Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Agree using Pittsburgh as some all encomposing example seems EXTREMELY short-sighted
I am hard pressed to come up with a street car suburb in the NE corrider where lack of sidewalks are not the extreme exception
Agree with the first sentence, but I like to talk about what I know, unlike many posters on CD. I brought up Pittsburgh as an example, and someone else took off with it, disagreed with me, started posting google satellite pictures, etc.
Your middle sentence is so full of double negatives I can't quite figure out what you're trying to say. Try again with positives, please.
Moderator cut: off-topic
Last edited by nei; 10-06-2011 at 06:20 AM..
Reason: removed response to deleted attack
The block I grew up on had lovely older trees - oaks, maples, and yes, American Chestnuts.
We kids played on the sidewalk, in the back patio, and the school yard. I would say it was idyllic in some ways. I also got to visit Prospect Park, Brooklyn Botanic Gardens, as well as museums and stuff. We often vacationed in the country, so I got to see my share of cows.
By the time I was a teenager I didnt like living in Brooklyn so much. I wished we lived in Manhattan! Cause my HS was there, and many of my friends, and so much of what I liked to do.
I have since lived in suburbs and cities. I have found a few folks in suburbs who really take advantage of nature. Mostly they do so no more than city folks, and some less so. Some suburban folks take advantage of city offerings, but many don't.
I think the ideal places to raise kids would be either an uptownish city nabe, or a street car suburb (or one of those neo trad suburbs that tries to imitate a street car suburb). Some mix of private space and well utilized public space. With some way for teens to get around without a car. OTOH I think kids can live denser, or less dense without major harm.
I just think that people who insist they MUST have at least 1/4 acre lot "for the well being of the kids" are silly. Folks who insisted city life would be necessary for kids would be silly too, but I dont see many of them.
Agree with the first sentence, but I like to talk about what I know, unlike many posters on CD. I brought up Pittsburgh as an example, and someone else took off with it, disagreed with me, started posting google satellite pictures, etc.
Your middle sentence is so full of double negatives I can't quite figure out what you're trying to say. Try again with positives, please.
Moderator cut: off-topic
I didn't necessarily disagree with you, just questioned what you stated given my experience there. I also politely corrected myself.
As someone else mentioned, the exception is the rule here.
I didn't necessarily disagree with you, just questioned what you stated given my experience there. I also politely corrected myself.
As someone else mentioned, the exception is the rule here.
Sorry, I seriously don't believe that Pittsburgh is any exception. I also lived in the Albany, NY suburbs. There were no sidewalks in any burb in our area. Perhaps there were some burbs somewhere with sidewalks, but I did not experience any of them. Posters from other parts of the NE have remarked that their area does not have suburban sidewalks, and/or they have posted pictures of burbs w/o sidewalks. A couple examples are Scranton-Wilkes Barre, PA and Syracuse, NY. What other cities are we talking about?
Sorry, I seriously don't believe that Pittsburgh is any exception. I also lived in the Albany, NY suburbs. There were no sidewalks in any burb in our area. Perhaps there were some burbs somewhere with sidewalks, but I did not experience any of them. Posters from other parts of the NE have remarked that their area does not have suburban sidewalks, and/or they have posted pictures of burbs w/o sidewalks. A couple examples are Scranton-Wilkes Barre, PA and Syracuse, NY. What other cities are we talking about?
All those cities you listed are in the interior Northeast not the coastal Northeast Corridor. I think more of Boston, NYC and Philly when I think of the Northeast, and more people live there. As I said before, I can remember sidewalks in some NYC Metro suburbs and some not.
First house I lived in (in a 1960ish suburb in Long Island) was on a street with a sidewalk.
All those cities you listed are in the interior Northeast not the coastal Northeast Corridor. I think more of Boston, NYC and Philly when I think of the Northeast, and more people live there. As I said before, I can remember sidewalks in some NYC Metro suburbs and some not.
Agreed. I think a lot would have to do with the timeframe of construction as well.
40s and 50s will largely have sidewalks, seems like the 60s and 70s did not while i find virtually no burbs being wuilt without sidewalks today. Which honestly can be a little funny, though are not a bad thing. But 40-45 wide streets and large lots in exurban areas with sidewalks seem more a zoning need than a truely practical one. In the closer in streetcar burbs I cant think of any in the Philly area, jersey or NYC that i have experienced that do not. And ot your point the number of people that live in these areas may outnumber the other cities in total population by a long way
Sorry, I seriously don't believe that Pittsburgh is any exception. I also lived in the Albany, NY suburbs. There were no sidewalks in any burb in our area. Perhaps there were some burbs somewhere with sidewalks, but I did not experience any of them. Posters from other parts of the NE have remarked that their area does not have suburban sidewalks, and/or they have posted pictures of burbs w/o sidewalks. A couple examples are Scranton-Wilkes Barre, PA and Syracuse, NY. What other cities are we talking about?
