We Might Be Able to Fix the Suburbs 

And the artificially created ones outside of the residential areas, are just large businesses making something feel like a Disney Land commercial area. Instead we could have something closer with smaller independent businesses, working together as a community.

@ LOL...."working together as a community"......LOL.... how is that EVER going to happen? especially in the US?

@ And smaller independent businesses? heavy regulation lobbied by huge corporations prevent those from existing anymore.

You can make yourself miserable, complaining about all the things you don't like, or you can just move somewhere you do like. There is no money, and it's too big of a job to go and bulldoze the existing suburbs and build something a better way. It's just fantasy to think it will change.

Main streets don't thrive with high rent and expensive labor. Walmart/Costco is cheap because giant trucks bring massive amounts of inventory which gets forklifted to the aisles they need to be in. A tiny mom & pop store needs shelf stockers (which they can't afford) and is stocked with a truck that illegally blocks the road in front. Urbanization thrives when you have a two-class society which allows you to have a poor working class that's easy to exploit. When you improve human rights, then suddenly that model collapses. Dubai was built urban with cheap immigrant labor who was treated terribly. China was built urban by exploiting laborers as well. In the US, our urban cities love being sanctuary cities because undocumented immigrants = undocumented labor exploitation = exactly what Caesar Chavez fought against. Economy of scale is vital for creating affordability. Amazon's big warehouses makes their products cheaper than the small corner stores/liquor stores. It's easy to make a video saying "this could be a nice restaurant, this could be a corner store", but in reality those businesses can't afford that rent or the labor needed. And if we switch to urban densification as a solution. This creates a situation where you won't own anything, and would be forced to pay for everything your entire life which is serfism. Someone like Jared Kushner or Lakireddy Bali Reddy owns the apartment complex and they earn rent money indefinitely thriving off the poor. Pedestrian friendliness and cycling is loved, as long as they feel safe. Many women would rather drive in the dark after work rather than walking alone past the dimly lit back-alleys in their urban neighborhood. Parents don't want their kids walking past giant homeless tents or druggies shooting up on the street. Mixed housing works great when you have beautiful small businesses like a florist or artesian baker. It's not so great if you live next to a tire shop, plastic recycler, or fish market.

It's the algorithms..

@@inesalag the algorithm at its best.

I think so too. It's a breath of fresh air. Too often urbanist channels focuses too much on anger and frustration against carbrains. It's good that this channel can convey urbanism without playing into the polarisation.

@@freemanolAgreed: Like yeah NJB is cool but so much of the message feels negative. It's the main reason why I watch CityBeautiful and CityNerd instead.

The Great Omniscient Omnipotent Algorithms has recently been very kind to us meek viewers. It hath chosen to shine it graceful light on smaller channels.

Thanks of pointing out the realities of your field! So many online urbanists think it's easy to point out problems and then prescribe solutions. But it takes a lot to change all those development codes and default practices (not that we shouldn't though). It takes years just to approve and build one building. Physical infrastructure isn't computer code, you can't just change it on a whim and get immediate feedback on if it's working or not. Working through all these development codes, municipalities, politics, etc. is tough work, way harder than anything we studied in engineering imo.

I agree with what you said but I must point out that this was kind of the point of the video, he did say that the laws must be changed before we can improve things.

In situations with excessive parking requirements like that, is it viable to 'future proof' the overall design of the property by laying out the parking lot and associated paths and curbs in a way that specific could be developed in the future if the property owner received an exception to the rule, or if the rule ever changed? Given the increased discussion and movement on reducing rules that lead to auto-dependent built-environments, is that aspect ever considered? Thanks for sharing your perspective!

There was a time that those minimum parking regulations made sense. But we now have online shopping and social media so not as many people are using vehicles to do their non-necessary shopping. So now we need a new study to see what is now a sensible max capacity for parking

The problem is not having available parkings. When you have it, it's not a problem!

Stay in Europe you won’t have to worry about

​@@thorpower1015why are u so angry about people trying to help you? We're obviously smarter so take our help in fixing ur little country

@@thorpower1015 The truth hurts, apparently.

@@bobsemple9341 I'm not angry, Im just pointing out what we like here in America, don't try to Europe America, you are not smarter if you were you would not be so self righteous like all the rest of you city types.

@@Coffeepanda294 enjoy your crowded cities, I'll stay in the wide open suburbs anyway.

it's wild! thank you!

