Pulled up a snippit today with the catchy headline "Suburbia's March To Oblivion". The title did its job and I dutifully pulled up the link. The author of the short piece came straight out and announced that suburbia was doomed 
because of the mortgage "crisis". He continued to point out that some professors in universities have been calling for the obliteration of suburban life in favor of a return to urban locations, leaving vast swaths of suburbia to decay and crime, etc. etc. By 2025, one academic pronounced. All this was too much for the author who, apparently gleefully, predicted that the "frantic selling" was only the beginning of a profound change in American life. To me, it sounded like something out of a "Mad Max" movie. I think they actually want this to happen...
Oh, then I noticed that it was from the New York Times. In the business section, no less.
Relieved, I set the article aside until now. Only a writer for the NYT would be so misguided as to write of a normal economic cycle like it was the end of time, and of course to rely on college professors (with unknown personal agendas) for his research. I was sad (but not overly surprised, sorry Gil) to see our own Gil Smart quoted prominently in the article. At least he voiced the one concern about this sillyness.
Read it here. I just remembered why I don't rely on "the times" when I'm interested in our times.
I too discount anything that originates from the NYTimes.
As for the death of surburbia? Never happen. Surburbia has evolved. We now have our own small town atmosphere with employment, services, shopping and reasonably close by employment centers. We don't need the center city as in the past.
Long live surburbia. It's closer to the country.
I don't think I've ever read such a gross over-exaggeration as this:
"The result, he says, could be that low-density suburbs "may become what inner cities became in the 1960's and 1970's - slums characterized by poverty, crime, and decay."
Slums? Really? I just can't quite figure how he came to that conclusion. I did notice today, ironically, that there are a number of fairly newer homes listed as short-sales. But, I failed to see the "poverty, crime and decay" reveal itself on those MLS photos!
OK, I guess you people haven't been traveling to the inner suburbs of cities larger than Lancaster? Check out large swaths of poorly built, unattractive housing around SE Portland, OR, and tell me this isn't decaying!
I wouldn't be so dismissive of what we planners are suggesting is likely to happen (not that we want it to happen!)
Homefinders, Real Estate in MD & VA, Lenn Harley, Broker, New & Resale Homes
Great point, Lenn - it isn't about cities vs. suburbia anymore. I live in a borough and there are 18 in Lancaster County alone - we used to be "suburbs" of Lancaster City 150 years ago but now have identities and community centers of our own.
Jeannie Kontis - Lancaster Real Estate, Lancaster PA Homes for Sale
I agree - this sounds like something designed to pit city folk against suburban folk - a steady thread I've observed.
"You People..." "We planners" -I afraid I don't follow the thought. I'd love to hear from any Portland area real estate pros who can support that doom is impending for the suburbs there. In my opinion, crime and decay are a neighborhood phenomena, not endemic of a class within society. And, the situation can be turned around within a few years of community involvement. White flight was a reality due to social engineering in the sixties and seventies that scared families away. Similar conditions do not exist in the "suburbs" of the 21st century.
Oh, and by the way I know different professional planners and I've never heard them call for the dissolution of the fabric of society.