards neighboring municipalities is typically empoverished – periferia (the periphery, in the sense of it dealing with spatial marginalization) –, with a very noticeable example being the rail suburbs of Rio de Janeiro – the North Zone, the Baixada Fluminense, the part of the West Zone associated with SuperVia's Ramal de Santa Cruz. These, in comparison with the inner suburbs, often prove to be remote, violent food deserts with inadequate sewer structure coverage, saturated mass transit, more precarious running water, electricity and communication services, and lack of urban planning and landscaping, while also not necessarily qualifying as actual favelas or slums. They often are former agricultural land or wild areas settled through squatting; suburbs grew and expanded due to the mass rural exodus during the years of the military dictatorship. This is particularly true of São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and Brasília, which grew with migration from more distant and impoverished parts of the country and deal with overpopulation as a result.
Malaysia
[edit]In Malaysia, suburbs are common especially in Klang Valley, the largest conurbation in the country.[61] These suburbs also serve as major housing areas and commuter towns. Terraced houses, semi-detached houses and shophouses are common concepts in suburban planning. In certain places such as Klang, Subang Jaya and Petaling Jaya, suburbs form the core. The latter one has been turned into a satellite city of Kuala Lumpur. Suburbs are also evident in other major conurbations in the country such as Penang Island (Butterworth, Bukit Mertajam), Johor Bahru (Skudai, Pasir Gudang), Ipoh (Simpang Pulai), Kota Melaka (Ayer Keroh), Kuching (Petra Jaya) and Alor Setar (Anak Bukit).
Russia
[edit]In Russia, until recently, the term suburb refers to high-rise residential apartments which usually consist of two bedrooms, one bathroom, a kitchen and a living room. However, since the beginning of the 21st century in Russia there has been a "cottage boom", as a result of which a huge number of cottage villages appeared in almost every city of the country (including Moscow), no different from the suburbs in western countries.[citation needed]
United Kingdom
[edit]In the United Kingdom suburbs are located between the exurbs and inner cities of a metropolitan area. The growth in the use of trains, and later cars and highways, increased the ease with which workers could have a job in the city while commuting in from the suburbs. In the United Kingdom, as mentioned above, railways stimulated the first mass exodus to the suburbs. The Metropolitan Railway, for example, was active in building and promoting its own housing estates in the north-west of London, consisting mostly of detached houses on large plots, which it then marketed as "Metro-land".[62] In the UK, the government is seeking to impose minimum densities on newly approved housing schemes in parts of South East England. The goal is to "build sustainable communities" rather than housing estates. However, commercial concerns tend to delay the opening of services until a large number of residents have occupied the new neighborhood.
United States
[edit]Many white people moved to the suburbs during the white flight.[63][64]
In the 19th century, horse-drawn and later electric trolleys enabled the creation of streetcar suburbs, which expanded the area in which city commuters could live. These are typically medium-density neighborhoods contiguous with the core urban area, built for pedestrian access to the streetcar lines.
With widespread adoption of the automobile progressing from the 1920s to the 1950s, and especially with the introduction of the Interstate Highway System, new suburbs were designed around car transport instead of pedestrians. Over time, many suburban areas, especially those not within the political boundaries of the city containing the central business area, began to see independence from the central city as an asset. In some cases, suburbanites saw self-government as a means to keep out people who could not afford the added suburban property maintenance costs not needed in city living. Federal subsidies for suburban development accelerated this process as did the practice of redlining by banks and other lending institutions.[65] In some cities such as Miami, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C., the main city is much smaller than the surrounding suburban areas, leaving the city proper with a small portion of the metro area's population and land area.
Mesa, Arizona, and Virginia Beach, Virginia, the two most populous suburbs in the U.S., are actually more populous than many core cities, including Miami, Minneapolis, New Orleans, Cleveland, Tampa, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and others. Virginia Beach is now the most populous city in Virginia, having long since exceeded the population of its neighboring primary city, Norfolk. While Virginia Beach has slowly been taking on the characteristics of an urban city, it will not likely achieve the population density and urban characteristics of Norfolk. A second suburban city in Virginia, Chesapeake, has also exceeded the population of adjacent Norfolk. With only a few large commercial areas and no definitive downtown area, Chesapeake is primarily residential in nature with vast rural areas remaining within the city limits.
Cleveland, Ohio, is typical of many American central cities; its municipal borders have changed little since 1922, even though the Cleveland urbanized area has grown many times over.[citation needed] Several layers of suburban municipalities now surround cities like Boston, Cleveland, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, Dallas, Denver, Houston, New York City, San Francisco, Sacramento, Atlanta, Miami, Baltimore, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Norfolk, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, Minneapolis, and Washington, D.C..
Suburbs in the United States have a prevalence of usually detached[66] single-family homes.[67]
They are characterized by:
- Lower densities than central cities, dominated by single-family homes on small plots of land – anywhere from 0.1 acres[17] and up – surrounded at close quarters by very similar dwellings.
- Zoning patterns that separate residential and commercial development, as well as different intensities and densities of development. Daily needs are not within walking distance of most homes.
- A greater percentage of whites (both non-Hispanic and, in some areas, Hispanic) and lesser percentage of citizens of other ethnic groups than in urban areas. However, black suburbanization grew between 1970 and 1980 by 2.6% as a result of central city neighborhoods expanding into older neighborhoods vacated by whites.[68][69][70]
- Subdivisions carved from previously rural land into multiple-home developments built by a single real estate company. These subdivisions are often segregated by minute differences in home value, creating entire communities where family incomes and demographics are almost completely homogeneous.[71]
- Shopping malls and strip malls behind large parking lots instead of a classic downtown shopping district.
- A road network designed to conform to a hierarchy, including culs-de-sac, leading to larger residential streets, in turn leading to large collector roads, in place of the grid pattern common to most central cities and pre-World War II suburbs.
- A greater percentage of one-story administrative buildings than in urban areas.
- Compared to rural areas, suburbs usually have greater population density, higher standards of living, more complex road systems, more franchised stores and restaurants, and less farmland and wildlife.
By 2010, suburbs increasingly gained people in racial minority groups, as many members of minority groups gained better access to education and sought more favorable living conditions compared to inner city areas.[original research?][opinion]
Conversely, many white Americans also moved back to city centers. Nearly all major city downtowns (such as Downtown Miami, Downtown Detroit, Downtown Philadelphia, Downtown Roanoke, or Downtown Los Angeles) are experiencing a renewal, with large population growth, residential apartment construction, and increased social, cultural, and infrastructural investments, as have suburban neighborhoods close to city centers. Better public transit, proximity to work and cultural attractions, and frustration with suburban life and gridlock have attracted young Americans to the city centers.[72]
The Hispanic and Asian population is increasing in the suburbs.[73]
Traffic flows
[edit]This section has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
Suburbs typically have longer travel times to work than traditional neighborhoods.[74] Only the traffic within the short streets themselves is less. This is due to three factors:[citation needed] almost-mandatory automobile ownership due to poor suburban bus systems and nearly-nonexistent rail systems, longer travel distances and the hierarchy system, which is less efficient at distributing traffic than the traditional grid of streets.
In the suburban system, most trips from one component to another component requires that cars enter a collector road[citation needed], no matter how short or long the distance is. This is compounded by the hierarchy of streets, where entire neighborhoods and subdivisions are dependent on one or two collector roads. Because all traffic is forced onto these roads, they are often heavy with traffic all day. If a traffic crash occurs on a collector road, or if road construction inhibits the flow, then the entire road system may be rendered useless until the blockage is cleared. The traditional "grown" grid, in turn, allows for a larger number of choices and alternate routes.
Suburban systems of the sprawl type are also quite inefficient for cyclists or pedestrians, as the direct route is usually not available for them either.[75] This encourages car trips even for distances as low as several hundreds of yards or meters (which may have become up to several miles or kilometers due to the road network). Improved sprawl systems, though retaining the car detours, possess cycle paths and footpaths connecting across the arms of the sprawl system, allowing a more direct route while still keeping the cars out of the residential and side streets.
More commonly, central cities seek ways to tax nonresidents working downtown – known as commuter taxes – as property tax bases dwindle. Taken together, these two groups of taxpayers represent a largely untapped source of potential revenue that cities may begin to target more aggressively, particularly if they're struggling. According to struggling cities, this will help bring in a substantial revenue for the city which is a great way to tax the people who make the most use of the highways and repairs.
Today more companies settle down in suburbs because of low property costs.
Criticism
[edit]Criticism of suburbia dates back to the boom of suburban development in the 1950s and critiques a culture of aspirational homeownership.[76] In the English-speaking world, this discourse is prominent in the United States and Australia being prevalent both in popular culture and academia.
In popular culture
[edit]This section has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
Suburbs and suburban living have been the subject for a wide variety of films, books, television shows and songs.
French songs like La Zone by Fréhel (1933), Aux quatre coins de la banlieue by Damia (1936), Ma banlieue by Reda Caire (1937), or Banlieue by Robert Lamoureux (1953), evoke the suburbs of Paris explicitly since the 1930s.[77] Those singers give a sunny festive, almost bucolic, image of the suburbs, yet still few urbanized. During the fifties and the sixties, French singer-songwriter Léo Ferré evokes in his songs popular and proletarian suburbs of Paris, to oppose them to the city, considered by comparison as a bourgeois and conservative place.
