It might inspire some Americans to rethink the destructive notion (drummed into our culture for decades, and supported by people like Robert Bruegmann as discussed on this site) that suburban sprawl is the result of a natural human tendency. In my uneducated opinion, it ain't: it's the result of many UNnatural things, especially the interstate highway system.

Maybe if information like that in this study got out to a broader public, more Americans who don't live near cities might realize that cities are better for the environment than suburbs, and that the real natural human tendency is to live close to other people, not separated by Chemlawns and eight-lane highways.

2. J:Lai - that's optimistic, and I hope you're right. Simple supply and demand says that if cities become more desirable (like NYC), real estate will become more expensive, especially in desirable (i.e. convenient) areas (like NYC). However, supply and demand also says that providing more supply (of housing in this case), such as you suggest thru denser zoning, could mitigate the problem. Another solution this highlights and which I think is important is decentralizing center cities so that they have multiple satellite central business districts, all easily connected with mass transit. To their credit, this is a major part of the Bloomberg administration's economic development strategy - bringing the jobs closer to the residential areas, by developing or expanding such areas as Downtown Brooklyn, Long Island City, Jamaica, Bronx Hub, and Flushing.

While there are elements of truth in what you say, I believe the vision of cities as exclusive places for the super-rich is a result of naively predicting current trends into the future with no moderating influences. The same type of predictions made in the 1970s and 1980s led people to expect that by the present day, cities would be completely overrun with hyper-violent criminals and squalid poverty.

The reality is that these things to move back and forth in cycles. A large city can not function without a sizable population of lower and middle income residents. There is are large parts of NYC that are affordable for low and middle income people (although probably not enough), but these places are increasingly far removed from what we think of as the "city" - the lower half of Manhattan.

The atomization of neighborhoods brings its own problems, however many of these problems could be solved by improved mass transit and re-zoning for denser residential development.

If only it were that simple. Unfortunately, the financial advantage of living in New York City is increasingly available only to the financially advantaged. Rich people want short commutes also, which is one reason for the gentrification of neighborhoods once thought to be undesirable to families and young professionals, such as the Lower East Side and parts of Brooklyn. The real estate bubble may pop in the suburbs, but with the increasing appeal of city living, places like NYC will become less and less affordable for the poor and middle class.

Unless the city makes a concerted effort to provide affordable housing to all income levels, we are headed to a situation where the poor will be forced out of the city and increasingly burdened by the emotional, physical, and financial toll of car culture and traffic jams.

The irony is that suburbs that were once built to accommodate those who fled the cities are now housing more and more people who would rather live in the city but can't afford it.

The depth of the changes on Metro-North was evident during a morning weekday visit of several hours to the Fordham station, at East Fordham Road and Third Avenue in the Bronx. The northbound platform for trains to places like White Plains, Chappaqua, New Rochelle and Greenwich was usually jammed with well over 100 people. The opposite platform, for trains bound for Grand Central Terminal, was virtually deserted by comparison. Part of the reason was that taking the subway is cheaper.

This commuting pattern is the direct result of "unaffordable suburbs" both in housing and transportation costs. What we need are more communities with a diversity of income levels in relatively close proximity, linked together by good mass transit. This is something the suburbs are not good at doing (even if you let 12+ people live in a 3 bedroom house).

For example: No other place in the U.S. can you find free entertainment just about every day - quality events - outdoor movies, concerts, museums, etc! This summer was amazing, in Brooklyn FREE events were actually competing with each other for attendees.

And I love being able to walk down a street and get a 25 cent banana nearly every block.