Why are suburban lots in the southwest so small?

**nec209** · 25 May 2009, 5:50 PM

I ask this quetion before.I think it has to do with climate and water problems in those hot cities .The cities in the sun belt cities have smaller homes and smaller lots .

Has other cites have greenbelts ,creeks ,rivers ,parks so they built around it and there is more a green movement to make the city look green.

The sun belt cities do not have all this green movemet to protect.In Las Vegas and Los Angeles there is nothing environment to protect like greenbelts ,creeks ,rivers ,parks and there is big water problem so they pack the houses in with no property.

But Toronto , Calgary , Dever, Buffalo , Detroit and New York and so on have greenbelts ,creeks ,rivers ,parks and so there is more green movement to make city look green and protect the environment .

That us look at it a city in desert or semi- desert is going to look different than Toronto , Calgary , Dever, Buffalon.You got a water problem in a desert or semi- desert and no environment to protect like greenbelts ,creeks ,rivers ,parks ,trees and so on.

Las Vegas sprawl
http://blogs.nationaltrust.org/prese..._las_vegas.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1080/...3ac512fd7d.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/3803797...60534/sizes/o/

Los Angeles
http://www.flickr.com/photos/3803797...7606528887532/

Toronto sprawl ( suburb)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/litwine...96471/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aaaames...88398/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbl...38557/sizes/l/

Thing is Toronto has greenbelts ,creeks ,rivers ,parks and trees and Las Vegas and Los Angeles does not like alot of south west cities.So Toronto builts around it and protects the environment and make the city look green.Also there is a water problem in some of those south west cities so they use every land.

Most homes in the 50's to 80's had alot of property in Toronto and 80's and 90's less property and even less property now almost like Miami or Las Vegas that is how we are slowing getting more and more dense. Well the city of Mississauga is almost out of land other than small section here there ,Toronto, Etobicoke , North York , Scarborouhgn are out of land. Vaughan ,Richmond hill , Markham are built from steeles ave past Major Mackenzie Dr .So they are building into Farm land now so yes they slowing getting more and more dense.

**nec209** · 25 May 2009, 6:19 PM

You think that is dense take a look here ( suburb of Miami )

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1

I was reading somewhere much of Miami and suburbs of Miami was built from 1900's to 1960 and I also think because of land in Miami is too marsh for farm land or high-rise buildings and the city can only sprawl so much do to the everglades they build dense but low dense like 1 story homes , 1 story store-fronts and apartments under 7 story .

Now note has of now only by the water and Beach in Miami is thing for high-rise condos and urban renewal projects making it more high-rise and less homes and even more dense .But west of the downtown or beach is 1 story homes , 1 story store-fronts and apartments under 7 story.

Now Fort Lauderdale and suburbs in Fort Lauderdale look newer than Miami and sprawl is bigger in Fort Lauderdale. And Fort Lauderdale is less compact and walkable streets than Miami and more suburb feel.

**jmello** · 26 May 2009, 8:03 AM

Originally posted by nec209

I was reading somewhere much of Miami and suburbs of Miami was built from 1900's to 1960 and I also think because of land in Miami is too marsh for farm land or high-rise buildings and the city can only sprawl so much do to the everglades they build dense but low dense like 1 story homes , 1 story store-fronts and apartments under 7 story .

Don't get me wrong, I love Miami. I have family there. But, with this type of development (single-family on postage stamp lots and one-story strip malls), you get all the worst of urbanism (traffic, lack of open space and foliage, noise and sign pollution, etc.) and absolutely none of the benefits (walkability, public parkland, sense of community, lively public spaces, etc.). Miami Beach is really the only part of the Miami metro that is truly "urban."

**Gotta Speakup** · 26 May 2009, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by nec209

Has other cites have greenbelts ,creeks ,rivers ,parks so they built around it and there is more a green movement to make the city look green.

The sun belt cities do not have all this green movemet to protect.In Las Vegas and Los Angeles there is nothing environment to protect like greenbelts ,creeks ,rivers ,parks and there is big water problem so they pack the houses in with no property.

.

Los Angeles and other sunbelt cities do have creeks and rivers that are worth protecting. The LA river is the site of a major restoration process. Even desert land has beauties and things worth preserving.