I love the presentation of alternatives and the focus on how to fix things. I also like your introduction of retail to that intersection. The theory is sound. I think, personally, I would prefer to see that more towards the center of the neighborhood and off of the arterials but otherwise it's a good idea. I think, however, in a real world scenario this wouldn't work. The corners of that intersection look pretty wet and development was likely avoided for a reason. It also may be satisfying part of their open space requirements so that land wouldn't be buildable anyway. Also, "illegal," while technically true still Rings a bit hyperbolic. It's legal or illegal in the sense of it being an ordinance. These things get changed in Florida pretty regularly in a 3-6 month, statutorily defined process. It's not hard to change zoning, you just need political and/or local voter buy-in.

One of, if not the best i have seen so far! Great real world examples, shows the problem and gives advice to how to solve it in a realistic and constructive way!

Every regulation exists because before it, someone died.

@@timogul ? No.

Funny thing is, that this fix would bring the city to the suburbs, but if done correctly more to a European city. Only need to allow zoning of middle housing, and it would start to be looking more like one. When I was in Fort Lauderdale visiting relatives I already thought about why you can't have anything in the suburbs and need to drive anywhere, same about schools etc. I am from Germany and I have my next store 5 min away and live in a house btw.

@v.kut7307 boomer relatives?

@@longiusaescius2537 close to the end of the boomer generation, it is a rich doctor family in a gated community. That, btw. was also very strange to have a guard in the entrance and need to show ID and such. Felt less free and more like in a camping vacation park.

@@v.kut7307 I'll take the ID showing if it keeps the sidewalks piss free, and they would just move to America typical boomers

@@v.kut7307no. We don’t want your leftist urban policies in the suburbs. We want wider roads and larger homes 🙄. Stay in the city if you want a 6 story apartment building

Being able to take a short stroll to a coffee shop or convenience store is heavenly.

I agree. I live in Europe and small/medium food shop next to housing area is a MUST. I live in a city but I used to spend lots of time in rural areas and each village has small shop that you can walk by foot, like in max 15min! It's so wierd that US banned food shops...

Most of New Orleans is still like this - corner store underneath with a family or two living above.

I absolutely agree; we also need to follow your example in healthcare, education and work/life balance as well! Unfortunately, the majority of Americans nowadays are too self centered and have been programmed to believe that success is shown with how big and flashy their homes and stuff is and want the exclusivity of the gates or private community for status. God forbid anyone is slowed down or inconvenienced for the sake of everyone as a whole; it's "me, me, me" here, sadly.

@@One4Truththe Netherlands is not the country to follow they harass minorities and have literal black face characters in their mainstream culture. Look it up it’s called zwarte piet

@@One4TruthSo in your eyes, what is success?

@@dlazo32696 that's a difficult thing to describe, but I'll try. Success to me would mean I'd be happy overall/content, living comfortably in an average 3 bedroom ranch house with a yard for the kids to play in, a pool to relax in, a driveway and garage in which to work on cars, flower beds to water and most of all good health. My kids being happy, healthy and kind is the greatest success. Also, enjoying my job is important; we spend too much time there to be doing anything we don't like. Of course, no one wants to be poor and being rich be wonderful, but I'd never want wealth at the expense of others. I can't understand the mentality of those who don't want to see others rise, for everyone to have a fair shot and get a piece of the pie. I'm nearly there, I love my job and my kids are wonderful(3 of which are grown and have become young adults that I can be proud of). Now, I just would like to own my own home and more importantly, need to obtain good health. It's very difficult to enjoy even the great things in life while living with chronic illness and pain, but I've been trying my best!

We don’t need to learn anything. Suburbs are far superior to the high density urban living of those countries. That’s exactly what we do not want. That’s the whole point of living in the suburbs.

Agree that is a huge part of the problem. Second big problem is the issues that reducing down to 1-lane per direction roads will cause for emergency crews and repair activities.

@@Re_Doubt Could be solved with different types of emergency response vehicles (e.g. small cars/minivans/bikes) or with roads that are blocked off for emergency-use only.

@@zianchoy I like your creative thinking and I would love to see smaller more efficient emergency vehicles. I think that would require reform to the US's civil lawsuit system as well as likely reduction of US vehicle safety and emissions regulations (which currently drive large bulky vehicle design for aerodynamics and crash safety). In our current legal environment, slimmed down emergency vehicles are not very feasible. Would love to see change in this area.

