2006 - 2026: What are the most surprising changes to happen in major cities?

[Chisouthside]

Somethings ive noticed in Chicago

Chinese people moving southwest from Chinatown along archer avenue. When I was in high school taking the orange line home all the chinese would get off at the Halsted orange line but now I see them keep riding south to midway station.

Also seeing more diversified ethnicities moving to different areas of the southside. Before you would really only see legacy ethnic whites, mexicans, blacks and chinese in the aforementioned Chinatown. but within the last few years ive noticed new middle eastern families (and not the ones that left the arab enclave around Kedzie and 63rd, Indian and Bangladeshi, turkish, north africans, ukranian, venezuelans , east africans. and im not saying theyre coming down in huge numbers but just consistently seeing these new ethnicities on the south side is something different.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Really?

There are tree-lined streets and avenues all across the city, rich and poor neighborhoods alike. That's what Paris is famous for. Even if you are in a tree-less street (and there are many), you always have trees in the next street, or the next little square. You cannot walk more than 3 minutes without seeing a tree. There are trees literally in every neighborhood.

This is total bullshit. Paris has remarkably few trees.

This is the main commercial corridor in probably the richest Paris neighborhood. There are zero trees.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Eiffel..._ep=EgoyMDI2MDUxMi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

Typical sidestreet in the 7th. Again, zero trees:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Eiffel..._ep=EgoyMDI2MDUxMi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I'm not sure what forests have to do with cities, nor am I sure why having one in a city would be a good thing.

It's like saying, while discussing the SF Bay Area, "I'm not sure what hills/ocean/forests" have to do with cities. Well, if you don't, then how can you understand the attraction of the Bay Area, and why many people want to live there?

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Crawford

This is the main commercial corridor in probably the richest Paris neighborhood. There are zero trees.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Eiffel..._ep=EgoyMDI2MDUxMi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

It's not "the main commercial corridor". It's just one street, not particularly frequented by Parisians from other parts of Paris. I haven't been in that street in 2 years I think.

And literally just at the corner of that street you've got trees (not to mention that that street is between the Champ-de-Mars and the Invalides, two green areas of Paris, although Invalides have suffered a lot since the city hall has stopped watering the lawns there):

Originally Posted by Crawford

Typical sidestreet in the 7th. Again, zero trees:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Eiffel..._ep=EgoyMDI2MDUxMi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

Literally 200 yards from here:



I can also show you tree-less side streets in Berlin. What does it prove?

[jmecklenborg]

A big thing everyone missed is the rise of LED lighting. Some things did have LED lights in 2006 but now it seems to be well over 50% of all public lighting.

The problem is that its giving the whole cityscape a "flat" look because so many of the lighting sources are similar. In the past, car headlights versus overhead street lights were different types of light sources. Now they're usually the same, and so everything is "flat". The incadescent/flourescent/mercury vapor/neon had more texture. Each lighting type had an insinuation on its own and how it mixed with onother lighting type.

[New Brisavoine]

In France the Green mayors turn off the street lights at night. That's one of the reasons why the Green mayor of Bordeaux was defeated in the last municipal election. The first measure of the center-right mayor was to turn the lights on again at night.

In smaller towns and villages, many towns and villages turn off the lights at night because they have no more money. 2 years ago I drove in the countryside near the Loire Valley, and it was crazy the number of towns and villages we crossed at night that were pitch-dark. I thought it was dangerous.

In Paris, due to the pressure from the Green allies of the mayor, they turn the lights on 30 minutes after sunset, and not at sunset as they used to. I find it pretty unpleasant during those 30 minutes when it's already too dark to see the name of streets from a long distance. And they turn the lights of monuments off sooner than before too, despite the fact LED lighting consumes very little electricity, and French electricity is largely nuclear to start with.

That's the ideologues in charge of our cities... The Greens in Paris also want stores to turn off the lights of their windows at night, and they want the La Défense skyscrapers to turn off their lights at night (but they have no authority over La Défense).

