U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-02-2014, 09:44 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,414 posts, read 11,910,584 times
Reputation: 10533

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
My suburb has a bunch of local cafes. San Francisco has a bunch of McDonald's. There are very few artistic, creative types left in San Francisco, unless you're talking about programmers, doctors, lawyers, and engineers. The "starving artist" creative-types live in the bland suburbs not giving the community a sort of soul to make it stand out because they can't afford to live in the city. The same is true for Manhattan. Next, I'm sure, we'll be hearing how Bushwick has more soul and community than Manhattan.
This point was made last year by Alan Ehrenhalt in the Great Inversion that cities became the engines of creativity in the economy (where the artists lived, and where the interesting independent businesses opened up) because they were cheap. Now that core city neighborhoods are getting more expensive, chains are pushing everyone out of the most desirable city neighborhoods, and immigrants move directly to the suburbs. He uses Gwinnett County Georgia as an example of what the future of U.S. suburbia will look like as cities become increasingly homogenized.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-02-2014, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Youngstown, Oh.
4,893 posts, read 7,652,237 times
Reputation: 4508
I hesitate to reply to a threat with a title that starts off with "Do you people honestly believe..."

But, to answer the question, no.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 02:47 PM
 
Location: Richmond/Philadelphia/Brooklyn
1,263 posts, read 1,272,260 times
Reputation: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
My suburb has a bunch of local cafes. San Francisco has a bunch of McDonald's. There are very few artistic, creative types left in San Francisco, unless you're talking about programmers, doctors, lawyers, and engineers. The "starving artist" creative-types live in the bland suburbs not giving the community a sort of soul to make it stand out because they can't afford to live in the city. The same is true for Manhattan. Next, I'm sure, we'll be hearing how Bushwick has more soul and community than Manhattan.
I did NOT say that every suburb lacks a soul (actually I have found that some suburbs (like the ones you mentioned around The bay area/ mid California). Also, I have read the great inversion, and while he does state that many communities will become more culturally diverse (namely inner suburbs) even in some of the most gentrified and wealthy of areas mentioned in the book (Soho, Lincoln Park) there is certainly much more of a cultural presence than in wealthy new suburbs. and It even seems so compared with these poorer, and minority dominated suburbs. Yes, the starving artists have moved to other neighborhoods, but it seems that many of the wealthy who move in tend to be much more of a creative, and designer type, not necessarily your average banker, lawyer, etc. To conclude, my point is, I don't think creative types will ever move into an area as dull, and hideous as the far cul-de sacs of suburbia (possibly a number of poorer ones may move into the pre 1950s inner suburbs where there is still some sense of community rather than where everything seems plastic, and fake). Maybe those poorer immigrant, and minority groups may also find themselves in inner suburbs, but I think more creative types would never willingly live there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 06:01 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,981 posts, read 102,527,356 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogre View Post
However, the OP referred to "every suburb," presumably meant to include all suburbs, not just post-WWII 'burbs. You're cherry-picking here. Kind of like answering the question of whether all cities look the same by saying yes, because (in the view of the respondent) all old small industrial cities have that dreary look of grimy red bricks downtown and faded, gray, cramped, sagging old frame houses in the residential sections.



Another example of cherry-picking. Industrial suburbs are suburbs. Not counting them because they don't fit the preconception that all 'burbs look like Levittown is stacking the deck.

Actually, to those of us familiar with suburban areas that have seen extensive growth since WWII, it's clear that even those suburbs are not all the same. Not even close.
Agreed, esp. re: the bold. There's a lot of "that's different" on this forum, even if it's said in a different way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Probably because he thought it was a more relevant distinction. Industrial rarely get grouped with other suburbs, historically they have more in common with center cities and face similar issues.
It's either "all suburbs" or it's something else. I'd disagree that industrial suburbs rarely get grouped with other suburbs. In fact, I disagree they have more in common with center cities. This is just another way of saying "oh, that's different".

