Older Suburbs

Everywhere I turn I read about the plight of our older suburbs.
Cities are enjoying a renaissance, as boomers crave the ability to
live near where they take in art, culture, and alcohol. Outer suburbs
are where the biggest growth is, as both young families and big box
retail stores love the cheap land and new infrastructure.

Left behind and left in the middle are our older suburbs. The poor in
our cities that are pushed out by gentrification often end up in these
areas. Higher social service burdens and aging infrastructure cause
those who have the means to flee further from urban centers. As a
result, our older suburbs are feeling the double pain our cities felt
a decade ago: a dwindling tax base and soaring costs.

What to do? Two things come to mind, both traditionally urban
solutions, one easier to do than in the city and one harder to do.
The easier thing is for governments to be pro-active in working with
private developers to assemble multi-tenant lots. Whether
residential, retail, or commercial, these things rarely get done
without government intervention, and this kind of in-fill development
can bolster a sagging municipality and stem the unceasing outward
march of sprawl. In-fill development in the suburbs, no matter how
old they are, is easier than in urban areas, because issues of land
fragmentation, environmental cleanup, and lot size are just less
messy.

A second thing, harder to do than in cities, is mass transit.
Transit-oriented development isn't a panacea, but if done well it sure
can rejuvenate an aging area by providing activity and opportunity in
an environmentally friendly and aesthetically pleasing way. Mixing of
uses, pedestrian walkways, and alternatives to cars and roads are all
the kinds of the things older suburbs need to come back to life.