[montréaliste]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

In France the Green mayors turn off the street lights at night. That's one of the reasons why the Green mayor of Bordeaux was defeated in the last municipal election. The first measure of the center-right mayor was to turn the lights on again at night.

In smaller towns and villages, many towns and villages turn off the lights at night because they have no more money. 2 years ago I drove in the countryside near the Loire Valley, and it was crazy the number of towns and villages we crossed at night that were pitch-dark. I thought it was dangerous.

In Paris, due to the pressure from the Green allies of the mayor, they turn the lights on 30 minutes after sunset, and not at sunset as they used to. I find it pretty unpleasant during those 30 minutes when it's already too dark to see the name of streets from a long distance. And they turn the lights of monuments off sooner than before too, despite the fact LED lighting consumes very little electricity, and French electricity is largely nuclear to start with.

That's the ideologues in charge of our cities... The Greens in Paris also want stores to turn off the lights of their windows at night, and they want the La Défense skyscrapers to turn off their lights at night (but they have no authority over La Défense).

Yep. True about the negligible cost of led lighting. For my house’s exterior, If I had to reinstate usage of incandescent or halogen lights, the cost would triple, at least. I also noticed while walking my dog that in Montreal, a lot of art galleries don’t light the artwork when closed, even in the daytime, which is ridiculous. A lot of stupid decisions by committees who need to exercise power over anything they deem "au courant". Laffs

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

It's like saying, while discussing the SF Bay Area, "I'm not sure what hills/ocean/forests" have to do with cities. Well, if you don't, then how can you understand the attraction of the Bay Area, and why many people want to live there?

Obviously a city can have hills but a city does not tend to have oceans or foresst inside of it. Sure, proximity to an ocean or nature preserve can be a feature for a city but we're talking specifically about what's within the actual city. Again, if a forest or ocean is inside of your city, I'm not sure what that would be a good thing. Unless you're a fish or a deer.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Obviously a city can have hills but a city does not tend to have oceans or foresst inside of it. Sure, proximity to an ocean or nature preserve can be a feature for a city but we're talking specifically about what's within the actual city. Again, if a forest or ocean is inside of your city, I'm not sure what that would be a good thing. Unless you're a fish or a deer.

Define "city". Is a city only the territory within the municipal borders of the administrative entity called under the name of the city? Then in that case most of Sydney is not actually Sydney, and most of London is not actually London. Westminster is the City of Westminster for instance, not the City of London.

So, is Paris only the territory within the 1860 borders of the City of Paris? Some guys in this thread have an even narrower vision of it, considering that the Bois de Boulogne and Bois de Vincennes are not part of Paris, despite the fact they are within the municipal borders of the city.

For me a "city", like for most people, is essentially its metro area. When I'm in LA and I go to the beach in Santa Monica, I'm not thinking "oh, I'm not in LA anymore, I'm in another city". The beach in Santa Monica is a clear asset of living in LA, even if technically speaking it's not the City of Los Angeles proper.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Define "city". Is a city only the territory within the municipal borders of the administrative entity called under the name of the city? Then in that case most of Sydney is not actually Sydney, and most of London is not actually London. Westminster is the City of Westminster for instance, not the City of London.

You know what a city is lol.

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

For me a "city", like for most people, is essentially its metro area. When I'm in LA and I go to the beach in Santa Monica, I'm not thinking "oh, I'm not in LA anymore, I'm in another city". The beach in Santa Monica is a clear asset of living in LA, even if technically speaking it's not the City of Los Angeles proper.

Forests and oceans don't belong in the middle of metro areas either.

[mhays]

"City" clearly has a lot of varied meanings. The fact that we endlessly debate this is a good clue.

That's also how the language works.

Unless the subject is municipal governance, I think of cities as the blotches you see from airplanes. That can be similar to "metro" or "UA" etc.

