The City and the Suburban Ideal
by Leidy Sanchez
One of the most influential ideologies that drove residential and corporate relocation to the suburbs is the ideal of the city as dirty, disease and crime infested, and the suburbs as clean, safe good for mental and physical health.
This anti-urban and pro-suburb view has existed since America’s early history, as portrayed by Thomas Jefferson when he stated “I view large cities as pestilential to the morals, the health, and the liberties of man.” The city was
viewed as a symbol of immorality and became the scapegoat for all that was wrong with society. The suburbs were viewed as the solution to urban ills and offered hope for better living. Suburbia provided the comforts of city living and close proximity to the central business district, while at the same time providing the tranquility and beauty of country living. The elite and middle class utilized the suburbs as a way to separate themselves from these negative attributes of city living This view of the city contributed to the suburban ideal and pro-suburbanism that in turn led to anti-urbanism.
Unfortunately,this image of city was not all a myth, as the city was indeed unsanitary and crowded before governmental regulations and services were put into place.[1] During the nineteenth century cities began to experience an influx migrants and immigrants, which caused the city expand, and farm land to decrease. American distrust of the city of the city grew as tenement houses became slums and diseases like malaria and tuberculosis were rampant.The images above and below illustrate the conditions in New York City in 1893 with garbage and even waste in the street.
The Single Family Home against Urban Tenements
While American cities in the nineteenth century were characterized by dark and dirty tenement houses and buildings that housed the poor and immigrant population, the suburbs were associated with single family detached homes surrounded by nature and middle to upper class families. Tenements were described as overcrowded, dangerous, both in construction and crime; and unsanitary, as most tenements did not have indoor plumbing. Conversely, the suburban home was built for the comfort of the family and most often had the latest infrastructure and technological advances. Homes like the Glenview Suburban Estate in Westchester, New York, were custom built for elite families that wanted to escape city living conditions.[2] Tenements were viewed as a health hazard not only to its residents, but the city as a whole.
While American cities in the nineteenth century were characterized by dark and dirty tenement houses and buildings that housed the poor and immigrant population, the suburbs were associated with single family detached homes surrounded by nature and middle to upper class families. Tenements were described as overcrowded, dangerous, both in construction and crime; and unsanitary, as most tenements did not have indoor plumbing. Conversely, the suburban home was built for the comfort of the family and most often had the latest infrastructure and technological advances. Homes like the Glenview Suburban Estate in Westchester, New York, were custom built for elite families that wanted to escape city living conditions.[2] Tenements were viewed as a health hazard not only to its residents, but the city as a whole.
Disinvestment in Urban Centers
A major component that contributed to the negative image of the city was the disinvestment of the federal government and developers. Post World War II the federal government established policies and programs facilitated suburban living to white working families. There was a strong emphasis suburban living and the building of highway systems that facilitated the commute from the suburbs to the city. For example, many of the federal mortgage loans were approved for the suburbs, but were denied to the cities. This in many ways led to the growth of the suburbs and the degradation of the cities.
The disinvestments of city continued even with the urban renewal programs that were put into place to solve urban ills. For example, the highway system provided better access to the suburbs as the expense of its residents. In many instances, working class neighborhoods were destroyed and families were displaced in order make way for these highways. For instance, the urban renewal programs had a profound impact specifically in the Bronx, where low-income minorities were concentrated into one area, and segregated from the rest of the city by the Cross- Bronx Expressway.
Notes:
[1] Richard Plunz, A History of Housing in New York City: Dwelling Type and Social Change in the American Metropolis (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990) p. 22.
[2] Laura L. Vookles, “ Glenview” in Westchester: The American Suburb (New York: Fordham University Press, 2006 151-2.
A major component that contributed to the negative image of the city was the disinvestment of the federal government and developers. Post World War II the federal government established policies and programs facilitated suburban living to white working families. There was a strong emphasis suburban living and the building of highway systems that facilitated the commute from the suburbs to the city. For example, many of the federal mortgage loans were approved for the suburbs, but were denied to the cities. This in many ways led to the growth of the suburbs and the degradation of the cities.
The disinvestments of city continued even with the urban renewal programs that were put into place to solve urban ills. For example, the highway system provided better access to the suburbs as the expense of its residents. In many instances, working class neighborhoods were destroyed and families were displaced in order make way for these highways. For instance, the urban renewal programs had a profound impact specifically in the Bronx, where low-income minorities were concentrated into one area, and segregated from the rest of the city by the Cross- Bronx Expressway.
Notes:
[1] Richard Plunz, A History of Housing in New York City: Dwelling Type and Social Change in the American Metropolis (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990) p. 22.
[2] Laura L. Vookles, “ Glenview” in Westchester: The American Suburb (New York: Fordham University Press, 2006 151-2.