​@@Re_Doubtwhy would 1 lane per direction roads cause problems for emergency vehicles? Pull over and let them pass

@@Re_Doubt He put the cylcling lanes next to the road. In Europe it is often the case, that, if the road is blocked, the emergency vehicles just drive over the cycling pathes.

Thank you for noticing! People don't listen if you blame them for how they're living their life, so it's important to notice where differences occur and what changes can be realistic.

We can blame someone for the car centric design though. Auto companies that lobbied and worked with firms to make cities more car centric.

Car centric infastructure is still the problem tho

Also there's this huge misconception that whenever someone wants to make life less car dependant there's always people commenting "Well i LIKE driving" and "You can't force me to take the poor and drug filled train or bus" and it's literally just better for everyone because more public transit and more walkability makes driving easier and more funding simply makes public transit better, cleaner and safer.

but cycling IS better. it objectively is. you should get people to cycle whenever you can.

The comments threads of these videos are really something to behold.

its a culture thing. :/

Probably because it is mediocre, no offense

9:00 Ngl it just seems counterintuitive having less lanes and more traffic is going to make it even harder to get to point A to point B and also make it more dangerous with more traffic jams

There engineers for a reason.

Better solution, don’t build gated communities. It’s a pointless design and a waste of money.

but but my privacy. isn't that the whole reason why suburbs exist

Instead of restricting these new roads to pedestrian and bike access, you may as well make them accessible to cars now that you've changed the class of the widest roads from arterial to local.

@@takatamiyagawa5688 That's not a good idea. If you do that you'll get more cut-through traffic and the roads inside the neighborhood become more dangerous. The arterial is still not at local level, since it'll have a higher posted speed and separated modes of transit. While the neighborhood has mixed road use, so you want to limit car traffic and speed there as much as possible.

​@@salamipitza I haven't noticed more privacy in suburbs in practice.

Rest in peace🪦

Road safety has a hard life, living out in the dark. Just like homeless people, it is neglected. We have our priorities. Some young people getting killed is sad. But what can we do other than find a person to blame, clean up, forget and move on? In this case they build a roundabout. Nice, but just a drop of water in the sea.

Let us pray Jon Voight's Anaconda Prayer: May the souls of the departed, by the mercy of God, rest in peace. In nomine patris, et fille, et Spiritus Sancti Amen.

I went to LRHS with them it was a sad year for sure

Yeah, most streets in argentina are one way for that reason

Like, it's going to have traffic either way, might as well avoid making it terrible.

I missed that part when America is Germany 😂😂😂

then stay in germany

i always wondered why a double lane road feels much more dangerous. it's much harder to cross and even as a driver it feels much harder to drive safely as some people zig-zag across the lanes

St Armand's feels more like the Lakewood Ranch faux downtown example than the redesigned intersection. It's a destination to which people drive (although there is a free trolley available) rather than walk or bike from where they live to exist for a normal day. The nearest grocery, for example, is Whole Foods in downtown almost 3 miles away. Most people can't afford to eat at the Columbia Restaurant 3xday!

@@sarasota_commutes yeah i agree it's somewhere between a lifestyle center and an actual downtown, definitely not an affordable spot for everyday living, but I think it's nice that it's there

Sarasota is a real community that’s years ahead of everywhere else around it

I hate the businesses-around-roundabouts idea. I am a big proponent of roundabouts, but they're premised on flow. Stopping to get into and out of business districts is a more stop/slow down heavy practice so the entrances need to be away from the round abouts. A round about at the ends of the streets the shops are on makes sense.

Thanks!!

its not worth the work to solve it. the design is inherently flawed and would require way too much work and time that likely wouldnt even pan out in real life. nothing is going to change for the better until the politicians and government controlling this stuff allows it too. and they likely dont even realize the problem.

And everyone usually is some sort of commie.

@@exchangAscribe this video is literally showing a solution, mate.

@@ano_nym i know, i just described why that solution would likely be more work than its worth and wouldnt pan out. also, his solution is *theoretical* ; it may not even work at all in real life. and like the video and i said, the current laws and people in power prevent anything from getting better. unless the laws and regulations change, this solution or any like it will not be possible.

In the US that's illegal :(

Sounds wonderful. The Netherlands is leading the way.

Totally agree, walkway connections are not talked about enough!