French cinema was although soon interested in urban changes in the suburbs, with such movies as Mon oncle by Jacques Tati (1958), L'Amour existe by Maurice Pialat (1961) or Two or Three Things I Know About Her by Jean-Luc Godard (1967).
In his one-act opera Trouble in Tahiti (1952), Leonard Bernstein skewers American suburbia, which produces misery instead of happiness.
The American photojournalist Bill Owens documented the culture of suburbia in the 1970s, most notably in his book Suburbia. The 1962 song "Little Boxes" by Malvina Reynolds lampoons the development of suburbia and its perceived bourgeois and conformist values,[78] while the 1982 song Subdivisions by the Canadian band Rush also discusses suburbia, as does Rockin' the Suburbs by Ben Folds. The 2010 album The Suburbs by the Canadian-based alternative band Arcade Fire dealt with aspects of growing up in suburbia, suggesting aimlessness, apathy and endless rushing are ingrained into the suburban culture and mentality. Suburb The Musical, was written by Robert S. Cohen and David Javerbaum. Over the Hedge is a syndicated comic strip written and drawn by Michael Fry and T. Lewis. It tells the story of a raccoon, turtle, a squirrel, and their friends who come to terms with their woodlands being taken over by suburbia, trying to survive the increasing flow of humanity and technology while becoming enticed by it at the same time. A film adaptation of Over the Hedge was produced in 2006.
British television series such as The Good Life, Butterflies and The Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin have depicted suburbia as well-manicured but relentlessly boring, and its residents as either overly conforming or prone to going stir crazy. In contrast, U.S. shows such as Knots Landing, Desperate Housewives and Weeds portray the suburbs as concealing darker secrets behind a façade of manicured lawns, friendly people, and beautifully kept houses. Films such as The 'Burbs and Disturbia have brought this theme to the cinema.
Gallery
[edit]












See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ The Lands Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. c. 18) required railways to sell off surplus lands within ten years of the time given for completion of the work in the line's enabling Act.[26]
References
[edit]- ^ "The Spatial Structure of US Metropolitan Employment: New Insights from LODES Data" (PDF). US Cencus Bureau. Retrieved 23 May 2025.
- ^ Garreau, J., Edge City: Life on the New Frontier, Knopf Doubleday, 1992, p149
- ^ "People per square mile (excluding waters).Scope: population of selected places in the Atlanta Area". Statistical Atlas. Retrieved 23 May 2025.
- ^ "DP04Selected Housing Characteristics". US census Bureau. Retrieved 23 May 2025.
- ^ "DP04Selected Housing Characteristics". US Census Bureau. Retrieved 23 May 2025.
- ^ Caves, R. W. (2004). Encyclopedia of the City. Routledge. p. 640. ISBN 9780415252256.
- ^ Jain, Shri V. K. (30 April 2021). Applied Ecology and Sustainable Environment. BFC Publications. ISBN 978-93-90880-19-5.
- ^ "A forgotten history of how the US Government Segregated America". NPR. Retrieved 30 November 2023.
- ^ a b c Hollow, Matthew (2011). "Suburban Ideals on England's Interwar Council Estates". Journal of the Garden History Society. Retrieved 29 December 2012.
- ^ The Fractured Metropolis: Improving the New City, Restoring the Old City, Reshaping the Region[permanent dead link] by Jonathan Barnett, via Google Books.
- ^ "Suburb-to-Suburb Commuting Now National Pattern". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 27 May 2025.
- ^ "suburb, n."
- ^ Psalter, British Library Add. MS. 17376, in Bülbring 1891, p. 188.
- ^ "The country lying immediately outside a town or city; more particularly, those residential parts belonging to a town or city that lie immediately outside and adjacent to its walls or boundaries" (Oxford English Dictionary 2011a; McManus and Ethington 2007, 319- 320).
- ^ Montgomery, David (7 July 2020). "How to Tell If You Live in the Suburbs". Bloomberg.com.
- ^ Brasuell, James (21 November 2018). "According to the Federal Government, the Suburbs Don't Exist". Planetizen.
- ^ a b Jackson 1985.
- ^ Ruth McManus, and Philip J. Ethington (2007). "Suburbs in transition: new approaches to suburban history". Urban History. 34 (2): 317–337. doi:10.1017/S096392680700466X. S2CID 146703204.
- ^ Adams, L. J. (1 September 2006). "Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism". Journal of American History. 93 (2): 601–602. doi:10.2307/4486372. ISSN 0021-8723. JSTOR 4486372.
- ^ Mary Corbin Sies (2001). "North American Suburbs, 1880–1950". Journal of Urban History. 27 (3): 313–46. doi:10.1177/009614420102700304. S2CID 144947126.
- ^ "Luoyang and the Northern Army". Scholars of Shen Zhou.
- ^ a b "History of Suburbs". Archived from the original on 20 March 2020. Retrieved 17 December 2012.
- ^ Goodman, Robin; Buxton, Michael; Moloney, Susie (2016). "The early development of Melbourne". Planning Melbourne: Lessons for a Sustainable City. CSIRO Publishing. ISBN 9780643104747. Retrieved 16 June 2019.
By 1890, Melbourne was the second-largest city in the British Empire and one of the world's richest.
- ^
Gilbert, Alan (25 July 1989). "The Roots of Australian Anti-Suburbanism". In Goldberg, Samuels Louis; Smith, Francis Barrymore (eds.). Australian Cultural History (reprint ed.). Cambridge: CUP Archive (published 1988). p. 36. ISBN 9780521356510. Retrieved 26 March 2021.
[...] there has been surprising continuity since the infancy of Australian suburbia in the 1850s in the attitudes, values and motives underlying suburbanization.
- ^ Edwards, Dennis; Pigram, Ron (1988). The Golden Years of the Metropolitan Railway and the Metro-land Dream. Bloomsbury. p. 32. ISBN 1-870630-11-4.
- ^ Jackson 1986, p. 134.
- ^ Jackson 1986, pp. 134, 137.
- ^ a b Jackson 1986, p. 240.
- ^ a b Green 1987, p. 43.
- ^ Jackson 1986, pp. 241–242.
- ^ Rowley 2006, pp. 206, 207.
- ^ Green 2004, introduction.
- ^ "History of London Metro-Land and London's Suburbs". History.co.uk. Archived from the original on 12 July 2013. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
- ^ Clapson, Mark (2000). "The suburban aspiration in England since 1919". Contemporary British History. 14: 151–174. doi:10.1080/13619460008581576. S2CID 143590157.
- ^ "The History of the Suburb". Hgstrust.org. Archived from the original on 3 January 2018. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
- ^ "Outcomes of the War: Britain". Bbc.co.uk. Archived from the original on 30 November 2002. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
- ^ Lofthouse, Pamela (2012). "The Development of English Semi-detached Dwellings During the Nineteenth Century". Papers from the Institute of Archaeology. 22: 83–98. doi:10.5334/pia.404.
- ^ Ward David (1964). "A Comparative Historical Geography of Streetcar Suburbs in Boston, Massachusetts and Leeds, England: 1850–1920". Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 54 (4): 477–489. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.1964.tb01779.x.
- ^ Roger G. Panetta, Westchester: the American suburb (2006)
- ^ "The Postwar Economy: 1945–1960 < Postwar America < History 1994 < American History From Revolution To Reconstruction and beyond". Let.rug.nl. Retrieved 12 December 2021.
- ^ Cohen, Lizabeth (2003). A Consumer's Republic: The Politics of Mass Consumption in Postwar America. Vintage Books. pp. Chapter 6.
- ^ Muller, Peter O. (1977). "The Evolution of American Suburbs: A Geographical Interpretation". Urbanism Past & Present (4): 1–10. ISSN 0160-2780.
- ^ U.S. Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States (1976) series H-156
- ^ Joseph Goulden, The Best Years, 1945–1950 (1976) pp 135–39.
- ^ Barbara Mae Kelly, Expanding the American Dream: Building and Rebuilding Levittown (SUNY Press, 1993).
- ^ Rothstein, Richard: The Color of Law. A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America, Liveright, 2017.
- ^ Beauregard, Robert A. When America Became Suburban. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2006.
- ^ "Zoning Requirements for Standard Lot in RS3 District". 47th Ward Public Service website. Archived from the original on 14 August 2014. Retrieved 27 April 2017.
- ^ Garden Cities of To-Morrow. Library.cornell.edu. Retrieved on 22 November 2011.
- ^ England, Robert E. and David R. Morgan. Managing Urban America, 1979.
- ^ "Eye of Africa". Eyeofafrica.co.za. 2021. Retrieved 9 October 2021.
- ^ "Eye of Africa". Eyeofafrica.co.za. 2021. Retrieved 9 October 2021.
- ^ "NSW Place and Road Naming Proposals System". proposals.gnb.nsw.gov.au. Retrieved 24 January 2022.
- ^ "Dependence on cars in urban neighborhoods". Statistics Canada. Government of Canada. Archived from the original on 17 September 2016. Retrieved 27 April 2017.
- ^ The Wealthy Suburbs of Canada. Planetizen. Retrieved on 22 November 2011.
- ^ "CALGARY, AB an overview of development trends" (PDF). Retrieved 15 December 2018.
- ^ "THE CITY OF CALGARY Municipal Development Plan" (PDF). Retrieved 15 December 2018.
