Americans' Shift To The Suburbs Sped Up Last Year (fivethirtyeight.com)
Jed Kolko, writing for FiveThirtyEight: The suburbanization of America marches on. Population growth in big cities slowed for the fifth-straight year in 2016, according to new census data, while population growth accelerated in the more sprawling counties that surround them. The Census Bureau on Thursday released population estimates for every one of the more than 3,000 counties in the U.S. I grouped those counties into six categories: urban centers of large metropolitan areas; their densely populated suburbs; their lightly populated suburbs; midsize metros; smaller metro areas; and rural counties, which are outside metro areas entirely. The fastest growth was in those lower-density suburbs. Those counties grew by 1.3 percent in 2016, the fastest rate since 2008, when the housing bust put an end to rapid homebuilding in these areas. In the South and West, growth in large-metro lower-density suburbs topped 2 percent in 2016, led by counties such as Kendall and Comal north of San Antonio; Hays near Austin; and Forsyth, north of Atlanta.
If self driving cars take off expect the suburbs to spread even further. A lot of people who wouldn't like an hour's drive each way wouldn't mind an hour reading, watching tv, and eating breakfast.
Suburbanization isn't a problem. If we planned cities properly we could serve city centers with high speed rail to secondary cities (suburbs, exurbs) and ease the urban housing crunch. Of course this would require taxation, debt, eminent domain, and operating at a loss for decades, which is not popular with short term thinkers, despite the fact that rail infrastructure has a lifespan measured in centuries.
I live in the downtown area of a large city. We have two parking spaces, a dog, and grass for her to run around on. I am able to be as loud as I want to be (YMMV), mostly because new buildings are much better at soundproofing than was true even 20 years ago.
Our condo is smaller than our suburban house was, but plenty large enough for the two of us, and bigger than the median square footage of a house when I was a kid.
And we pay more than I did in the burbs, but we have baseball, football and basketball stadiums within walking distance, as well as theaters and easily 2 dozen restaurants. Expand my range to what I can reach for the minimum Uber fare or a bike share, and I have easy access to all of the downtown area.
It's a personal decision, but it is not nearly as bleak a life as you paint it.
Not everyone likes urban life. I've been to plenty of cities all over the world, but I'm always glad to be back home in a place where you can see the stars at night and the only noise to complain about when you're trying to sleep is the howling of coyotes (though they can get quite annoying). I like being able to go for a walk in the woods just by stepping outside or just watch the trees swaying in a storm. It's relaxing and peaceful in a way you just can't get in a city. So what if I have to drive 5-10 minutes to get to the nearest major shopping area with ample parking and every store I could possibly need? If I want a city, I have three of them less than half an hour away. But I usually prefer to avoid them whenever possible.
Cities are best for people who pay for their entertainment. Rural is best for people who make their own entertainment.