I've stayed in a few different Toronto suburbs over the years (my brother lives in a Midtown studio, so staying with him is kind of infeasible) and they've all been MILES ahead of the average US suburb, as far as green space, pedestrian connectivity, and development scale are concerned

Not everyone is like you. not everyone wants to live in a city. many of us HATE living in apartments/condos and do not want to be in crowded spaces, cars or pedestrians. Why must you expect people of one country to live like those in another country? Are you suggesting we homogenize the entire world and force everyone to live in the same ways? many people in the US happen to like how we do things here, and quite resent attempts to make us more like Europe or Asia, or even Canada. We do not want to go along with you folks. We like our big stuff, and "wasteful" lifestyles. At some point you folks are going to have to start FORCING people to go along, since you will never persuade us to go along.

@@peterbelanger4094 It's hilarious cause out of all the countries, your the one forcing your lifestyle on everyone. Mandatory parking, mandatory setbacks, mandatory minimum lots, mamdatory height limits. Literally every aspect of suburbia garbage is forced upon people. Free country my ass. Shame on us to want the choice to build whatever we want instead of living in some racist boomers zoning experimentation from 1940s

​@@peterbelanger4094yeah, its just putting stores and buisness nearby, not rebuildind the place from scratch

Thank you!!

You can see its a new channel by the use of stock video clips.

This channel had

@@Blackadder75 Nothing wrong with using stock footage in morderation to illustrate some points. Seeing what seems to be original footage with quite some effort put into it (and even a face behind the channel) is encouraging.

@@wolframstahl1263 sorry if it came off as negative, I didn't say it, it is just an observation. I see new channels using these and established channels not using it. (exceptions happen of course) SoI think that content creators in general prefer to make their own footage, once they have the means to do that.

And ironically, the argument for building this way is that it gives you 'freedom'.

Yeah in Australia, even the worst and least-urbanist outer suburbs are still more like the "fixed"/proposed version in this video, but with better PT too. And the older middle-suburbs here are worlds apart from those barren US suburbs, so much better.

I heard Australia suburbs suffer the same kind of urbanism that’s the us and Canada do. I’m glad to hear that’s not case for the most part!

@@redrox3312 Australian suburbs are kind of midway between Europe and North America. They are typically built as very low density sprawl, but they do generally have some provision of local shops and facilities and at least a skeleton public transport network. Superficially they _look_ more similar to North America, because what you see is the vast expanse of large houses, but functionally they are different because they don't have the harmful zoning laws.

​@@redrox3312 depends on the area. Newer suburbs, like those in the west of Melbourne, tend to be more like thr American ones, but older, more established suburbs are more walkable and have some local stores, similar go the redesign proposed in this video

Couldn't agree more.

thank you!

I literally said the exact same thing. I was like "Finally a urbanist video talking about improving the suburbs rather than banning them and banning cars". This might be the first urban channel I will subscribe too.

Every one of his proposed suburban solutions has FLOPPED in the marketplace.

@@selfdo What do you mean they flopped?

He effectively said "ban cars" when he wants all the main roads to only be one lane each. This will cause a semi-permanent massive traffic jam.

​@@GeotpfNo, it will not. Because the flow of traffic is more determined by the (flow through) exits of said road. The easier it is to take the next exit, the easier it is to clear the road. Next to that, induced demand works in both ways. If you have better alternatives to driving (using the newfound space for other modes of transportation) less people will need to drive. The only difference here is to be able to go 50 when someone in front of you is going 45. That'll set you back a second or ten. Improved traffic flow will save you minutes

yes i loved that too! explaining how to fix the problem instead of just pointing out that there is a problem

Thank you so much!!

You 'urbanists' want to force people who prefer living in lower density into living in high density cities. Do you urban apartment/condo dwellers really want people who are resentful at being coerced into denser living than they are comfortable, living next to you? Contrary to you beliefs, some people actually LIKE living out in the suburbs, and you have no right to force them out of that lifestyle.

​@@peterbelanger4094people in the suburbsvare not going to be kicked out, you are just going to have some stores here and there, and better streets

​@@peterbelanger4094 nobody forces anyone the only thing most urbanists promote is MORE CHOICE and not only 1 type of suburbs.

@@peterbelanger4094 Either you're just trolling or you haven't seen the video

Thank you! There will be more content on the way soon!

