Suburbs and sustainability

Appendix 3 of the City of Villages report (URBED , 2002 ) ‘Environmental Sustainability’ concludes with the following passage regarding which settlement pattern is the most sustainable.

“There is remarkable agreement about what such a pattern would look like. The Urban Task Force, the TCPA, the Urban Village Forum [Prince Charles' organisation - no link] and the American New Urbanists [link to http://www.newurbanism.org/] all agree on the idea of a polycentric model consisting of a network of high-accessibility, walkable, dense centres served by good public transport and providing a full range of local facilities. This pattern can be seen in many North European cities. Because of its dense public transport network and heritage of ‘engulfed villages’ London is better placed than most cities.” [p.100]

I highlight this passage to show how the polycentric perspective has gained wide acceptance amongst opinion formers and also to suggest how ‘environmental sustainability’ and ’sustainability over time’ might be said to share some common ground here – since higher densities are more energy-sustainable in terms of car use and public transport while a variegated network of interrelated suburban centres is likely to be more adaptable to socio-economic change overall than a centre-periphery model.

‘Stylish singles’, social networks & suburbs

The Mosaic ‘stylish singles‘ group (who don’t need to be either stylish or single but youngish and affluent) are obviously an important demographic when it comes to planning for the intensification of residential land-use in suburban town-centre neighbourhoods. The assumption is that, in suitable numbers, this group are well positioned to inject money into the local economy and help sustain the urban buzz. Apart from using shops and services, the role of if and how stylish singles use the suburb as a social destination is perhaps of interest insofar as it relates to the positioning of the suburbs in social networks.

To a degree, the extent to which a suburb provides a social destination for stylish singles will depend on how many members of an affluent and mobile group of friends and friends of friends happen to live in the same place. This is especially true of the London suburbs where it is relatively unlikely (I would suggest) that stylish singles who choose to socialise together also live in the same walkable area. In this scenario, central locations which are relatively accessible by public transport and car to all members of a social group are likely to be favoured as social destinations. Where the town centre is located at a distance from transport links then it is relatively less likely to become part of a reciprocal cycle of favoured locations by a social network of  that exists over an extended geographical area. Are stylish singles central or marginal to the urban buzz of the suburbs?