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.
Either way, it's not much better than being located on the freeway. Noise pollution from the cars and trucks would probably drive most insane. Either seems like a very stressful place to live. How would you like to have a constant stream of cars, city buses, large commercial trucks, emergency vehicles with their sirens wailing, etc. passing by your doorstep every 5 seconds?
Adverse health effects of living on major roadways:
That's not even an especially bad suburban arterial example. Take a look at Hillsdale Avenue in San Jose, CA. Six lanes, lots of traffic regularly moving at 55+ and it has houses on it.
at least you dont have to walk a long ways to catch the bus and there wouldnt be a lot of cars when your going to bed, unless you work grave yard.
If I had to choose I'd also go with 2) because of the benefits of living in the city.
Whereas with 1) you have the noise of the big city but none of its benefits, the worst of both worlds.
But neither is ideal.
My ideal is an urban street where cars are eliminated or severely restricted.
Of course for those who prefer suburban living the ideal location is the cul de sac where you have total silence.
Peace and quiet is good but too much peace and quiet feels like living in a ghost town, which to me is not ideal.
That's not even an especially bad suburban arterial example. Take a look at Hillsdale Avenue in San Jose, CA. Six lanes, lots of traffic regularly moving at 55+ and it has houses on it.
San Jose is terribly traffic-congested for the most part, but does have one small but interesting example of what a less car-oriented street could look like. With emphasis on the small, since most who lived in San Jose all their lives probably never heard of it.
San Jose is terribly traffic-congested for the most part, but does have one small but interesting example of what a less car-oriented street could look like. With emphasis on the small, since most who lived in San Jose all their lives probably never heard of it.
Than near this part of Lawrence East which could be the worst stretch of suburban arterial with housing in Toronto. Aside from being relatively poor and somewhat high crime, it's also pretty isolated (far flung, poor transit, poor walkability). https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.76593...BAMfC66akQ!2e0
BTW crime rates in the suburban area are about 1.5x higher, even though the first one was known as Clubland with lots of nightclubs and bars (though several nightclubs have been pushed out by the condo boom). The suburban area might have about 3x more crime than a more average downtown neighbourhood.
Last edited by memph; 11-14-2014 at 12:31 PM..
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.