- ^ "(Mis)understanding China's Suburbs". China Urban Development Blog. 23 February 2011. Retrieved 25 February 2013.
- ^ "Is This Beijing's Suburban Future?". The Atlantic. 10 February 2011. Retrieved 25 February 2013.
- ^ Nasser, Haya El. (18 April 2008) Modern suburbia not just in America anymore. Usatoday.com. Retrieved on 22 November 2011.
- ^ Aiken, S. Robert; Leigh, Colin H. (December 1975). "Malaysia's Emerging Conurbation". Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 65 (4): 546–563. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.1975.tb01062.x. JSTOR 2562422. Retrieved 24 June 2023.
- ^ London's metroland Archived 16 October 2007 at the Wayback Machine. Transportdiversions.com. Retrieved on 22 November 2011.
- ^ The Myth of the White Suburb and “Suburban Invasion”
- ^ Lamb, Charles M. (24 January 2005). Housing Segregation in Suburban America Since 1960: Presidential and Judicial Politics. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-139-44418-7.
- ^ Comeback Cities: A Blueprint for Urban Neighborhood Revival By Paul S. Grogan, Tony Proscio. ISBN 0-8133-3952-9. Published 2002. Page 142. "Perhaps suburbanization was a 'natural' phenomenon—rising incomes allowing formerly huddled masses in city neighborhoods to breathe free on green lawn and leafy culs-de-sac. But, we will never know how natural it was, because of the massive federal subsidy that eased and accelerated it, in the form of tax, transportation and housing policies."
- ^ Land Development Calculations 2001 Walter Martin Hosack. "single-family detached housing" = "suburb houses" p133
- ^ "Housing Unit Characteristics by Type of Housing Unit, 2005" Energy Information Association
- ^ Barlow, Andrew L. (2003). Between fear and hope: globalization and race in the United States. Lanham, Maryland (Prince George's County): Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 0-7425-1619-9.
- ^ Noguera, Pedro (2003). City schools and the American dream: reclaiming the promise of public education. New York: Teachers College Press. ISBN 0-8077-4381-X.
- ^ Naylor, Larry L. (1999). Problems and issues of diversity in the United States. Westport, Conn.: Bergin & Garvey. ISBN 0-89789-615-7.
- ^ Miller, Carissa Moffat; Blevins, Audie (1 March 2005). "Battlement Mesa: a case study of community evolution". The Social Science Journal. 42 (1): 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.soscij.2004.11.001. ISSN 0362-3319. S2CID 143677128.
- ^ Yen, Hope. "White flight? Suburbs lose young whites to cities." Associated Press at Yahoo! News. Sunday 9 May 2010. Retrieved on 10 May 2010.
- ^ Minority Suburbanization
- ^ Kneebone; Holmes, Elizabeth; Natalie. "The growing distance between people and jobs in metropolitan America" (PDF). Bicycleuniverse.info.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "FHWA Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation - Safety | Federal Highway Administration". safety.fhwa.dot.gov. Archived from the original on 30 June 2024. Retrieved 3 January 2025.
- ^ Boyd (1960).
- ^ "Chanson francaise La banlieue 1931–1953 Anthologie". Fremeaux.com. Retrieved 2 January 2018.
- ^ Keil, Rob (2006). Little Boxes: The Architecture of a Classic Midcentury Suburb. Daly City, CA: Advection Media. ISBN 0-9779236-4-9.
Bibliography
[edit]- Archer, John; Paul J.P. Sandul, and Katherine Solomonson (eds.), Making Suburbia: New Histories of Everyday America. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2015.
- Baxandall, Rosalyn and Elizabeth Ewen. Picture Windows: How the Suburbs Happened. New York: Basic Books, 2000.
- Beauregard, Robert A. When America Became Suburban. University of Minnesota Press, 2006.
- Boyd, Robin (1960). The Australian Ugliness. Melbourne: Penguin Books.
- The Earliest Complete English Prose Salter,ed. by K. D. Bülbring. Early English Text Society, Original Series, 1891.
- Fishman, Robert. Bourgeois Utopias: The Rise and Fall of Suburbia. Basic Books, 1987; in U.S.
- Foxell, Clive (1996). Chesham Shuttle: The Story of a Metropolitan Branch Line (2nd ed.). Clive Foxell. ISBN 0-9529184-0-4.
- Galinou, Mireille. Cottages and Villas: The Birth of the Garden Suburb (2011), in England
- Green, Oliver (1987). The London Underground: An illustrated history. Ian Allan. ISBN 0-7110-1720-4.
- Green, Oliver, ed. (2004). Metro-Land (British Empire Exhibition 1924 reprinted ed.). Southbank Publishing. ISBN 1-904915-00-0. Archived from the original on 28 June 2008. Retrieved 22 April 2012.
- Harris, Richard. Creeping Conformity: How Canada Became Suburban, 1900–1960 (2004)
- Hayden, Dolores. Building Suburbia: Green Fields and Urban Growth, 1820–2000. Vintage Books, 2003.
- Horne, Mike (2003). The Metropolitan Line. Capital Transport. ISBN 1-85414-275-5.
- Jackson, Kenneth T. (1985). Crabgrass frontier: The suburbanization of the United States. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-504983-7. OCLC 11785435.
- Jackson, Alan (1986). London's Metropolitan Railway. David & Charles. ISBN 0-7153-8839-8.
- Psalter, London, British Library Add. MS. 17376
- Rowley, Trevor (2006). The English landscape in the twentieth century. Hambledon Continuum. ISBN 1-85285-388-3.
- Simpson, Bill (2003). A History of the Metropolitan Railway. Volume 1: The Circle and Extended Lines to Rickmansworth. Lamplight Publications. ISBN 1-899246-07-X.
- Stilgoe, John R. Borderland: Origins of the American Suburb, 1820–1939. Yale University Press, 1989.
- Teaford, Jon C. The American Suburb: The Basics. Routledge, 2008.
External links
[edit]Suburb
View on GrokipediaEtymology and Definition
Etymology
The English word suburb derives from the Latin suburbium, a compound of sub- ("under," "near," or "outside") and urbs ("city"), denoting districts lying adjacent to or beyond the walls of a city.[8] [9] In ancient Roman contexts, suburbium specifically referred to the extramural zones surrounding the urban core, often including villas, gardens, cemeteries, and markets situated outside the pomerium—the sacred boundary of the city proper.[8] [10] The term entered Middle English around 1350, primarily through Old French suburbe or subburbe, initially describing outlying parts around the edges of towns or cities.[10] [11] Early usages, such as in the Midland dialect, retained the connotation of peripheral settlements dependent on the central urban area for economic and social functions.[10] By the 14th century, it had displaced native Old English terms like underburg ("under-city"), reflecting Norman linguistic influences post-Conquest.[11] Over time, the word evolved to encompass broader residential extensions, though its core etymological sense of proximity to, yet distinction from, the city persisted.[8]Definitions and Regional Variations
A suburb is generally defined as a residential area located on the periphery of a larger city or metropolitan core, distinguished by lower population densities, predominantly single-family housing, and functional separation from urban centers through zoning that prioritizes residential use over mixed commercial activities.[2] This form emerged as an outgrowth of urban expansion, where proximity to the city enables commuting while offering space and quieter environments compared to dense inner-city districts.[12] Empirical analyses of metropolitan areas classify suburbs based on criteria such as commuting distance to employment hubs, housing typology, and infrastructure reliance, with densities typically ranging from 1,000 to 4,000 residents per square mile—far below urban cores exceeding 10,000.[1] In the United States, suburbs constitute expansive, low-density zones developed post-1945, characterized by automobile dependency, with over 50% of suburban households lacking access to robust public transit as of 2020, leading to average commute times of 25-30 minutes by car.[13] These areas often feature grid or curvilinear street layouts with large lots (averaging 0.25-0.5 acres per home) and strict single-use zoning, resulting in spatial isolation of residences from retail and services; by 2018, suburbs housed 55% of the U.S. population, up from 23% in 1950.[14] Regional data from the Northeast show denser inner-ring suburbs near legacy cities like Boston, while Sun Belt examples, such as Las Vegas outskirts, exhibit sprawl exceeding 2,000 square miles of developed land by 2020.[15] European suburbs vary more compactly due to historical constraints and regulatory frameworks, with densities often 5,000-10,000 residents per square kilometer and greater integration of multifamily housing, green spaces, and rail links; for instance, French banlieues around Paris blend 19th-century worker villages with post-1960s high-rise estates, fostering walkability and lower car ownership rates (under 400 vehicles per 1,000 residents in many cases).[16] In contrast to U.S. models, European planning emphasizes containment through greenbelts and urban growth boundaries, as seen in the UK's post-1947 New Towns like Stevenage, which by 2023 supported mixed densities averaging 20-30 dwellings per hectare while preserving rural edges.[17] German Vororte, such as those near Munich, incorporate terraced housing and transit-oriented development, with 70% of suburban trips feasible by foot, bike, or train, reflecting denser land-use patterns shaped by pre-automotive rail networks.[18] In Asia, suburban forms diverge sharply by economic stage: rapidly urbanizing nations like China feature peri-urban zones of high-rise apartments and industrial parks, as in Beijing's outskirts where densities surpass 15,000 per square kilometer amid state-driven expansion adding 1.5 million suburban residents annually from 2010-2020.[19] Southeast Asian examples, such as Jakarta's satellite towns, mix planned low-rise estates with informal settlements, yielding hybrid densities of 4,000-8,000 per square kilometer and heavy motorcycle reliance due to congested core access.[20] Australian suburbs mirror U.S. sprawl in outer rings like Sydney's west, with lot sizes averaging 600-800 square meters and car commuting dominant (over 70% of trips), though inner suburbs retain higher densities from early 20th-century rail suburbs.[21] These variations stem from causal factors like land availability, policy incentives, and transport infrastructure, with empirical studies confirming lower-density models correlate with higher per-capita emissions in Anglo-sphere contexts versus Europe's transit-efficient peripheries.[22]Historical Development
Ancient and Pre-Modern Suburbs