[montréaliste]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Obviously a city can have hills but a city does not tend to have oceans or foresst inside of it. Sure, proximity to an ocean or nature preserve can be a feature for a city but we're talking specifically about what's within the actual city. Again, if a forest or ocean is inside of your city, I'm not sure what that would be a good thing. Unless you're a fish or a deer.

Well, the forests that the French kings protected that survive in Paris’ contemporary domain are curated, not the Adirondack or Alpine forests that exist far from cities. The fact that they exist in a very functional city must mean that they serve a purpose, and are valued for it. Likewise, the ocean frontage in SoCal is upkept and protected for human consumption, or frequentation, but the ocean remains a wild domain. I’m not seeing where the presence of wilderness within the city is a negative. Angelenos will always have to deal witht the presence of wildlife if living or hiking in the hills, though; I’ll admit to that…

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by mhays

I think of cities as the blotches you see from airplanes.

Yes, exactly.

And when you fly over Paris, that's what you see. A city with lots of parks and forests.

West:



South-West:



South:



East:



Even North-East (what Fox News called the 'no go areas' of Paris):



Lots of parks to choose from.

Like this one, famous for its Japanese cherry blossom during the Spring:



Or this one, which I consider the best English park in all of Greater Paris (and perhaps all of Europe in fact), but unfortunately I don't go there anymore because it's on the other side of the city compared to where I live now.



Or this one, a French-style park that is nearby the English-style park above:



And this has been my favorite walk in the past 3 years, but 99.99% of tourists and foreign visitors would have no idea about that place:



Which is why I always find it infuriating when people say Paris lacks green space. It's such a narrow-minded vision from people who beat only the same tourists paths only in a couple of streets in the most central areas, without realizing the enormous megacity this is with tons of parks and forests everywhere. When I was at university I once brought some Belgian and Swiss students I knew to some green area in the south-western suburbs to ride our bikes there, and they just couldn't believe it, because they had always lingered in the center before. They had no idea Paris extended so far out.

[Gresto]

Originally Posted by montréaliste

Yep. True about the negligible cost of led lighting. For my house’s exterior, If I had to reinstate usage of incandescent or halogen lights, the cost would triple, at least. I also noticed while walking my dog that in Montreal, a lot of art galleries don’t light the artwork when closed, even in the daytime, which is ridiculous. A lot of stupid decisions by committees who need to exercise power over anything they deem "au courant". Laffs

LED bulbs are 90% more efficient than incandescents, and last much longer. That doesn't mean one should stop trying to conserve and keep lights blazing 24/7, but a mayor deciding to turn off street lights is stupid because citizens want to feel safe in cities, and part of that entails keeping them well-lit.

[LA21st]

I'd add in the Russians/Ukrainans moving into hispanic parts of the San Fernando Valley here since 2020/2021. I wonder how signifigant the change is gonna be in 10 years,because it still feels rather new. But they're redeveloping/tearing down smaller houses in Van Nuys and building bigger houses or those new new townhouse/small lot homes seemingly everywhere.

They're def targeting the area north of Burbank blvd and moving north, I'm guessing because its cheaper than Studio City. But these Russians aren't poor either.

[montréaliste]

Originally Posted by Gresto

LED bulbs are 90% more efficient than incandescents, and last much longer. That doesn't mean one should stop trying to conserve and keep lights blazing 24/7, but a mayor deciding to turn off street lights is stupid because citizens want to feel safe in cities, and part of that entails keeping them well-lit.

Definitely.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Chisouthside

Somethings ive noticed in Chicago

Chinese people moving southwest from Chinatown along archer avenue. When I was in high school taking the orange line home all the chinese would get off at the Halsted orange line but now I see them keep riding south to midway station.

Also seeing more diversified ethnicities moving to different areas of the southside. Before you would really only see legacy ethnic whites, mexicans, blacks and chinese in the aforementioned Chinatown. but within the last few years ive noticed new middle eastern families (and not the ones that left the arab enclave around Kedzie and 63rd, Indian and Bangladeshi, turkish, north africans, ukranian, venezuelans , east africans. and im not saying theyre coming down in huge numbers but just consistently seeing these new ethnicities on the south side is something different.