**wahday** · 26 May 2009, 1:53 PM

Originally posted by nec209

Has other cites have greenbelts ,creeks ,rivers ,parks so they built around it and there is more a green movement to make the city look green.

This is a common mis-perception about arid environments, I think, especially as seen from the vantage point of a wetter clime (which is also where I come from). While arid and desert environments may look like they don't have as much to protect or manage, the ecosystems are no less complex and present at times more and not less in the way of environmental sensitivity compared to places like the northeast.

Consider just stormwater: Poor permeability means massive amounts of runoff draining large areas that end up in large natural arroyos. Sometimes the catchment areas for these arroyos can cover many square miles (even hundreds) and disrupting flow of water to these points (which is surface runoff that in other more vegetated areas might be slowed and absorbed on site) can cause untold damage later on and are a NEPA requirement for new development. So, the challenge of understanding the complexity of storm water management alone can deeply impact site design.

As someone pointed out, in many places simply installing storm water and sewer infrastructure is a huge investment because its just very difficult to dig here (thus few basements).

To get back to the original question, speaking from New Mexico, we are a poor state - we trade places with West Virginia from time to time as having the lowest per capita income. This means developers are building what people can afford and bigger lots would price many out. In fact, much of our suburban development has historically been geared toward and emerging middle class demographic (and middle class here is notably lower than in some other places). Those places attracting a wealthier cilentelle are situated on huge lots and those people can afford it. But mostly, we are talking more modest development.

I also agree with Dan's assessment about appealing also to retirees who don't want a large yard and may also be looking to make their money go further with a more modest abode.

Also, I think the point about the developers entering our market from California and Arizona may hold some water, but I have to look at where those builders are based. but for so many large scale housing developers (which is mainly what we see here), they establish an approach and just keep replicating it in different places. If California land values dictate smaller lots and they can translate that to here, they can get more units on less land and still have a demographic to appeal to (the emerging middle class).

**nec209** · 26 May 2009, 5:47 PM

Don't get me wrong, I love Miami. I have family there. But, with this type of development (single-family on postage stamp lots and one-story strip malls), you get all the worst of urbanism (traffic, lack of open space and foliage, noise and sign pollution, etc.) and absolutely none of the benefits (walkability, public parkland, sense of community, lively public spaces, etc.). Miami Beach is really the only part of the Miami metro that is truly "urban."

Well I would say the suburbs in Toronto being built now of homes almost touching and townhoues and lack of apartments and slowing getting more and more dence like Miami is going to be worse than Miami.You got to walk out of your crescent or court to a road than walk down that road to a collector road to go anywhere even 2KM in the city .There is big superblocks 1.6KM or 2 KM it is horrible walking on foot.There is lots of traffic on the collector roads and high driving speed limits of 70 KM or 80 KM that is a nightmare for people walking or crossing the street.

big superblocks 2KM
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/4659/blo2cu0.jpg

Lots of crescents ,courts,dead-end streets ,cul-de-sac, and big arterials(collector roads) with fence off subdivisions .

Typical ( they should just built some apartment than have those homes almost touching) But the suburbs in Toronto like to do that.
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/HPIM0936.jpg
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/HPIM0693.jpg
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/HPIM0694.jpg
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/HPIM0695.jpg
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/HPIM0692.jpg
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/HPIM0650.jpg
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/HPIM0651.jpg
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/HPIM0654.jpg

All those suburbs in Toronto built in the 60's to now have very little buildings on the collector roads and fence off subdivisions.

suburbs in Toronto ( This is a small road going to a collector road most are big collector roads of 3 lanes with high driving speed limits of 70 KM or 80 KM with high traffic and is the only way to get around )
http://www.flickr.com/photos/3817596...l-1058792@N25/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/3817596...l-1058792@N25/

Every 1.6 Km or 2KM there is a collector road. ( only way to get around ) You have to walk out of you maze to a collector road.

For some reason it was the thing in Toronto in the 60's ,70 to build 15 to 25 story apartments and mix housing income communities of backsplit ,semi ,bungalow house and 2 story homes and townhoues conplex in the 60's and 70's !!! But the 80's and 90's townhoues and 2 story homes and lack of backsplit and bungalow house .In th late 90's it was a fad in the old section or downtown to build big condos and office high-rise.