The term suburbium in ancient Rome referred to the zone immediately beyond the pomerium, the sacred boundary of the city, encompassing lands under urban influence but outside formal civic limits.[8] This area, extending roughly 100 stadia (about 18.5 kilometers) from Rome's walls by the late Republic, included a heterogeneous mix of elite estates, such as the luxurious horti (gardens) owned by figures like Maecenas in the Esquiline suburb, alongside denser habitations for freedmen, artisans, and laborers.[23] Archaeological evidence from sites along roads like the Via Appia reveals tombs, columbaria, and villas interspersed with workshops for pottery and metalwork, reflecting economic activities displaced from the crowded intra-urban core due to space constraints and fire risks.[24] Unlike modern suburbs, Roman suburbia lacked systematic residential planning for commuting; residents often walked or used carts for daily access to the city center, with the wealthy maintaining urban domus while using suburban properties for leisure or agriculture.[23] In ancient Greece, analogous peri-urban zones existed around poleis like Athens, where demes (rural townships) formed semi-autonomous extensions of the asty (city proper), supporting olive groves, vineyards, and smaller settlements.[25] These areas, part of the chora (countryside under civic control), housed yeoman farmers and metics (resident foreigners) who commuted on foot or by donkey to urban markets and assemblies, but lacked the formalized "suburban" designation seen in Rome; evidence from Attic demes like those in the Mesogeia plain indicates dispersed farmsteads rather than contiguous residential bands.[26] Similar patterns appeared in other Mediterranean civilizations, such as Etruscan cities preceding Rome, where extramural necropoleis and sanctuaries marked transitional zones blending urban and rural functions.[24] During the medieval period in Europe, suburbs—known as faubourgs in French (from faux bourg, or "false town")—emerged as unfortified extensions beyond city ramparts, often nucleating around gates for trade and crafts requiring open space, such as dyeing or brewing.[27] In cities like Paris by the 12th century, faubourgs like Saint-Antoine housed immigrant artisans and the indigent, comprising wooden structures vulnerable to fire and raids, with populations estimated at 10-20% of the intramural total in larger centers like London or Florence.[28] These zones grew organically due to overcrowding inside walls—exacerbated by population recovery post-1000 CE, reaching 300,000 in Paris by 1300—but remained economically tied to the core via foot traffic and markets, without mass transit enabling separation of home and work.[29] Periodic wall expansions, as in Bologna's 13th-century circuit incorporating prior faubourgs, integrated them into the urban fabric, underscoring their role as provisional overflows rather than planned retreats.[30] In the early modern era (c. 1500-1800), pre-industrial suburbs persisted as peripheral villages or estates for nobility seeking respite from urban density, as in London's emerging Westminster extensions or Vienna's Grinzing vineyards, where elites built summer residences accessible by carriage within hours.[31] Demographic pressures from trade booms—European urban population doubling to 10-15% by 1800—fostered ribbon development along roads, but sanitation issues, epidemics like the 1665 London plague killing 15% in suburban fringes, and feudal land controls limited sprawl.[32] These areas often mixed rural agriculture with proto-industrial activities, such as cloth finishing in English outskirts, reflecting causal ties to guild restrictions and land scarcity inside cities rather than ideological preferences for segregation.[33] By the 18th century, Enlightenment texts like those of Defoe described such zones as "sprawling appendages" valued for fresh air yet plagued by vagrancy, prefiguring industrial transformations without yet embodying commuter suburbia.[34]Industrial Era Origins
The Industrial Revolution, commencing in Britain circa 1760 with innovations in textile manufacturing and steam power, accelerated urbanization across Europe and North America by concentrating industrial production in cities, drawing rural migrants for factory employment and swelling urban populations from under 20% to over 50% in England and Wales by 1851.[35] This mass influx engendered acute overcrowding, inadequate sanitation, and epidemics such as cholera outbreaks in London in 1831-1832 and 1848-1849, which exposed the causal link between dense proletarian housing near factories and public health deterioration, compelling the affluent middle class—comprising professionals and merchants enriched by trade and early industry—to relocate to cleaner, less congested peripheries for reasons of hygiene, space, and social status.[36] Industrial suburbs initially housed workers in rudimentary tenements proximate to mills and foundries, but elite residential enclaves emerged as escapes from urban vice and pollution, reflecting a rational preference for detached living amid causal realities of soot-laden air and noise from machinery.[37] Technological advancements in transportation decoupled residence from workplace, birthing the commuter suburb model. Steam locomotives, operational on public lines from the Liverpool and Manchester Railway in 1830, reduced travel times to under an hour for distances of 20-30 miles, enabling daily returns from outlying villages to urban jobs; by the 1840s, regular rail services in U.S. cities like Boston and Philadelphia spawned early affluent suburbs such as Roxbury, Massachusetts, where property values rose 50% post-rail connection due to accessibility.[38] In Britain, rail companies actively promoted suburban plots, with the Great Western Railway extending lines westward from London by 1838 to foster villa developments; the 1836 opening of the London and Greenwich Railway, the first suburban commuter line, spurred ribbon growth along tracks, where land prices doubled within a decade as speculative builders erected semi-detached homes under bye-laws mandating setbacks and gardens from 1875 onward.[39] These innovations empirically inverted pre-industrial settlement patterns, where proximity to markets dictated location, by prioritizing personal mobility and revealing suburbs as a direct outcome of steam-era efficiency rather than mere fashion. By the late 19th century, electric streetcars from the 1880s amplified this trend in North America, with over 1,000 miles of track in U.S. cities by 1890 facilitating "streetcar suburbs" like those in Chicago's Ravenswood, where ridership surged 300% post-electrification, allowing middle-income families to afford horse-free commutes of 5-10 miles.[40] In continental Europe, similar patterns arose around Paris and Berlin, though slower due to regulatory hurdles; Germany's Ruhr industrial suburbs blended worker housing with bourgeois villas post-1871 unification, supported by state rail subsidies that lowered fares by 40%.[41] This era's suburban origins thus stemmed from industrialization's dual pressures—urban repulsion via environmental degradation and technological pull via transit—quantifiably evidenced by London's suburban population tripling to 2 million between 1851 and 1901, underscoring a pragmatic adaptation to causal forces of density and connectivity over ideological constructs.[42] ![Locust Street in Upper Darby, a historic Philadelphia-area streetcar suburb developed in the late 19th century][float-right]20th-Century Expansion
The expansion of suburbs in the early 20th century was primarily driven by advancements in mass transportation, particularly electric streetcars, which enabled residential development beyond dense urban cores while maintaining commuter access. In the United States, streetcar suburbs proliferated between 1890 and 1930, with developers aligning housing tracts along newly electrified rail lines to attract middle-class families seeking escape from city congestion and pollution.[43] These communities featured single-family homes on larger lots, often with deed restrictions enforcing uniformity and exclusivity, predating widespread zoning laws.[44] By the 1920s, the rise of the automobile further accelerated suburban growth, as personal vehicle ownership surged—U.S. registered cars increased by over 15 million during the decade—allowing settlements farther from urban centers without reliance on fixed rail schedules.[45] This shift favored curvilinear street layouts and garage-equipped homes, exemplified in regions like Philadelphia's outskirts, where bridge infrastructure supported cross-river commuting.[46] In the 1930s, despite the Great Depression, suburban areas captured nearly 85% of metropolitan population growth outside major exceptions like New York, with expansion rates exceeding core cities by over tenfold.[47] By 1940, suburbs housed about 19.5% of the U.S. population, up from negligible shares earlier in the century.[48] In Europe, the garden city movement, pioneered by Ebenezer Howard in his 1898 treatise Tomorrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform, influenced planned suburban developments emphasizing green spaces, limited densities, and self-contained communities. The first garden city, Letchworth, was established in 1903 in Hertfordshire, England, followed by Welwyn Garden City in 1920, promoting cooperative ownership and radial layouts to integrate urban amenities with rural aesthetics.[49] Similar garden suburbs emerged in continental Europe and Britain, such as Hampstead Garden Suburb (1907), countering industrial urbanization through deliberate low-rise, cottage-style housing amid parks.[50] These initiatives, while idealistic, laid foundational principles for 20th-century suburban planning, prioritizing health and community over profit-driven sprawl, though actual implementations often compromised on affordability due to land costs.[51]Post-World War II Boom
The post-World War II suburban boom in the United States was propelled by economic prosperity, demographic shifts, and government policies that facilitated mass homeownership and outward migration from cities. Suburban population share increased from 19.5% in 1940 to 30.7% by 1960, while homeownership rates rose from 44% to nearly 62% over the same period.[48] The Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, known as the GI Bill, provided low-interest, zero-down-payment loans to millions of returning veterans, enabling widespread purchases of single-family homes in developing suburban areas.[52] This policy, combined with Federal Housing Administration guarantees, lowered barriers to entry for middle-class families seeking larger living spaces amid the baby boom, which saw U.S. births peak at 4.3 million in 1957. Innovations in housing production accelerated the boom, exemplified by Levitt & Sons' development of Levittown, New York, starting in 1947. Using assembly-line techniques borrowed from wartime manufacturing, the firm constructed over 17,000 identical Cape Cod-style homes by 1951, selling for around $8,000 each—affordable on a single income and equipped with modern appliances.[53] Similar mass-produced communities proliferated nationwide, transforming farmland into grid-pattern neighborhoods with curvilinear streets, green lawns, and community amenities, catering to a cultural preference for privacy and domesticity post-Depression and war.[54] However, access was racially restricted; developers like Levitt imposed covenants barring sales to non-whites, and discriminatory lending practices under redlining limited benefits for Black veterans, resulting in suburbs that were initially over 90% white.[55] Federal infrastructure investments further enabled suburban expansion by easing commutes to urban jobs. The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 authorized over $25 billion for the Interstate Highway System, constructing 41,000 miles of limited-access roads by the 1970s, which connected suburbs to city centers and spurred commercial development along corridors.[56] This car-dependent framework, supported by rising automobile ownership—from 26 million vehicles in 1945 to 54 million by 1955—facilitated daily travel but also entrenched urban sprawl. Outside the U.S., similar though less explosive trends emerged. In Australia, post-war immigration and government building programs expanded housing stock by 50% from 1947 to 1961, outpacing a 41% population increase and fostering suburban growth in cities like Melbourne.[57] European countries experienced varied suburbanization, often tied to reconstruction efforts, but without the U.S. scale of private mass production or federal highways, relying more on public housing and rail extensions.[58]Physical and Infrastructural Features