My issue is not that Pittsburgh or Albany don't have sidewalks in some neighborhoods (because they do in some, as I've shown). My issue is that you're taking a couple examples and acting like it's really not more common for sidewalks to exist in suburban neighborhoods in the NE based on timeframe (aka streetcar suburbs). It just sounds like a strawman argument.
If that's what you're saying, then why don't you provide proof that more streetcar suburbs lack sidewalks vs. have sidewalks in the NE. If that's not what you're claiming, please elaborate.
They're fairly walkable from their parents' car, anyhow. The park in the suburb where I grew up was of the manicured variety--mostly lawn, with sports fields and a handful of oaks. The neighborhood parks downtown are small (around 2.5 acres, a city block) but they're plenty big enough for a small kid to run around and play on until they get tuckered out, whether or not they have play equipment (when I was a kid, a lack of formalized "play equipment" was not an obstacle as long as there were benches or other things to turn into imaginary forts etcetera.) The larger downtown parks are as big as my suburban park, and unlike my suburb, there's a pretty much completely wild river/nature area running through the north edge of downtown, with another river at the western edge of downtown. The most popular bike trail in the country runs through the first and ends at the second--that's where most of the museums are.
A manicured garden is not "back to nature"--which is why suburbs don't count as "nature" even though there are trees. But a manicured city park is as close to nature as a manicured front lawn is--and, as we have seen already, it's hardly the only option for city parks.
Many museums have great "replay" value, especially if you have a membership: the railroad museum has a dedicated group of "regulars" who buy junior memberships (around $20 a year, which includes unlimited visits, unlimited train rides, and a monthly birthday event) and show up on a regular basis. The play area actually became somewhat legendary as a good (and safe!) place to meet other single parents. It is also located in a district of other attractions that hold a child's attention (Candy stores! Toy stores! Hot-dog stands and all you can eat pizza!) as well as an adult's (Dance clubs! Fine dining! Gourmet coffee and all-you-can-drink mimosas!) that somehow exist simultaneously without a vortex in time and space opening up or anything. It is also close to other museums--and even the fine-art museum has kids' programs pretty regularly.
The things you mention that appeal to adults, with the exception of the first, are appealing mainly to upper midde-class yuppies. Most around here love Olive Garden and Applebee's and get their coffee from the gas station (or at best, Caribou Coffee or Starbucks). I would say with certainty that there are a lot more Bud Light drinkers than mimosa fans.
Quote:
tvdxer: Kids today expect to be driven everywhere because they grew up in suburbs where it was the only way to get anywhere--they never learned how to self-navigate. But the current trend is that kids are LESS likely to get licenses than they used to--they're more interested in getting a cell phone early than a car. It's not the 1950s anymore.
That's interesting that you say that, because in the 1950s most kids walked or biked to school - very few were driven and school buses were apparently much less common than they are today. The girl I was referring to had lived in that home, which is walkable to many destinations and within biking distance of many more, her entire life.
(Note that I am, most of the time, a critic of suburbia as it presently exists. I just want to point out some glaring flaws in the arguments of "urbanists".)
All those cities you listed are in the interior Northeast not the coastal Northeast Corridor. I think more of Boston, NYC and Philly when I think of the Northeast
Oh, please. The Northeast is waaaaaaay bigger than just Boston, New York and Philadelphia. And the rest of the Northeast does count.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA
My issue is not that Pittsburgh or Albany don't have sidewalks in some neighborhoods (because they do in some, as I've shown). My issue is that you're taking a couple examples and acting like it's really not more common for sidewalks to exist in suburban neighborhoods in the NE based on timeframe (aka streetcar suburbs).
I believe what Kat is doing is pointing out some exceptions that she has personal knowledge of to the broad assumption often posted here that older, pre-war suburbs have sidewalks, easy access to public transportation, etc. Not all pre-war suburbs are alike, just as not all post-war suburbs are soulless, vapid tracts filled with Wii-playing zombies, as some here would have you believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvdxer
That's interesting that you say that, because in the 1950s most kids walked or biked to school - very few were driven and school buses were apparently much less common than they are today.
Now there are state laws that kids can't walk more than x number of miles before the school has to provide bus service; those laws didn't exist 40 years ago. Add to that the consolidation of school districts, and of schools within those school districts, and you have more kids attending larger schools, which are not necessarily near where people actually live.
I believe what Kat is doing is pointing out some exceptions that she has personal knowledge of to the broad assumption often posted here that older, pre-war suburbs have sidewalks, easy access to public transportation, etc. Not all pre-war suburbs are alike, just as not all post-war suburbs are soulless, vapid tracts filled with Wii-playing zombies, as some here would have you believe..
If we are all agreed that suburbs with sidewalks, and with access to public transportation are good things, we are more in agreement than the national consensus I think.
Since we can't actually build any more pre 1945 suburbs, or any more 1945 to 1995 suburbs, but only post 2011 suburbs Im not sure why showing why arguments about ALL prewar suburbs being better than ALL post war suburbs is particularly meaningful.
I always thought the purpose of a forum on urban planning was to discuss how we should plan our metro areas - I am always befuddled when folks use it to declare moral superiority based on where they live (Maybe there should be a different forum for that?)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