This is just pure, unfiltered copium. Anyone can bike anywhere, no matter how far. You don't need to live in a walkable city to be able to bike to a restaurant or store.

@@snap__shotthat’s the single dumbest thing I’ve read today.

@@baneofbanes There are people who bike 3-4 miles to and from their jobs every day even in winter. Your only excuse is that you're lazy.

3-4 miles would take the average person approximately 20minutes to cycle. This cannot be equated to the distance 30minutes in a car would take you. Almost no one would cycle up to an hour to reach basic amenities. It's not just a case of laziness ​@snap__shot

@@snap__shot no you’re just a fool. I frankly doubt you’ve ever even rode a bike before on anything other than flat ground.

Most only complain about what they do not like and present very few solutions. Most urbanists have some insane expectation that everyone will be ok with dense urban living. NOT EVERYONE WANTS TO LIVE IN A CITY!!!!!! many people HATE apartment/condo living and do not want to be piled on top of others all the time. Anyway, just look at the condition of cities these days, who would want to live there? Why do you think city living is better? It sucks! STOP ADVOCATING FOR A SOCIETY THAT FORCES US INTO CITIES!!!!!!!!!!

@@peterbelanger4094a larger percentage of people living in dense cities is the only way to preserve nature.

@@peterbelanger4094Nobody thinks that cities are the only solution, lol. But car-dependent suburbs aren’t feasible for many reasons. An easy solution is to build suburbs that aren’t car-dependent, which is what you will find in many countries outside of the US.

​​​​@@peterbelanger4094This video is literally about making minor, incremental improvements to the liveability of suburbs by designing them better, not "forcing people into cities".

​@@niklas6882Exactly. Even in Australia I grew up in a suburb that was walkable, well connected to public transport and easy to live car free, simply because it was designed properly without the zoning and parking restrictions that strangle the life out of American suburbs.

It is incredible how central planning-like North American suburbs are. And to add to the irony, they defend it because they like the... "freedom". There's something Orwellian about that.

The Problem with American low density zoning is that any Kind of high density Transport(such as rail because rail is mostrou fixed cost, transporting 1 is the same as 100 almost) is of the table since it cant be sustainable. For example in that example of Lakewood Ranch, in that section you have maybe 1000 People, in a similar are in an European city(or some if the more dense cities) you have 10 times that, this makes any Development easier. I say this from an European perspective where leaving your house and going to a café or a Park, or quickly run to the store to buy something is the way we live our lives, and this kind of isolation of these neibourhoods(even gated neibourhoods which are even more) seems dystopian(of course it would sound normal for an American, just a different perspective).

Unfortunately light rail is way too expensive for such low density neighborhoods. Light rail can be viable in cities which are 10-100 times denser than the suburbs shown here. But buses or minibuses can work even in these suburbs.

​@@udishomer5852 What about Hybrid Rail?

Where is this strawman even coming from!

@@regulate.artificer_g23.mdctlsk ?

I disagree. I think it's very convenient.

@@CrAzYnAdEz I really don't care. I'd rather not be forced to drive everywhere, but if you want to be forced to do it, then you do you.

@@jamalgibson8139 Exactly! 👍

Now he has 2.4k

Just hit 8k a few minutes ago. Wouldn't be surprised to see that rapid growth continue for quite a while.

@@wolframstahl1263 Yeah man, never seen a yt channel growing that much only by 2 videos

Agree, Australia is similarly suburban and still has issues but designs its suburbs MUCH better than the US with more mixed zoning, pockets of density, generally building along rail corridors with extensive public transport networks servicing the suburbs, safer road designs (speed bumps, roundabouts, frequent crossings, traffic islands, lower speed limits) and a lot more off road walking and cycling paths to connect housing to shops and transport links. Even what I'd consider to be our worst, least urbanist and most US style suburbs are like that, let alone the older middle suburbs which are often very walkable and well serviced by PT and shops every 600-800m or so.

Hahaha I was just thinking this as I was watching then I read this comment

Strict zoning still prevents utilities like the old corner "deli/tuck shop" you'd find in established suburbs. Which like the American example means you have to drive all the way into a shopping centre to pick up a bag of sugar.

Suburbanization is rooted in a fetishized idea of the English countryside so it's an issue faced by one degree or another by the entire anglophone world.