Urban Planning and Layout
![Aerial view of suburban homes in Las Vegas illustrating typical low-density layout with curved streets and separated housing][float-right] Suburban urban planning emphasizes low-density residential development, typically featuring single-family detached homes on lots of 0.25 to 1 acre, separated from commercial and industrial zones through single-use zoning ordinances. This approach, rooted in early 20th-century zoning practices, enforces setbacks, minimum lot sizes, and height restrictions to maintain spacious, low-rise environments that prioritize privacy and green space over urban density.[59][60] Street layouts in suburbs commonly deviate from urban grid patterns, adopting curvilinear designs with loops, cul-de-sacs, and lollipop configurations to limit through-traffic, enhance pedestrian safety, and create a picturesque, non-industrial aesthetic. These patterns, which emerged prominently in mid-20th-century developments, reduce intersections and straight-line connectivity, thereby slowing vehicle speeds and integrating natural topography with winding roads lined by sidewalks and tree canopies.[61][62][60] Pioneering examples like Levittown, New York, established in 1947, exemplified mass-scale suburban layout by arranging standardized Cape Cod-style homes along curved streets with integrated community amenities such as schools and shopping centers, all optimized for automobile access via wide arterials and garages. This model influenced widespread adoption, achieving densities around 3-4 units per acre while allocating 20-30% of land for roads and open spaces.[53][63] Such planning principles facilitate family-centric living with ample yards for recreation but inherently promote car dependency, as residential pods are often isolated from employment centers, necessitating extensive road networks and contributing to higher per-capita infrastructure costs compared to compact urban forms. Empirical studies indicate suburban densities averaging 2-6 dwelling units per acre in U.S. contexts, contrasting sharply with urban cores exceeding 20 units per acre.[1][64]Housing Types and Development
Suburban housing predominantly consists of single-family detached homes, which form the core of low-density residential development characteristic of these areas. In the United States, many suburban communities exhibit over 90% single-family housing stock, as seen in places like Rio Rancho, New Mexico, and Buckeye, Arizona.[65] This dominance stems from zoning practices and market preferences favoring spacious lots and private yards over higher-density alternatives. Common architectural styles include ranch, colonial, and Craftsman homes, adapted for automobile-oriented living with attached garages and minimal shared walls.[66] Development of suburban housing accelerated after World War II, driven by mass-production techniques and government policies. Pioneering projects like Levittown, New York, constructed over 17,000 affordable single-family homes between 1947 and 1951 using assembly-line methods, making homeownership accessible to returning veterans via the GI Bill's low-interest loans.[54] The Interstate Highway System, authorized in 1956, further enabled sprawl by connecting suburbs to urban centers, boosting tract housing subdivisions developed by speculators on peripheral land.[4] By 1960, U.S. suburban population share had risen to 30.7% from 19.5% in 1940, with homeownership rates climbing to 62%.[48] Over subsequent decades, suburban housing evolved toward larger structures, with average new single-family home sizes reaching 2,480 square feet by 2021, reflecting demands for more bedrooms and amenities.[67] Early postwar ranch-style homes with open floor plans gave way to two-story colonials and oversized "McMansions" in edge suburbs during the 1980s and 1990s, often on larger lots but still emphasizing separation from multifamily units. While some inner suburbs incorporated townhouses or garden apartments, comprehensive zoning preserved single-family exclusivity in most developments, limiting housing-unit diversity compared to urban cores.[68] Recent trends show incremental diversification, with build-to-rent single-family communities and accessory dwelling units emerging in select suburbs to address affordability, though detached homes remain prevalent, capturing 25% of 2024 single-family permits in suburban counties.[69] This persistence underscores causal links between automobile dependency, family-oriented demographics, and land availability, which favor expansive, owner-occupied residences over dense alternatives.[70]Transportation and Accessibility
Suburbs characteristically feature low-density development that prioritizes private automobiles for transportation, with roadways and highways forming the primary infrastructure for accessibility to urban centers. In the United States, 92% of households own at least one vehicle, reflecting the structural car dependency inherent in suburban design where dispersed residential and commercial areas necessitate personal transport for daily mobility.[71] Public transit availability remains limited in suburban settings compared to urban cores, with only 6% of suburban residents using it regularly versus 21% in cities, due to lower population densities that render fixed-route services economically unviable.[72] Post-World War II highway development significantly enhanced suburban accessibility, as the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 funded the Interstate Highway System, enabling efficient commuting from outlying areas to employment hubs. Approximately 90% of suburban households owned cars by the mid-20th century, aligning with the expansion of limited-access highways that reduced travel times but reinforced automobile reliance.[73] Average one-way commute times in the U.S. stand at about 26 minutes, often longer in sprawling suburbs where single-occupancy vehicle trips predominate, contributing to congestion on radial arterials connecting residential zones to downtowns.[74] This car-centric model limits accessibility for non-drivers, such as the elderly or low-income individuals, exacerbating isolation in areas lacking walkable amenities or robust alternative transit options.[75]Socioeconomic Characteristics
Demographics and Family Dynamics
Suburban populations in the United States typically feature a higher proportion of families with children under 18 compared to urban cores, with 2020 Census data indicating that suburban areas absorbed much of the net domestic migration of young families seeking larger housing and perceived safety.[76] This demographic skew reflects a median age of around 36-42 years in many suburbs, slightly older than urban averages but younger than rural ones, driven by inflows of working-age adults and families.[77] Racial and ethnic diversity has increased markedly, with suburbs now hosting a larger share of minority populations than the national average; for instance, in major metropolitan suburbs, non-white residents often comprise over 40% of the population as of 2020, up from prior decades due to immigration and economic opportunities.[13] Median household incomes in suburban areas exceed urban and rural medians, frequently surpassing $100,000 in affluent examples, correlating with concentrations of professional and managerial occupations.[77][78] Family structures in suburbs emphasize nuclear households, with 71% of children residing in two-parent married families as of 2016-2018 data, higher than the 59% in urban areas and comparable to rural rates, attributable to selection effects where stable families migrate outward for space and amenities.[79] Nonmarital birth rates remain lower in suburbs, reinforcing two-parent dominance, while average household sizes hover around 2.5-2.6 persons, larger than urban singles-dominated units but smaller than historical norms.[79][80] These patterns persist amid broader U.S. trends of declining fertility, yet suburbs retain higher child populations per capita, with 2023 estimates showing sustained family-oriented growth in exurban rings.[81] Dynamics within suburban families often prioritize child-rearing in low-density environments, evidenced by higher rates of homeownership (over 70% in many areas) enabling multi-child households and backyard play, contrasting urban constraints.[77] Divorce rates, while not drastically divergent, align with socioeconomic stability, as higher incomes buffer family stresses per longitudinal studies, though recent Census reports note a 19.5% rise in median family income from 2020-2023, potentially stabilizing units amid economic pressures.[82] Extended family proximity remains moderate, with over 50% of suburban adults living within an hour's drive of relatives, facilitating intergenerational support without urban density.[83] These characteristics underscore suburbs' role as family-centric zones, selected by causal factors like school quality and crime rates lower than urban averages.[79]Economic Roles and Property Values
Suburbs predominantly serve as residential zones for households commuting to urban employment centers, fostering economic interdependence between suburban living and central city jobs. This commuter dynamic emerged prominently in the post-World War II era and persists, with approximately 70% of U.S. metropolitan residents living in suburbs that rely on highway and rail access for workforce mobility. [14] However, suburbs have evolved to host significant economic activity, including retail, light industry, and office parks; by the early 21st century, suburban areas accounted for over 60% of metropolitan job growth in the U.S., surpassing central cities in employment concentration. [84] This shift reflects causal factors like lower land costs and zoning flexibility, enabling businesses to expand without urban density constraints, though it has contributed to longer average commutes—rising 7% in major U.S. metros from 2002 to 2012 due to sprawl patterns. [85] Property values in suburbs typically exceed those in comparable urban fringes due to demand for larger lots, perceived safety, and access to amenities like schools, with median U.S. suburban home prices reaching $450,000 by mid-2024, compared to $400,000 in urban cores. [86] Appreciation rates have accelerated in suburbs amid remote work trends post-2020, with low-density suburban values increasing 36% from March 2020 to March 2023—outpacing many urban markets—driven by preferences for space over centrality. [87] In 2023, suburban home values rose 5.6% nationally, adding $2.4 trillion to U.S. housing wealth, fueled by inventory shortages and migration from high-cost cities. [88] These gains stem from empirical supply-demand imbalances rather than policy distortions alone, though zoning restrictions in suburbs can inflate values by limiting new construction, as evidenced by slower supply responses in metro peripheries. [89] Economically, suburban property appreciation supports household wealth accumulation, particularly for middle-income families, but it also widens regional disparities; data from 2021 onward show suburban zip codes outperforming urban ones in value growth by 2-3 percentage points annually in key markets. [89] [90] While some analyses attribute this to pandemic-induced shifts, long-term trends link it to suburban advantages in lot size and infrastructure investment, yielding average annual appreciation of 3-5% since 2000, aligned with national housing norms but amplified by lower volatility. [91] In Europe and Asia, similar patterns hold, with suburban rings around cities like London and Tokyo exhibiting 4-6% yearly gains tied to commuter rail expansions, underscoring transport infrastructure's role in value causal chains. [92]Education, Safety, and Community Services