Buch of Miami like LA is compact and walkable streets but are you going to walk 5KM or 10KM on foot.Light rail and good bus makes people walk and if Miami like LA if they did it would work.You can't put light rail and good bus when streets are not on a grid-system or modified grid-stem or big superblocks 1.6KM or 2 KM.And lack of side-walks and collector roads that are hostile to people.The built environment has to be pedestrian friendly. The blocks or intersetion have to be short for people walking not long like for cars.

People can debate all they want on density levels like LA ,Mew York ,Toronto ,Miami or old section of Chicago or new sections of Chicago and so on.. But the bilt environment has to be pedestrian friendly like light rail and good bus , grid-system or modified grid-system and short blocks or intersetion.

The big box stores or power center will have go

on on less they can some how build it in a resident section of the city by light rail going there with parking in the back and line it up on a strip than pod or cluster to cut down on big parking.

**Michele Zone** · 26 May 2009, 7:38 PM

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, Apple Valley, CA has a minimum lot size of around a 1/2 acre I believe. (If you google it, they have an ordinance that explains in detail why it would be disastrous to allow 4 units per acre.) I've been there. Lots of big lots with huge mansions on them. It's a place some celebrities have lived at times because it is close enough to LA to drive if you are working on a movie but it's "rural". Lots of folks there own horses. It's cheek to jowl with Victorville, which has more normal homes and more normal home prices.

Perhaps it's the exception that proves the rule, but not all lots in Cali are little.

**stroskey** · 26 May 2009, 7:51 PM

Originally posted by nec209

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/HPIM0654.jpg

Those houses are awesome. Are there design standards in that city or how did that architecture come to be?

**Gotta Speakup** · 27 May 2009, 7:24 AM

Originally posted by Michele Zone

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, Apple Valley, CA has a minimum lot size of around a 1/2 acre I believe. (If you google it, they have an ordinance that explains in detail why it would be disastrous to allow 4 units per acre.) I've been there. Lots of big lots with huge mansions on them. It's a place some celebrities have lived at times because it is close enough to LA to drive if you are working on a movie but it's "rural". Lots of folks there own horses. It's cheek to jowl with Victorville, which has more normal homes and more normal home prices.

Perhaps it's the exception that proves the rule, but not all lots in Cali are little.

In many parts of the country, 1/2 acre lots are considered way too small!

**nec209** · 27 May 2009, 11:51 PM

Originally posted by stroskey

Those houses are awesome. Are there design standards in that city or how did that architecture come to be?

**nec209** · 24 Sep 2009, 1:02 AM

After watching alot of movies/TV shows made in the sun belt cities and also looking at pictures on the internet and google maps and such

It seems alot of homes are smaller and bungalow homes and no basment in the sun belt cities . Well the North section or North East section of the US and even Canada is 2 story homes. Some one here was saying the land value is cheaper in the sun belt cities and cost more in the North section or North East section of the US and even Canada .This is okay just one problem.

Why such small bungalow homes and no basment ?

It strange has it is all one color and small homes what you would not find in the Canada , North section or North east section of the US .

Here is bing view of the area of suburb of Miami ..
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1

Very intresting has you would not see this dense look in Canada and all the homes the same color .
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1

What is so strange is the sun belt cities build dense but low dense well Canada , North section or North east section of the US there is town-town look and out of down-town look the suburb look but the sun belt cities are not like this.

Also even the war time homes in Toronto where shacks but small 2 story homes , people living above store ,basment tenets ,roomates not what you really would see in the sun belt cities ..

I don't know if anyone here has use bing to look at Toronto than LA but sure looks different.

If the land value is cheaper in the sun belt cities that would be why you have alot of 1 story store-fronts , 1 story homes and apartments under 6 story ,small plazas.

Well the land value cost more in Canada ,North section or North east section of the US had have 2 story homes ,apartments 15 to 20 story , people living above a store than a 1 story store front.

But why such small homes ? If the land value is cheaper there should be alot of 1 story homes , 1 story store-fronts and apartments under 6 story but every thing much bigger than those small homes.

