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.
Washington's suburbs have always inspired me. You have a collection of historical sites, beautiful natural qualities, and continued growth. I am also more familiar with Washington's than any other city on the list. Boston comes in second for similar reasons, added one of my favorite features the New England coastline. Seattle has the access to nature that I love, the coastal/water aspect, and unique architecture IMO. San Francisco for scenery, architecture, history, and recent developments in technology. Atlanta simply has nice developments outside their city core, and I like the people there. Denver comes across as a city with newer built suburbs that are well planned. Philly has nice suburbs, but I also know that it has some that might as well be suburbs of Damascus. Dallas is obviously newer, but just to bland for my taste. Chicago's I have never visited (with the exception of O'Hare) and I don't know enough about them to rank them higher. Minneapolis is a place I've never visited, but I couldn't imagine that it would be above any of the other cities on the list.
So there is my reasoning.
Again, this doesn't make much sense to me... this all sounds no different than Philadelphia suburbs to me. I can't imagine any of those cities (except maybe Boston) being considered more historic than the Philadelphia area. Architecture can be subjective based on personal preferences, but thank goodness you do not find as much of the cookie cutter tract housing in the Philadelphia area compared to southern cities, even DC has significantly more tract housing and strip malls than the Philadelphia area.
Thanks! Do both San Fran and Seattle have suburban architecture that's all that unique? More unique than Philly? I'm not familiar with their architecture at all outside of the city.
Also, what history is unique in San Fran that surpasses Philly's?
I honestly don't feel that I have to give a reason for every opinion I hold, but since you've been friendly I will answer your question. I am in no way hating on Philadelphia, but I just am not impressed with its surrounding selection of town and villages. It does have a few that I think would consider charming, but overall I don't like the area for some reason. I never said that there wasn't history in the Philly region because that would be absurd, but I find the villages/towns around Boston and DC to also have those characteristics as well as other qualities that weigh it above Philly. San Francisco has a great history with the Gold Rush and its role as a major player on the west coast. Philly would certainly be among the greatest on a list including all the cities in America, but this is only a small sample size.
As for architecture, you can find similar architecture to Philadelphia throughout most of the NE Corridor. It isn't ugly, but not unique. San Fran most certainly has its own style, and so too does the Pacific NW where Seattle resides. I am not an expert on architecture by any stretch of the imagination. I simply enjoy it, and find it to be a factor in making decisions on threads like this.
Again, this doesn't make much sense to me... this all sounds no different than Philadelphia suburbs to me. I can't imagine any of those cities (except maybe Boston) being considered more historic than the Philadelphia area. Architecture can be subjective based on personal preferences, but thank goodness you do not find as much of the cookie cutter tract housing in the Philadelphia area compared to southern cities, even DC has significantly more tract housing and strip malls than the Philadelphia area.
This is a thread made on the idea of overall quality. You cannot emphasize one or two points that make suburbs stand out and leave out other things they lack. I am not a fan of cookie cutter, but one factor IMO is modern development. I consider quality developments to be more prevalent in other cities than in the Philly metro. Not saying Philly doesn't have any, but I prefer DC in this regard. Sorry that my opinion doesn't match yours, but welcome to America where its ok to disagree.
This is a thread made on the idea of overall quality. You cannot emphasize one or two points that make suburbs stand out and leave out other things they lack. I am not a fan of cookie cutter, but one factor IMO is modern development. I consider quality developments to be more prevalent in other cities than in the Philly metro. Not saying Philly doesn't have any, but I prefer DC in this regard. Sorry that my opinion doesn't match yours, but welcome to America where its ok to disagree.
I don't really think the Philly burbs lack anything major though, so agree to disagree, but the one point I do agree on is that the Philadelphia area has a huge NIMBY problem, some people fight tooth and nail any possible development that will "harm the character" of the area.
However, that is slowly beginning to change, maybe as demographics change? King of Prussia for example is following the path of Tysons Corner, many other towns like Media, West Chester, Conshohocken are also seeing building booms, which is fantastic. Many Philly area residents don't like development (for whatever reason), but growth is necessary to remain relevant and attractive to newcomers.