Suburban school districts in the United States generally exhibit higher student performance metrics than urban districts, with suburban eighth-grade students scoring approximately 12 percentile points higher on achievement tests compared to urban peers.[93] This disparity correlates with greater per-pupil expenditures in suburban areas, averaging $12,699 in fiscal year 2017 versus $10,510 in cities, driven by local property tax revenues from higher home values.[94] National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data by locale further confirm suburban advantages in mathematics and reading proficiency, attributable to factors including lower student-teacher ratios, more experienced faculty, and higher parental involvement linked to family demographics.[95] Safety in suburbs surpasses that of urban areas, with violent victimization rates in 2022 at 23.9 per 1,000 persons aged 12 or older in suburban locales, compared to 33.4 in urban areas.[96] FBI Uniform Crime Reporting data reinforce this pattern, showing urban violent crime rates exceeding suburban ones by factors of 1.5 to 2 times across recent years, a trend persisting despite national declines.[97] Causal factors include lower population density, socioeconomic homogeneity, and self-selection of families prioritizing stability, which reduce opportunities for property and violent offenses prevalent in denser urban environments.[98] Community services in suburbs emphasize family-centric provisions such as parks, libraries, and recreational programs, often delivered through fragmented local governments that enable tailored, efficient responses via property tax funding.[99] Empirical assessments indicate suburban residents report higher life satisfaction tied to these localized amenities, contrasting with urban strains from higher demand and centralized administration.[100] However, car dependency can limit access for non-drivers, though volunteer-based fire and police services typically achieve faster response times due to proximate staffing.[101]Global Patterns
North America
Suburbs in North America, particularly in the United States and Canada, are defined by low-density residential development featuring predominantly single-family detached homes, extensive reliance on automobiles for transportation, and separation from urban cores via highways and arterial roads. This pattern emerged prominently in the mid-20th century, facilitated by federal policies such as the U.S. Interstate Highway System established in 1956 and zoning laws that prioritized single-family housing zones, resulting in average suburban densities of around 5.8 housing units per acre in typical subdivisions. In the U.S., approximately 52% of the population resided in suburban areas as of recent estimates, with growth concentrated in exurban and Sun Belt regions like Arizona, Nevada, and Texas, where land availability and economic migration drive expansion.[102][103][104] Canadian suburbs exhibit similar sprawl but with comparatively higher densities and less extreme separation from city centers, owing to stronger public transit investments and urban growth boundaries in provinces like Ontario. About two-thirds of Canada's population lives in suburban forms, often integrated with multi-family housing in outer rings of metropolitan areas such as Toronto and Vancouver, contrasting with the more uniform single-family dominance in U.S. counterparts. Differences stem from planning variances: Canadian municipalities enforce more mixed-use zoning in newer developments, reducing pure residential monoculture, while U.S. suburbs maintain stricter Euclidean zoning that limits density to preserve property values and low traffic volumes.[105][106][107] Recent demographic shifts have increased ethnic diversity in North American suburbs, with minority populations rising faster than in urban cores; for instance, U.S. large suburbs saw their non-white share grow from 25% in 2000 to over 40% by 2020, driven by immigration and economic opportunities in peripheral job centers. Property values in these areas benefit from infrastructural investments, though car dependency elevates per capita energy use and contributes to longer commutes averaging 27 minutes in U.S. metros. In both nations, suburbs accommodate family-oriented demographics, with higher homeownership rates—around 70% in U.S. suburbs versus 50% nationally—supported by larger lot sizes averaging 0.2-0.5 acres.[13][108][109]Europe
Suburbanization in Europe originated in the 19th century, driven by industrial growth and railway development, which enabled commuting from peripheral residential areas to urban centers. In the United Kingdom, early suburbs emerged around expanding cities like London and Manchester as early as the 1820s, with affluent residents building villas to escape urban density.[39] [110] The interwar period (1918–1939) marked a surge in UK suburban expansion, influenced by garden city ideals promoting low-density, green-space housing; by 1939, over 4 million homes had been built in England's outer suburbs, often semi-detached houses served by trams and buses.[111] In continental Europe, similar patterns developed, though constrained by denser historical settlements and stricter land-use planning.[42] Post-World War II reconstruction accelerated suburban growth across Western Europe, with car ownership rising and policies favoring peripheral development; between the mid-1950s and early 2000s, European urban land area expanded by 78% while population grew only 33%, indicating sprawl but at densities far exceeding North American counterparts.[112] European suburbs typically average 6,600 residents per square mile, compared to lower figures in U.S. suburbs, supporting greater walkability and public transit integration.[113] In France, banlieues—suburbs encircling Paris and other cities—expanded rapidly from the 1950s to 1970s through state-led high-rise projects (grands ensembles) to house rural migrants and workers, resulting in over 3 million units by 1973; these areas often feature higher unemployment (up to 20% in some zones) and crime rates than city centers, linked to socioeconomic isolation.[114] [115] German Vororte (suburbs), such as those around Munich or Berlin, emphasize single-family homes and infill development, with recent densification policies adding multifamily units to accommodate population growth; suburban regions here maintain densities supporting efficient rail networks.[116] [117] Central and Eastern European suburbanization gained momentum after 1990, following the fall of communism, as private car use and market reforms spurred outward migration from decaying urban cores; in Poland and Hungary, suburbs grew faster than cities, attracting middle-class families seeking detached housing.[118] [119] Overall, European suburbs blend historical villages with modern expansions, prioritizing mixed-use zoning and sustainability amid ongoing debates over sprawl's environmental costs.[120]Asia and Oceania
In Australia, suburban areas form the predominant residential form in urban regions, with more than 76% of the population residing in major cities characterized by low-density detached housing and peripheral growth.[121] Capital city populations, such as Melbourne and Sydney, expanded by 142,600 and 107,500 people respectively in the 2023-24 financial year, much of this increment occurring in outer suburban zones through new dwelling construction.[122] Dwelling stock increased by 1.4% nationwide in 2021-22, with houses comprising 61.7% of additions, reflecting a preference for single-family suburban homes over higher-density alternatives.[123] This pattern stems from historical post-World War II planning emphasizing car-oriented sprawl, resulting in extensive commuter suburbs reliant on automobiles for accessibility. New Zealand exhibits comparable suburban dominance, with 51% of the population in major urban areas as of 2024, featuring expansive low-density neighborhoods around centers like Auckland and Wellington.[124] Suburbs and localities, delineated by Statistics New Zealand, encompass communities with population estimates highlighting residential clusters outside dense cores, supported by data layers for urban-rural transitions.[125] These areas prioritize family-oriented housing, though recent analyses identify emerging growth suburbs based on property value trajectories and infrastructure potential.[126] Asian suburbanization contrasts sharply with Oceania's model, often integrating higher densities and public transit dependence due to land constraints and policy directives. In Japan, suburbs manifest as commuter towns encircling metropolises like Tokyo, where commuting zones capture 87% of intra-area travel via rail, sustaining dense residential bands with efficient mass transit rather than individual vehicles.[127] This rail-centric structure, serving millions daily, underscores causal links between infrastructure investment and suburban viability in high-population contexts.[128] China's suburban expansion, accelerated by economic reforms since 1990, involves state-orchestrated deconcentration from urban cores in cities like Beijing and Nanjing, reallocating industrial land to residential and commercial uses amid population redistribution.[129][130] Post-2008 policies promoted peripheral development, correlating with reduced traffic crash densities in suburbs through mixed land uses and expressway density, though unplanned sprawl has spurred residential encroachment.[131][132] In India, suburban growth fuels broader urbanization, with urban areas projected to house 600 million people—or 40% of the population—by 2036, driven by peripheral expansions around metros like Mumbai and Delhi, including 2,774 new towns formed between 2001 and 2011.[133][134] This outward shift, outpacing core city limits, arises from natural population increase, rural-to-urban migration, and reclassification, yet strains infrastructure without corresponding density controls.[135] Southeast Asian suburbs, surrounding megacities in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand, increasingly feature gated communities as a response to security demands and private development, blending low-rise housing with commercial nodes in expanding peri-urban zones.[136] Urban expansion here, including private cities in Indonesia, contributes to inequality by prioritizing affluent enclaves, while overall urban populations generate 80% of regional GDP despite occupying limited land.[137][138] These patterns reflect market-driven suburbanization tempered by governance variations, differing from Oceania's more uniform public-led sprawl.Africa, Latin America, and Other Regions