How many Chinese Americans/Canadians actually live in "Chinatown" nowadays?

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

In France the Green mayors turn off the street lights at night. That's one of the reasons why the Green mayor of Bordeaux was defeated in the last municipal election. The first measure of the center-right mayor was to turn the lights on again at night.

In smaller towns and villages, many towns and villages turn off the lights at night because they have no more money. 2 years ago I drove in the countryside near the Loire Valley, and it was crazy the number of towns and villages we crossed at night that were pitch-dark. I thought it was dangerous.

In Paris, due to the pressure from the Green allies of the mayor, they turn the lights on 30 minutes after sunset, and not at sunset as they used to. I find it pretty unpleasant during those 30 minutes when it's already too dark to see the name of streets from a long distance. And they turn the lights of monuments off sooner than before too, despite the fact LED lighting consumes very little electricity, and French electricity is largely nuclear to start with.

That's the ideologues in charge of our cities... The Greens in Paris also want stores to turn off the lights of their windows at night, and they want the La Défense skyscrapers to turn off their lights at night (but they have no authority over La Défense).

This is craziness. Even old streetlights weren't especially expensive to operate, in part because electric rates are lower overnight. Unfortunately, the activists in Boston recently forced the city to change its 2,000+ historic gaslights to LED. Now the U.S. city with the most historic gaslights is Cincinnati, OH. Per Google, Cincinnati has 1,126 gas lights:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1457295,..._ep=EgoyMDI2MDUxMy4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

The gas lights operate 24/7, but their gas usage is very low. They run the lights less brightly today than they did in the 1800s before electric lighting.

Here is a recent article on the lamps:
https://www.cincinnatimagazine.com/article/shedding-a-little-light-on-cincinnatis-gaslamps/

[mousquet]

Originally Posted by Crawford

This is total bullshit. Paris has remarkably few trees.

This is the main commercial corridor in probably the richest Paris neighborhood. There are zero trees.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Eiffel..._ep=EgoyMDI2MDUxMi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

Rue Saint-Dominique? Ah bon... I don't even know whether I've ever set any toe in that street. Maybe, but I didn't pay attention.
Unless you live there or you're some kind of official or employee working in the district, there's usually no reason for going to the 7th arrondissement.
Foreign tourists like you speak of it because urban legend has it that it would be priciest district in town these days. It has a number of mansions to offer to very wealthy people who'd favor it at the moment, that's about it.

Paris is famous for its (quote) "elegant tree-lined boulevards". What makes some people feel like it lacks trees is the density of the inner city, which may cause some kind of painful urban heat island effect in the summer, for example. That's when people desperately look for trees.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

This is craziness. Even old streetlights weren't especially expensive to operate, in part because electric rates are lower overnight. Unfortunately, the activists in Boston recently forced the city to change its 2,000+ historic gaslights to LED. Now the U.S. city with the most historic gaslights is Cincinnati, OH. Per Google, Cincinnati has 1,126 gas lights:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1457295,..._ep=EgoyMDI2MDUxMy4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

The gas lights operate 24/7, but their gas usage is very low. They run the lights less brightly today than they did in the 1800s before electric lighting.

Here is a recent article on the lamps:
https://www.cincinnatimagazine.com/article/shedding-a-little-light-on-cincinnatis-gaslamps/

Their argument is two-pronged: on the one hand, they seek energy saving (which again in the French context of nuclear electricity makes no sense, but most politicians, even on the center-right push for electricity-saving, as if our electricity was produced by coal plants; I see this as a remnant of the old Catholic doxa, you have to fast and be ascetic to be a good person in the eyes of God; this moral attitude is still very strong in France).

On the other hand they say street lighting is bad for animals at night, in particular birds. So it's better to turn off the lights at night for the animals.

Here the new mayor of Bordeaux turning the lights on again (I believe you can select English dubbing of the video in the parameters):

• Video Link