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I suspect that poster has seen little of the country except for NYC, and whatever he saw seemed the same. From another post he made, he mentioned he immigrated recently to the US
Then maybe s/he shouldn't have made the statement. If you don't know enough about Laramie to know it's not a suburb of anything (what did s/he think it was a suburb of, Denver?) maybe you shouldn't call it a suburb and claim it's just like Amityville, NY.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 07:20 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,921,149 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
It's either "all suburbs" or it's something else. I'd disagree that industrial suburbs rarely get grouped with other suburbs. In fact, I disagree they have more in common with center cities. This is just another way of saying "oh, that's different".
Since few agree on this forum what "suburbs" refer to, all suburbs might mean different things to different people. [No, I don't want to another pointless argument on what suburb mean]

In my experience, industrial suburbs don't usually get grouped with other suburbs.

As for the bolded, why? Industrial suburbs generally have the postwar flight of the middle class, similar school issues. Density and building stock age is more in common with typical city neighborhoods, often demographics are, too. Municipality and tax base is different, however.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 07:21 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,921,149 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR_C View Post
I hesitate to reply to a threat with a title that starts off with "Do you people honestly believe..."
Agreed. The OP is trying to argue against a position he doesn't believe in but have read from some other post, it starts with a strawman position, though a few people have agreed with it on the thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 07:30 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,981 posts, read 102,527,356 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Since few agree on this forum what "suburbs" refer to, all suburbs might mean different things to different people. [No, I don't want to another pointless argument on what suburb mean]

In my experience, industrial suburbs don't usually get grouped with other suburbs.

As for the bolded, why? Industrial suburbs generally have the postwar flight of the middle class, similar school issues. Density and building stock age is more in common with typical city neighborhoods, often demographics are, too. Municipality and tax base is different, however.
I grew up in what could be called an "industrial suburb". It wasn't NYC then and it's not NYC now!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 07:31 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,921,149 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post

I don't know that I'd really agree that older is more distinct. The parts of the Peninsula and Crocker Amazon Sunset/Richmond in SF look fairly alike in terms of architecture. And while Daly City is quite old, the majority of it was built post-war. It probably had as many cows as people (slight exaggeration possibly) before Westlake was developed after the war. It's now the largest city in San Mateo County and has one of the highest transit usage rankings in the county and the second highest in California. Not bad for a 'burbs thats grown more than ten-fold since the 1940s. The Cow Palace hosted livestock shows long before the San Francisco Warriors.
One odd thing to me, is why so many San Francisco area homes have garages. For example, this Daly City neighborhood:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=daly+...78.67,,0,-6.16

many smaller Long Island homes lack garages. late 50s tract home development. Lower density (lot size around 5000-6000 sq ft) than the daly city one but developer never bothered to put garages:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=70+Ea...10.44,,0,-1.12

Going down to the parts of the South Bay that were built in the '40s and '50s, they don't look Daly City. They're more conventional MCM and ranch which were the ubiquitous forms of construction in West, especially California, at the time, kind of like row houses are so ubiquitous in many cities on the east coast in the 19th century. You still had plenty of variety. Say Falls Church, VA. Almost none of that was built prior to the war aside from a few farm houses. There's a few losely ranch-style homes, but it's by no means common.

Quote:
Move forward to the '80s-2000s and DC burbs still builds tons of Federal-style homes, row houses. You'd have trouble finding one out here in California. We don't build that stuff at all. Even if you're talking about the Neoeclectic "Mr. Potato Head" tracts, the elements they randomly borrow from are way different than we use which aren't even that common in DC burbs and are practically all that is built here. While most residential construction across the country is Neoeclectic, that doesn't mean they look similar. Street patterns and designs are different, zoning different.
The denser parts of Daly City look like row homes to me, even if the exterior style is different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 07:34 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,921,149 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
I grew up in what could be called an "industrial suburb". It wasn't NYC then and it's not NYC now!
Might make more sense if you compared to the city proper of the same metro area. Beaver Falls definitely had a similar population loss as Pittsburgh, higher than the metro area average, newer suburbs must have had less losses:

Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2014, 07:35 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,981 posts, read 102,527,356 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Might make more sense if you compared to the city proper of the same metro area. Beaver Falls definitely had a similar population loss as Pittsburgh, higher than the metro area average, newer suburbs must have had less losses:

Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm way too brain dead to argue this tonight. I'll be back, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top