If land value cost more you cannot have 1 story store-fronts and apartments under 6 story you got have people that live above the store and build apartments 15 to 20 story high or more..

And what is up with all the bungalow homes and no basment in the sun belt cities .

**Chet** · 24 Sep 2009, 5:17 AM

Good thread. This could be a long discussion!

I come from the north and now live in the south. Although I am on the Gulf of Mexico, I guess I am not considered to be "sunbelt" though. We have alot of 2 story homes on very small lots down here. The lack of basements has alot to do with soil types and humidity. In a good rain the streets break up - they would crush a basement form of foundation. A structure on caisons moves better I guess. Where I am from in the north, new homes commonly have 4 car garages. That doesn't seem to have caught on down here.

Sometimes the "same color" issue is dictated by the developer to avoid garrish intrusions.

**stroskey** · 24 Sep 2009, 10:49 AM

We had a similar discussion a few months back about why the yards in the SW and West are so small - this may be related. The general consensus was that because of the lack of water the development needs to be more compact, thus not leaving room for large yards. Not sure why that would mean one story homes, though.

You'd think they would want larger houses and more land (since there is A LOT of it out there). A friend who lives in Phoenix told me the newer developments are two-story but just like anywhere, the less expensive the home the more likely it is to have only one story, although many of the older people aren't moving into the new areas. Much of the SW is newer and has an older population which prefers having things on one level. Many of the "retirement communities" around the Midwest have single story homes. The SW is odd because the amount of "planning" they have done is a great example of what not to do in planning.

**Gotta Speakup** · 24 Sep 2009, 11:00 AM

Perhaps there are fewer two story homes because with the lots so small, the neighbors can see into the backyard from a second story. That at least is what happens in my mother's neighborhood in California.

**Raf** · 24 Sep 2009, 11:01 AM

We did:

http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showthread.php?t=37631

Maybe the threads can be merged. A lot of good answers there.

**stroskey** · 24 Sep 2009, 11:01 AM

Originally posted by Gotta Speakup

Perhaps there are fewer two story homes because with the lots so small, the neighbors can see into the backyard from a second story. That at least is what happens in my mother's neighborhood in California.

In most neighborhoods in the North and Northeast you can see in all your neighbors backyards. Maybe it has something to do with the same reason houses down there have walls... there is a lack of community!

**NHPlanner** · 24 Sep 2009, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by CPSURaf

We did:

http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showthread.php?t=37631

Maybe the threads can be merged. A lot of good answers there.

Moderator note:

Threads merged.

**wahday** · 24 Sep 2009, 11:46 AM

I thought of a few other considerations at least for here in the southwest:

Heating and cooling is more efficient in a one story building. With our intense sun and solar gain potentials, limiting glazing is also beneficial.

History and aesthetics - traditionally, the Pueblo structures here have served as a model for other house designs. The Spanish took many design elements from the Pueblos and on to current building types, there is a whole family of homes called "Pueblo-style", "Pueblo Revivial," etc. Its also fitting with our landscape. Its open, flat and few trees, so homes that emphasize large open spaces and horizontal expanse are more in keeping with the experiences outside of the home. In PA, where I grew up, there are many large trees and hillier terrain. To see two or three story homes poking up among this feels more fitting - its a more vertical landscape. I suspect that those trees and vegetation in general also do provide some natural screening from one yard to the next - at least more than out here where vegetation is more sparse and trees never really get all that huge (except for a few species).

Lastly, as I mentioned in an earlier post in the merged thread, cost is probably a big factor here in New Mexico. We are not a wealthy state and to appeal to emerging middle class buyers, housing cost needs to be kept in check. Building one story homes is a way to accomplish that as are smaller lots. So, economics is a big factor for us.

**Gotta Speakup** · 24 Sep 2009, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by stroskey

In most neighborhoods in the North and Northeast you can see in all your neighbors backyards. Maybe it has something to do with the same reason houses down there have walls... there is a lack of community!

I am not sure there is any evidence that there is more "community" in one part of the country vs. another. Californians do like their 6 foot walls around their back yards. Perhaps its because the houses are so close together AND people spend much more time outside in their yards - almost year round even in northern California.