In sub-Saharan Africa, suburban development remains limited and uneven compared to industrialized regions, with formal suburbs primarily concentrated in South Africa, where areas like Sandhurst in Johannesburg feature high-value real estate, gated communities, and low-density housing for affluent residents, reflecting post-apartheid economic segregation.[139] [140] Across the continent, rapid urbanization at 3.5% annually drives peripheral expansion, but this manifests more as dense informal settlements and townships—such as Soweto near Johannesburg—than planned, automobile-oriented suburbs, with insufficient infrastructure exacerbating vulnerabilities like flooding and service gaps.[141] [142] By 2050, urban populations are projected to double to nearly 1 billion, intensifying sprawl in cities like Lagos and Nairobi, where elite enclaves coexist with slums comprising over 50% of urban dwellers in some areas.[143] [144] In Latin America, suburbanization has accelerated since the mid-20th century, characterized by extensive sprawl in megacities like Mexico City, São Paulo, and Bogotá, where peripheral growth exploits cheaper land near transport corridors, resulting in fragmented landscapes of formal middle-class neighborhoods interspersed with informal, poverty-stricken settlements.[145] [146] Urban expansion rates, analyzed via nighttime lights data from 1996 to 2010, reveal low-density peripheral development covering vast areas, often with illegal land use and inadequate regulation, contributing to environmental strain and social inequality.[147] [148] The region, 81% urbanized as of 2024, sees suburbs as extensions of core cities rather than distinct entities, with higher densities than North American models and reliance on informal economies in sprawling zones.[149] [150] In other developing regions, such as parts of the Middle East and smaller Pacific islands, suburban patterns echo those in Africa and Latin America, featuring peri-urban growth amid high urbanization but with variations like oil-driven gated compounds in Gulf states or climate-vulnerable expansions in island nations; however, data remains sparse, underscoring global disparities in formalized suburban infrastructure.[151]Debates and Empirical Assessments
Environmental Impacts and Sustainability
Suburban expansion drives urban sprawl, characterized by low-density development that consumes significantly more land per capita than compact urban forms, resulting in habitat fragmentation, deforestation, and reduced biodiversity. Empirical analyses of U.S. metropolitan regions show sprawl converts agricultural and natural lands at rates up to 2.5 times higher than population growth, disrupting wildlife corridors and increasing edge effects that degrade ecosystems.[152][153] This pattern also elevates infrastructure demands, including roads and utilities, which fragment landscapes and amplify stormwater runoff, contributing to water pollution through higher impervious surface coverage—studies report up to 30-50% more runoff in sprawled areas compared to dense cities.[154][155] Transportation-related emissions represent a primary environmental drawback, as suburban residents exhibit higher vehicle miles traveled (VMT) due to separation of homes, workplaces, and services, averaging 20-40% more VMT per capita than urban dwellers. A UC Berkeley study of U.S. households quantified this effect, finding suburbs account for about 50% of metropolitan household greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions despite comprising less than half the population, driven by gasoline consumption in single-occupancy vehicles. Per capita carbon footprints in suburbs exceed those in urban cores by 20-50%, with a 2021 United Nations University analysis confirming suburban patterns yield the highest emissions among urban, suburban, and rural typologies, totaling up to 2.5-3.0 tons CO2-equivalent per person annually more than dense cities. Energy use in larger suburban homes further compounds this, with single-family dwellings requiring 50-100% more heating and cooling energy per capita than multifamily urban units, per PNAS modeling of U.S. census data.[156][157][158] Counterbalancing these impacts, suburbs often provide more per capita green space—up to 2-5 times that of urban centers—which supports localized carbon sequestration via trees and lawns, stormwater absorption, and biodiversity refugia. Vegetation in suburban yards and parks can offset 10-20% of household emissions through photosynthesis in temperate climates, while lower population density mitigates urban heat island intensification compared to high-rise cores. However, these benefits diminish with poor maintenance or conversion to impervious lawns, and overall net environmental costs remain higher due to sprawl's scale.[159][160] Sustainability efforts in suburbs focus on retrofitting for efficiency, including adoption of building codes mandating solar panels and insulation, which reduced per-home energy use by 15-25% in select U.S. developments since 2010, and transit-oriented clusters that cut VMT by 10-20% where implemented. Challenges include entrenched car dependency, with only 5-10% of suburban trips feasible by public transit in most U.S. areas, hindering emission reductions, and vulnerability to climate extremes like flooding, where sprawl's drainage issues amplify risks by 20-30% over denser forms. Peer-reviewed assessments emphasize densification near existing infrastructure as key to viability, though political resistance to zoning changes limits progress. Brookings data from 2023 highlights suburbs emitting up to four times the household GHGs of urban cores, underscoring the need for targeted policies like electrification and green corridors to align suburban growth with net-zero goals.[161][162][163]Social and Cultural Critiques
Critics of suburbia, particularly from mid-20th-century urban theorists, have contended that suburban design promotes conformity and homogenization, exemplified by uniform "cookie-cutter" housing developments that suppress individual expression and foster a culture of sameness.[164] Lewis Mumford, in The City in History (1961), characterized American suburbs as escapist "asylums" preserving illusions of privacy and security while isolating residents in sterile, automobile-dependent enclaves that erode communal vitality.[165][166] Such perspectives, often rooted in a preference for dense urban forms, argue that suburbs dismantle traditional social bonds by prioritizing private yards over public spaces, leading to weakened neighborhood ties.[167] Social isolation represents another focal point of critique, with observers claiming that low-density layouts and reliance on cars diminish face-to-face interactions, particularly affecting women confined to domestic roles in isolated homes.[167] This view posits suburbs as psychologically stultifying, breeding boredom and alienation amid expansive lawns and separated uses of space, as opposed to the organic encounters of walkable urban cores.[168] However, these assertions frequently derive from anecdotal or ideological analyses by urban planners rather than broad empirical validation; studies indicate suburban residents often report higher life satisfaction and happiness than urban counterparts, suggesting critiques may overemphasize design flaws while underweighting preferences for autonomy and reduced density.[100][169] Culturally, suburbs have been lambasted for embodying materialism and consumerism, serving as the "spiritual home" of overconsumption under capitalism, where sprawling homes and lawns symbolize status through acquisition rather than communal or aesthetic values.[170] Detractors argue this fosters a shallow pursuit of goods—shiny appliances, vehicles, and manicured exteriors—at the expense of deeper social or intellectual engagement, reinforcing a cycle of debt and dissatisfaction masked by affluence.[164] These cultural indictments, prevalent in literary depictions of "suburban malaise," often reflect elite disdain for middle-class aspirations, yet empirical patterns show suburban households achieving greater family stability and economic security, challenging the narrative of inherent cultural vacuity.[171] Academic sources advancing such views, including those from sociology departments, exhibit a systemic tilt toward urban-centric ideals, potentially biasing interpretations against suburban empirical outcomes like lower crime and higher subjective well-being.[172][100]Racial and Economic Segregation Claims
Claims that suburbs inherently foster racial and economic segregation often attribute this to exclusionary zoning practices, historical redlining, and discriminatory lending, which purportedly confine minorities to urban cores while reserving suburbs for whites and the affluent.[173][174] Proponents of this view, including some urban policy analysts, argue that post-World War II suburban development, enabled by federal highway programs and FHA policies favoring single-family zoning, systematically excluded non-whites, perpetuating disparities into the present.[175] However, empirical assessments reveal that while historical policies contributed to initial patterns, ongoing segregation is more nuanced, influenced by income differentials, group preferences, and self-sorting rather than zoning alone.[176][177] U.S. Census data from 2010 to 2020 indicate a continued, albeit gradual, decline in metropolitan racial segregation, with black-white dissimilarity indices falling by 7-14% across pairwise groups, except for Asian-white measures which stabilized.[178] Suburbs, once predominantly white, now house the majority of the nation's population growth for all major racial groups, with non-white suburban residents comprising over 50% of suburbanites in many metros by 2020, exceeding national diversity averages.[13] This diversification reflects minority suburbanization trends since the 1970s, including the emergence of predominantly black and Hispanic suburbs, driven by economic mobility and access to employment rather than exclusionary barriers.[179] Studies decomposing segregation causes find that density zoning explains only a modest portion—around 10-20% in some models—of persistent patterns, with stronger correlations to socioeconomic status and voluntary clustering for cultural or safety reasons.[176][180] Economic segregation claims similarly emphasize zoning's role in inflating suburban housing costs, allegedly pricing out lower-income and minority households. Yet, econometric analyses attribute much of this to Tiebout sorting, where families select suburbs for superior schools, lower crime, and fiscal services, outcomes tied to local governance rather than race per se.[181] From 1991 to 2022, racial-economic school segregation decreased at the district level but persisted within metros due to income gaps, with suburbs showing integrated income distributions in growing areas like the Sun Belt.[182] Critiques of overattributing causation to zoning note that preferences for neighborhood homogeneity—evident in surveys where blacks and whites alike prioritize safety and peer groups—explain residual segregation better than regulatory constraints, especially as minority homeownership rates in suburbs rose 15-20% post-2000.[183][184] Academic sources advancing strong anti-zoning narratives often underweight these preference-based mechanisms, potentially reflecting institutional biases toward structural explanations over individual agency.[185] In sum, while suburbs exhibit uneven integration, data refute blanket claims of systemic exclusion, highlighting instead adaptive diversification and choice-driven patterns amid broader desegregation trends.[186]Evidence-Based Benefits and Achievements
