Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Suburbia Sucks

likewise.am

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 298 posts

Re: Why Suburbia Sucks

#231

Post by crimsonalucard »

coned88 wrote: post #151
terda12 wrote: post #135

I agree. I live in suburbia and I feel like I'm slowly choked out of my humanity. Can't wait to move to a damn city or somewhere with more density. America's suburbia was designed for cars and cars only. Here's an anecdote. My little brother has after school band practice 30 mins drive away. What does he do after school? He can't walk home, so he has to wait for me to pick him up. He can't go out to a movie with his…

On the other hand if he was allowed to walk home your parents would likely be arrested for child abuse.

I specifically looked up this podcast to show you guys because i find it relevant to this situation. I believe any parent will find it very interesting.

http://www.npr.org/2015/01/16/377517810/world-with-no-fear

Re: Why Suburbia Sucks

#232

Post by abalashov »

tptacek wrote: post #217
abalashov wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed; in Europe, you can find the same reproduced at the village and hamlet level, too. It's a density issue, at heart. Any US "city" (if it should be called that) of 100K-500K occupies 10x-20x the surface area that it would in most parts of the world, removing much of the cohesion that leads us to call places cities or towns in the first place.

I think you're going to get in trouble with generalizations like "any US city", or even "any US city of 100k-500k". Can you be more specific about the faux-cities you're referring to, rather than nerd-baiting me to come up with a list of cities that defy your criteria?

I should know better than to use words like "any" with programmers, it's true.

In response, I started compiling a list, but then I realised I can't think of a counterexample. "Any" might be just about right. Do you know of one?

I'm thinking of places like Indianapolis, Fairfax, Macon (GA), almost all college towns I've been to...

Re: Why Suburbia Sucks

#233

Post by crimsonalucard »

terda12 wrote: post #162
coned88 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not in America anymore.

There's a local elementary school nearby, I see kids walk home from school everyday. I'm not sure where you are pulling that data from. A young teenager can walk/bike home by him/herself relatively safely in most of America. Or are we just living in a world where a bit of hardship on a kid is "child abuse" now?

8 year olds and ten year olds use to walk all over the city in the 1970s and 80s

Re: Why Suburbia Sucks

#234

Post by jandrese »

abalashov wrote: post #200
maxsilver wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Suburbia exists because people want a quiet, relatively safe place for their kids to grow up. And because it's the only thing affordable. Which does not get mentioned enough. I would love to put my family in a walkable urban environment. But I don't have a $500k+ housing budget, so anything even remotely urban is completely out of the question, unless it's in the heart of some gangland territory somewhere.

It does get a lot of mention. If the overwhelming majority of housing development in the US is of the suburban sprawl type, it stands to reason that the few pockets of non-dilapidated dense urbanism will be expensive. Amusingly, this is often cited as evidence of suburbia's unique capacity to provide "affordable housing". Scarce things are unaffordable. Who knew!

Yes, but it is annoying to get these mildly scolding articles about how I'm a terrible person for living in a suburb, when the only places in the city I could afford on my budget are classified as ghettos. They don't even have good transit access because the crushing poverty in that part of the city allowed the transit to crumble.

Re: Why Suburbia Sucks

#235

Post by tptacek »

abalashov wrote: post #232
tptacek wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're going to get in trouble with generalizations like "any US city", or even "any US city of 100k-500k". Can you be more specific about the faux-cities you're referring to, rather than nerd-baiting me to come up with a list of cities that defy your criteria?

I should know better than to use words like "any" with programmers, it's true. In response, I started compiling a list, but then I realised I can't think of a counterexample. "Any" might be just about right. Do you know of one? I'm thinking of places like Indianapolis, Fairfax, Macon (GA), almost all college towns I've been to...

The one that sprang immediately to mind was Ann Arbor, Michigan, because I used to live there. But I can come up with more, if you like.

Your argument is that mid-sized US cities with densities comparable to European cities are rare, and that this causes pathology. That sounds intuitively defensible, because America definitely has more space to play with for its cities than Europe. But let's try to be specific.

What's a model European city, so we can compare its density to some set of American cities?

Re: Why Suburbia Sucks

#236

Post by abalashov »

tptacek wrote: post #235
abalashov wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should know better than to use words like "any" with programmers, it's true. In response, I started compiling a list, but then I realised I can't think of a counterexample. "Any" might be just about right. Do you know of one? I'm thinking of places like Indianapolis, Fairfax, Macon (GA), almost all college towns I've been to...