**stroskey** · 24 Sep 2009, 2:25 PM

It's funny you should mention that. I am working on a Master's in Community Economic Development right now and my thesis/creative component is about how "walkability" and the social attitudes/community involvement of teenagers are interconnected. Financial/social status aside, teenagers involved in activities that require constant use of a car are less connected to the civic aspects of their community than teenagers who do not require constant use of a car.

**nec209** · 25 Sep 2009, 2:45 PM

, teenagers involved in activities that require constant use of a car are less connected to the civic aspects of their community than teenagers who do not require constant use of a car.

What do you mean by lack of civic aspects?

I thought about aesthetics has building in the North and North East US and Canada are brown brick , red brick , white siding , gray brick and other dark drab colors. Well the sun belt cities are more bright colors ,stucco and red tile roofs are also a very popular look.

ranch style house in California
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ra...California.JPG

What you would see in the North and North East US and Canada
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gi...e_Essex_CT.jpg

History and aesthetics - traditionally, the Pueblo structures here have served as a model for other house designs. The Spanish took many design elements from the Pueblos and on to current building types, there is a whole family of homes called "Pueblo-style", "Pueblo Revivial," etc. Its also fitting with our landscape. Its open, flat and few trees, so homes that emphasize large open spaces and horizontal expanse are more in keeping with the experiences outside of the home. In PA, where I grew up, there are many large trees and hillier terrain. To see two or three story homes poking up among this feels more fitting - its a more vertical landscape. I suspect that those trees and vegetation in general also do provide some natural screening from one yard to the next - at least more than out here where vegetation is more sparse and trees never really get all that huge (except for a few species).

Is there some pictures to show the Pueblo look ,Spanish look ? I thought the California look was more bright colors ,stucco and some red tile roofs.

What about Victorian look? wiki saying Quote The term Victorian architecture can refer to one of a number of architectural styles predominantly employed during the Victorian era. As with the latter, the period of building that it covers may slightly overlap the actual reign, 20 June 1837 22 January 1901, of Queen Victoria after whom it is named Quote

This may be what I'm hung up on. Where Toronto took a Victorian architecture doing the 1900- to 1950 and alot of sun belt cities took a California look. And it could be that the Victorian architecture where 2 story where has the California look where a more 1 story look.

Quote The Victorian era of the United Kingdom was the period of Queen Victoria's reign from June 1837 until her death on the 22nd of January 1901 Quote

This may be why Toronto looks older and LA newer.Even the fack the pop not that off.

Toronto 1901 population 238,080
Toronto 1951 population 1,117,470

Los Angeles 1900 population 102,479
Los Angeles 1950 population 1,970,358

Typical of Toronto house
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:To...Row_Houses.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/caro11ne/390308397/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27677258@N00/252834204/

Building almost touching
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:To...o_Skyline2.jpg

This is so Toronto look
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jfitzg/...049045/detail/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jfitzg/...detail/?page=2

These look very very old than LA but looking at the population growth of LA and Toronto are almost the same with growth .Are these Victorian architecture? Did Toronto take 1800's architecture look and LA like lot of the sun-belt cities took a California look ( more 1900 to 1950 look? To I understand architecture look

I do not think I will understand why the North and North East look that way and the sun- belt cities look that way.

It is not good to say well Toronto looks so old has a Toronto 1861 population 65,085 and 1901 population 238,080 .It seems any thing built before the 50's in Toronto look very old , but older than LA and the likes of alot of sun belt cities .

Is it the fack the homes ,stores and such took a victorian architecture look and LA and the likes of alot of sun belt cities took a California look?

**wahday** · 28 Sep 2009, 12:41 PM

Originally posted by nec209

Is there some pictures to show the Pueblo look ,Spanish look ? I thought the California look was more bright colors ,stucco and some red tile roofs.

Check out this wiki link about Pueblo Revival Style (which is unique to New Mexico and a few other areas in neighboring states): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pueblo_...e_architecture

Pueblo style architecture seeks to imitate the appearance of traditional adobe construction, though more modern materials such as brick or concrete are often substituted. If adobe is not used, rounded corners, irregular parapets, and thick, battered walls are used to simulate it. Walls are usually stuccoed and painted in earth tones. Multistory buildings usually employ stepped massing similar to that seen at Taos Pueblo. Roofs are always flat. A common feature is the use of projecting wooden roof beams (vigas), which often serve no structural purpose.