@@JesusManera , you mention safer roads. However, in comparison to Europe, these roads are quite dangerous and would likely not meet European approval standards. Roundabouts are only found on smaller suburban roads. There are no roundabouts on major roads, even though they could certainly benefit from them. Instead, there are large, wide, and potentially dangerous intersections equipped with speed cameras and red-light cameras. This seems to be their solution to the problem. This is particularly true in Adelaide. Correction, there is one big roundabout on a mayor road, and it is designed really bad and stupid, no one knows how to drive on it.

Wonderful argument.

Also, people don't walk or bike in a lot of suburban areas not because they don't want to but because it's unsafe to do so due to being forced to use car-focused infrastructure.

wait 24? When I started watching this video, it was 590… now it's almost 800.

@@kailahmann1823it's 2.62k now

3k now, subbed.

holy this channel is growing FAST

4K now, and well deserved! Cheers to 5k by the end of the day

Too bad its all illegal

Too bad its all illegal.

People need to park somewhere, you're better off having Public Transit in the center median.

@@vxcmdr You don't need to park if you go by public transit. Build a large parking garage (or parallel parking streets) at the start of the street with a bus stop and let the bus stop at the community center. Now you have more space for the community. This is actually how it works in a lot of places in Europe.

@@vxcmdr Ever heard of a "Park And Ride" facility?

@@VestedUTuber Yes we have this in Australia, but you know people have cars and would like somewhere to park plus car enthusiasts actually contribute to the local economy by having car meets at the local shops.

@@vxcmdr Sure, but you don't need to put parallel parking along every single street for that. Also, for car meets specifically, parallel parking along the side of a road isn't exactly a good choice of location.

Well if you think NIMBY's are only boomers then you're in for a surprise. Many young people in their 20s and 30s (including me and everyone I know) have that mentality too. The only way to get more of them on your side is from videos like this who are more reasonable by trying to promote smaller improvements to the suburbs without actually doing a entire makeover of the suburb and banning cars like many other urbanists try do promote.

​@@CrAzYnAdEz Things are changing. Many of my colleagues, young and in the military, are becoming more partial to better public transit and places where you don't have to drive. Many of them aren't liberal either, they just don't put total car depenency on a pedestal like people used to.

@@TheNobleFive I wouldn't say people put "car dependency" on a pedestal. They usually put things like low density, low crime, more privacy and land on a pedestal. Car dependency is just a side effect of building suburbs that way. Most of us (regardless if we like cars or not) just think that it's worth the tradeoff. I have no issues with public transit but the problem is its hard build and pay for public transit without higher density and mixed use zoning, which will likely turn the suburb into the dense inner cities we once moved out of.

Carmel is the suburb to keep an eye on for sure. They're doing a lot of things right.

I want that on a shirt

Exactly the point I was going to make. The transformation examples he brings up are really great, but no not actually work for a very low-density suburb like the FL example. Increasing density allows more walking and biking options. Our surrounding area in San Jose, CA has lots of smaller strip malls which is the best compromise for our density, but half the customers need to drive to them, and most do anyway.

Yes, we need more density! Especially where housing is most expensive because that's how you know it's overdue. Unfortunately, too many people think we would immediately get Kowloon Walled City instead of some really nice looking 4/5-plexes and apartment buildings with shops around the corner.

This is a great idea! It allows people who like the space and privacy of a single-family home to still live, while still allowing for ever-increasing affordability and the lifestyle that living in apartments brings!

I do agree that suburbs need more density, absolutely! However, I do think single family home areas can support small corner stores. Where I lived in México, a lot of neighbourhoods are single family focused and even then you have a corner store on almost every street. Most of these are owned and run by people living in the neighbourhood (often above or besides the store) but there are also chain corner stores (OXXO, 7-11) close to most areas, all of these reachable by walking! In my neighbourhood there were also many small businesses like bakeries, butchers, farmers markets, etc all reachable by 10-20 mins of walking (which my 75 year old grandma does almost every day!). Car dependency and low funding of public transportation (and mostly safety) are also a big issue in Mexico but zoning is really good in my experience.

Its all illegal

Because of xenophobia. They don't want "the wrong people" (they'll never dare actually tell you what they think "the wrong people" are, of course) in their neighbourhoods, so they opt for deserts of single-family homes where you need a car for pretty much anything. That, and as we can also see from many of the comments here, America has become so insular and ignorant that they literally can't imagine any different way to do things.

I agree. They can use existing or add elevated rail