The one that sprang immediately to mind was Ann Arbor, Michigan, because I used to live there. But I can come up with more, if you like. Your argument is that mid-sized US cities with densities comparable to European cities are rare, and that this causes pathology. That sounds intuitively defensible, because America definitely has more space to play with for its cities than Europe. But let's try to be specific. What'…

I spent my middle and high school years in Athens, GA. It would not ordinarily be seen as a target for sprawl-bashing, given its ostensibly compact nature. And it's true, the downtown and campus are fused into something fairly livable.

However, as usual, 90% of the population doesn't live in that tiny core, but instead in the same kind of low-density layout one can find anywhere in America. While I haven't been to Ann Arbor since grade six or so, my recollection is that it's similar; wonderful UMich campus, nice downtown, but most of the Ann Arbor-Ypsilanti area? Same old automobile folk traditions. Am I misremembering?

Re: comparing density --

Density is certainly not the only variable. In my article, I made the point about how proximity/adjacency != walking accessibility. That seems relevant, too. It's probably quite possible to build a place with a decently high density where a car is still required to go anywhere, or a relatively low-density but profoundly pedestrian-friendly hamlet.

Re: Why Suburbia Sucks

#237

Post by tptacek »

abalashov wrote: post #236
tptacek wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one that sprang immediately to mind was Ann Arbor, Michigan, because I used to live there. But I can come up with more, if you like. Your argument is that mid-sized US cities with densities comparable to European cities are rare, and that this causes pathology. That sounds intuitively defensible, because America definitely has more space to play with for its cities than Europe. But let's try to be specific. What'…

I spent my middle and high school years in Athens, GA. It would not ordinarily be seen as a target for sprawl-bashing, given its ostensibly compact nature. And it's true, the downtown and campus are fused into something fairly livable. However, as usual, 90% of the population doesn't live in that tiny core, but instead in the same kind of low-density layout one can find anywhere in America. While I haven't been to An…

I know Athens solely from REM and Elephant 6 music. I've never been there.

Saline and Ypsi are suburbs of Ann Arbor.

Ann Arbor itself is mostly walkable, tree-lined, mixed-use, and connected by public transportation.

More than 90% of the population of Ann Arbor lives in Ann Arbor and not Ypsi or Saline. :)

What are the rest of the variables? I'd like to drive to specificity. If there's a set of US midsized cities that defies your characterizations, maybe there's something interesting that ties them together.

I'm certainly not going to deny that there are crappy cities!

Re: Why Suburbia Sucks

#238

Post by vasilipupkin »

tptacek wrote: post #207
vasilipupkin wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that US is really big and has lots of different types of suburbs. For example, Chicago has quite a few dense walkable suburbs with easy access to public transport

Chicago has basically two of those. :) But if you relax the public transportation constraint, I agree: the list of Chicago suburbs that defy most of the characterizations in this post is pretty large.

Oak Park, Evanston, Wilmette, pretty much all of north shore

Re: Why Suburbia Sucks

#239

Post by abalashov »

jandrese wrote: post #234
abalashov wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does get a lot of mention. If the overwhelming majority of housing development in the US is of the suburban sprawl type, it stands to reason that the few pockets of non-dilapidated dense urbanism will be expensive. Amusingly, this is often cited as evidence of suburbia's unique capacity to provide "affordable housing". Scarce things are unaffordable. Who knew!

Yes, but it is annoying to get these mildly scolding articles about how I'm a terrible person for living in a suburb, when the only places in the city I could afford on my budget are classified as ghettos. They don't even have good transit access because the crushing poverty in that part of the city allowed the transit to crumble.

If anyone deserves a scolding, it's governments for their insane 50s-60s zoning laws and perverse incentives offered to developers of sprawl, and whoever else is responsible for the fact that suburbia is the only option you've got.

Re: Why Suburbia Sucks

#240

Post by tptacek »

vasilipupkin wrote: post #238
tptacek wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chicago has basically two of those. :) But if you relax the public transportation constraint, I agree: the list of Chicago suburbs that defy most of the characterizations in this post is pretty large.

Oak Park, Evanston, Wilmette, pretty much all of north shore

Sure, you can say there are four such suburbs: Oak Park/River Forest and Evanston/Wilmette. To me, each suburb pair is essentially one area, but I can't defend that argument with a straight face here. (I live in Oak Park).

We also have a lot of walkable, tree-lined suburbs without huge setbacks and, with the exception of blighted commercial drags like Butterfield and Roosevelt, few of the traffic setbacks and parking lot hells that this post talks about.

Post reply on HN