The California style you are thinking of is called "Mission Style" architecture and developed in parallel to the Pueblo Revival Style at the turn of the 19th century (though Spanish New Mexicans had been building like this on a small scale since they arrived around 1600).

Mission Style (or Mission Revival Style): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission...e_architecture

The Mission Revival Style was an architectural movement that began in the late 19th century and drew inspiration from the early Spanish missions in California. The movement enjoyed its greatest popularity between 1890 and 1915, though numerous modern residential, commercial, and institutional structures (particularly schools and railroad depots) display this instantly-recognizable architectural style. The Mission Inn in Riverside, California is generally considered the largest Mission Revival Style building in the United States.

Originally posted by nec209

What about Victorian look? wiki saying Quote The term Victorian architecture can refer to one of a number of architectural styles predominantly employed during the Victorian era. As with the latter, the period of building that it covers may slightly overlap the actual reign, 20 June 1837 22 January 1901, of Queen Victoria after whom it is named

Well, we have Victorians in Albuquerque (I live in one) but they are in the minority. They date to the post-railroad years here (1880s onward). However, in terms of shear numbers, the Pueblo Revival style dominates the housing landscape of Albuquerque. I'm not sure the reasons, but I know that toward the end of the 19th century and the early years of the 20th, dimensional lumber was expensive to get in large quantities, so block houses (whether adobe or some other form of CMU) were a more affordable option. But again, I think historic precedent and a desire to fit newer homes into an established and valued style was a major factor in continuing with the Pueblo style.

Also, many building and development trends in New Mexico occurred a good 20 years after it hit elsewhere in the country. I think this is due to our remote location (not as much now, but definitely in the past). Remember, New Mexico was a territory until 1912 - the hinterlands.

**nec209** · 03 Nov 2009, 11:58 PM

I was having talk with guy on MSN and this what he tells me.

Saying they are from a High-Victorian or Victorian Commercial Vernacular Style
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jfitzg/...049045/detail/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jfitzg/...detail/?page=2

Has for why Canada has more malls than plazas like in alot of the sun belt cities I say the cold . Has for the basement they say it is needed for the cold so the house does NOT freeze and move.

Also people say the sun belt cities had cheaper land value so sprawled out more and do to the water shortage there was less of the garden city movement in the sun belt cities. The water shortage also is not good for buildings higher than 5 story do to the water pressure. I hear that Las Vegas has major water problem and are limited by growth do to the mountains so so is more denses than other city built post ww2.

Has you see this Los Angeles shot ...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/albaum/1362641756/sizes/l/

That is what I'm talking about.. (( You will not find that look in the North or North East US or in Canada.))

**wahday** · 04 Nov 2009, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by nec209

Has you see this Los Angeles shot ...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/albaum/1362641756/sizes/l/

That is what I'm talking about.. (( You will not find that look in the North or North East US or in Canada.))

Are you sure? I see sprawl all over the place. Take a look at these images form the northeast US and Canada:

This is from outside Minneapolis: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/col...ple_valley.jpg

Levittown, PA ca. 1952:http://explorepahistory.com/images/E...k5h4-a_349.jpg

Pennsylvania: http://lal.cas.psu.edu/Research/Images/sprawlComp.jpg

Pennsylvania (Lehigh Valley): http://www.westvalleypres.org/mediaf...ley-sprawl.jpg

Ontario: http://media.photobucket.com/image/s...009/sprawl.jpg

Toronto: http://www.indyish.com/wp-content/up...osprawl027.jpg

Western Ontario (Waterloo region): http://media.therecord.topscms.com/i...a8e5ce13c.jpeg

**The One** · 04 Nov 2009, 11:36 AM

OLD PEOPLE DON'T LIKE STAIRS

DISABLED PEOPLE DON'T LIKE STAIRS

Thread: Why are suburban lots in the southwest so small?

Thread tools

Why are the homes so small in the sun belt cities?

Yeah and......

More at Cyburbia

Will the southeast overtake the southwest?

Small Town Decay Delhi ON - Lots of Pictures

Small infill lots in NY make sense and good design

Hi from Southwest Ohio

hi from the southwest