![05_Suburban_homes_in_Las_Vegas_-_American_suburbia_aerial_view.jpg][float-right] Suburban areas consistently exhibit lower rates of violent crime compared to urban centers, contributing to enhanced personal safety for residents. Data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics indicate that victimization rates for personal crimes, such as robbery and assault, are lower in suburban locales than in central cities for individuals aged 12 and older.[187] Recent analyses of 2023 crime trends further highlight numerous suburbs ranking among the safest communities, with property crime rates below national averages in over 90% of studied suburban areas near major cities.[188] Homeownership rates in suburbs surpass those in urban areas, enabling greater wealth accumulation through equity buildup and property value appreciation. In the United States, suburban households achieve homeownership levels around 70-75%, compared to approximately 60% in urban settings, a disparity rooted in available land for single-family dwellings and zoning policies favoring detached homes.[189] This structure has historically supported family stability, with suburbs hosting higher proportions of married-couple families with children—43% of suburban adults live in such households versus 19% in urban areas—fostering environments conducive to child-rearing and intergenerational mobility.[77] Empirical assessments of quality of life reveal modest advantages for suburban living, particularly in time-use patterns and subjective well-being. Intrametropolitan studies using activity data show suburban residents experiencing slightly higher overall life satisfaction due to greater residential space, reduced density, and access to private amenities like yards, which correlate with lower reported stress levels.[190] [191] Suburban school districts, benefiting from property tax revenues, often demonstrate superior educational outcomes, including higher graduation rates and standardized test proficiency exceeding urban counterparts by 5-10 percentage points in many metropolitan regions.[192] Post-World War II suburban expansion achieved widespread middle-class housing access, with developments like Levittown providing affordable single-family homes to over 17,000 families by 1951, catalyzing a national homeownership surge from 44% in 1940 to 62% by 1960.[193] These patterns have sustained economic productivity, as suburban proximity to urban job centers—via commuting infrastructure—supports workforce participation while offering detached living that empirical data links to improved family cohesion and reduced social pathologies.[194]Recent Developments and Outlook
Post-COVID Suburbanization Trends
During the COVID-19 pandemic, urban-to-suburban migration accelerated in the United States, driven by desires for larger living spaces, reduced density to mitigate virus transmission, and the rapid adoption of remote work. From 2020 to 2021, net domestic migration from primary urban counties to suburban and exurban areas increased, with exurbs—communities beyond immediate suburbs—experiencing some of the fastest population gains as residents sought affordability and proximity to nature while maintaining access to urban job markets. This shift was particularly pronounced among higher-income households and families with children, who prioritized home offices and outdoor amenities over city-center apartments.[195][196] Post-2021, suburban growth persisted but moderated as pandemic restrictions eased and hybrid work models stabilized. U.S. Census Bureau data for July 2023 to June 2024 indicate that exurban areas continued to outpace urban cores in population growth, with high housing costs in cities and sustained remote work opportunities—reaching 13.8% of workers in 2023, more than double pre-pandemic levels—sustaining demand for suburban housing. Suburban markets maintained strength into 2024-2025, with real estate analyses showing preferences for larger homes and lower densities amid ongoing affordability pressures in urban centers. However, large U.S. cities reversed earlier declines, growing in 94% of cases during the same period, suggesting a partial urban rebound among younger, single demographics less tied to remote setups.[195][197][198] Globally, similar patterns emerged in developed economies, though data is sparser and trends less uniform. In Europe and parts of Asia, early-pandemic outflows to suburbs increased by up to 20% in some regions, fueled by remote work and policy responses like lockdowns, but overall migration scales remained low post-2022, with limited evidence of permanent de-urbanization. Causal factors include persistent remote work enabling longer commutes or none at all, alongside economic incentives like lower suburban property taxes and crime rates compared to revitalizing but strained cities. These trends challenge pre-pandemic urban densification narratives, highlighting suburbs' adaptability to technological shifts in labor markets.[199][200][201]Technological and Policy Influences
![Aerial view of Dallas skyline and surrounding suburbs illustrating modern suburban expansion][float-right] The widespread adoption of remote work following the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly influenced suburban growth, enabling workers to relocate farther from urban centers while maintaining employment. A 2024 study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences analyzed migration data from 2019 to 2022, finding that remote work reduced commute necessities, leading to increased residential choices in suburban areas, with nearly 60% of urban outflow directed to proximate suburbs rather than exurbs.[202] This shift persisted into 2024, with U.S. Census Bureau data indicating 13.3% of workers primarily remote, down slightly from 2023 but stable enough to sustain demand for larger suburban homes offering space for home offices.[203] Advancements in broadband infrastructure and smart home technologies have further supported suburban appeal by mitigating isolation and enhancing livability. High-speed internet expansions, accelerated by federal programs like the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, have equipped many suburban areas with fiber-optic networks, facilitating seamless remote collaboration and streaming.[204] Integration of IoT devices for energy management and security in new suburban developments has reduced operational costs and environmental footprints, with reports noting up to 20% energy savings in equipped homes as of 2025.[205] On the policy front, zoning reforms in the 2020s have aimed to adapt suburban landscapes to housing shortages while preserving low-density characteristics. States such as Connecticut and New York enacted laws by 2025 compelling suburbs to permit multifamily housing and accessory dwelling units, overriding local exclusions to boost supply amid rising prices.[206] [207] These changes, including New York City's 2024 "City of Yes" amendments increasing floor area ratios in suburban zones, seek to accommodate density near transit without mandating high-rise urbanization.[208] Federal tax policies, such as the mortgage interest deduction, continue to incentivize homeownership in suburbs, though critiques highlight their role in perpetuating sprawl over compact development.[209] Emerging policies promoting electric vehicle infrastructure and green retrofits are reshaping suburban planning, with subsidies under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act funding charging stations in over 50% of new suburban projects by 2025.[59] These measures address sustainability concerns empirically linked to higher suburban emissions from car dependency, potentially curbing future expansion if urban incentives strengthen.[210]Future Challenges and Adaptations
Suburbs face escalating climate risks, including intensified flooding, heatwaves, and infrastructure strain, which disproportionately affect low-lying or expansive developments due to their reliance on extensive road networks and single-family homes vulnerable to extreme weather. For instance, coastal suburbs in the U.S. have experienced increased high-tide flooding that damages roads and utilities, with projections indicating a tripling of such events by 2050 under moderate emissions scenarios.[211] Adaptations include retrofitting with permeable pavements and elevated structures, as piloted in regions like New Jersey, where economic analyses estimate unmitigated risks could cost billions in repairs by mid-century.[212] Demographic pressures, particularly an aging population and influx from urban areas, challenge suburban models predicated on car dependency and family-oriented designs. By 2050, urban populations globally, including suburbs, are expected to include a larger share of seniors requiring accessible housing and services, yet many U.S. suburbs lack sufficient public transit, exacerbating isolation for non-drivers.[213] Remote work trends, accelerated post-2020, have driven suburban population growth—evident in 2023-2025 data showing net migration to outer rings for affordable, spacious homes—but this sustains high per-capita vehicle miles traveled unless offset by local job hubs or e-commerce logistics.[214][215] Policy responses involve zoning reforms for mixed-use developments and "15-minute" neighborhoods, enabling seniors to access amenities without driving, as tested in European suburban pilots.[216] Sustainability demands reductions in suburban energy footprints, where single-detached homes account for higher operational emissions than denser urban forms, potentially offsetting remote work's commute savings. Empirical models suggest that while work-from-home cuts transport emissions by up to 20% in some U.S. metros, increased home heating and cooling could negate gains without efficiency upgrades like solar integration or electrification.[210] Resilience strategies emphasize decentralized infrastructure, such as community microgrids and green corridors, which leverage suburban land availability for carbon sequestration—contrasting denser cities' constraints—and have shown viability in simulations for withstanding disruptions like power outages.[217] Economic viability hinges on public-private investments, with 2025 forecasts indicating suburban areas balancing growth through innovative financing for resilient retrofits amid housing shortages amplified by climate-displaced demand.[218][219]References
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/suburb