I honestly don't feel that I have to give a reason for every opinion I hold, but since you've been friendly I will answer your question. I am in no way hating on Philadelphia, but I just am not impressed with its surrounding selection of town and villages. It does have a few that I think would consider charming, but overall I don't like the area for some reason. I never said that there wasn't history in the Philly region because that would be absurd, but I find the villages/towns around Boston and DC to also have those characteristics as well as other qualities that weigh it above Philly. San Francisco has a great history with the Gold Rush and its role as a major player on the west coast. Philly would certainly be among the greatest on a list including all the cities in America, but this is only a small sample size.
As for architecture, you can find similar architecture to Philadelphia throughout most of the NE Corridor. It isn't ugly, but not unique. San Fran most certainly has its own style, and so too does the Pacific NW where Seattle resides. I am not an expert on architecture by any stretch of the imagination. I simply enjoy it, and find it to be a factor in making decisions on threads like this.
One thing Philadelphia has that DC and Boston do not however, are abundance of stone houses.
Philadelphia can be beaten up by the media for their insane sports fans and being second fiddle to New York (much like Boston too), but when it comes to suburbs, they simply can't knock them.
Philadelphia is old money. Their suburbs are simply awesome.
Most others around the country don't compare.
suburban new jersey is quite isolating. i asked a philly native if they thought deptford was still in the philly area and they were like hell no.
related thread: //www.city-data.com/forum/city-...ght=integrated
suburban new jersey is quite isolating. i asked a philly native if they thought deptford was still in the philly area and they were like hell no.
related thread: //www.city-data.com/forum/city-...ght=integrated
I don't like to rag on SJ too much, but its just kind of there. The PA side of the metro offers the most across the board in desirability and contributions to the metro region, Northern DE would be 2nd, then SJ third.
This is a thread made on the idea of overall quality. You cannot emphasize one or two points that make suburbs stand out and leave out other things they lack. I am not a fan of cookie cutter, but one factor IMO is modern development. I consider quality developments to be more prevalent in other cities than in the Philly metro. Not saying Philly doesn't have any, but I prefer DC in this regard. Sorry that my opinion doesn't match yours, but welcome to America where its ok to disagree.
Exactly. I'm a fan of modern development as well, and am definitely in the minority on this site. It all comes down to personal preference. Many like historic, more quaint development, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's all a matter of personal taste/preferences.
I think a lot of people gloss over the Detroit suburbs because of the glaring issues within Detroit itself, but when you can buy a nice home in fun and trendy established suburbs like Ferndale, Grosse Pointe Woods, Royal Oak, or Ann Arbor for $150,000-300,000, while still getting that friendly Midwestern attitude and low cost of living, the Metro's suburbs shouldn't be as overlooked as they are. And this isn't even getting into some of the real upscale places like Bloomfield Hills or Franklin, with their sprawling estates costing about the same as a standard colonial in Berkeley or Stamford.
I honestly don't feel that I have to give a reason for every opinion I hold, but since you've been friendly I will answer your question. I am in no way hating on Philadelphia, but I just am not impressed with its surrounding selection of town and villages. It does have a few that I think would consider charming, but overall I don't like the area for some reason. I never said that there wasn't history in the Philly region because that would be absurd, but I find the villages/towns around Boston and DC to also have those characteristics as well as other qualities that weigh it above Philly. San Francisco has a great history with the Gold Rush and its role as a major player on the west coast. Philly would certainly be among the greatest on a list including all the cities in America, but this is only a small sample size.
The historical assets/charm of suburban DC pale in comparison to suburban Philadelphia, so I think that's a glaring difference between the two.
The DC region simply matured at a much later time, and the lion's share of its growth occurred post-WWII. Parallels can certainly be drawn between the historic nature of the Boston and Philly areas, but it's much harder with the DC area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscross309
As for architecture, you can find similar architecture to Philadelphia throughout most of the NE Corridor. It isn't ugly, but not unique. San Fran most certainly has its own style, and so too does the Pacific NW where Seattle resides. I am not an expert on architecture by any stretch of the imagination. I simply enjoy it, and find it to be a factor in making decisions on threads like this.
Then I'd had to simply say you're not aware of the architectural vernacular that surrounds Philadelphia. Even if it doesn't tickle your fancy, it's simply factually incorrect to assert that the region doesn't have a unique architectural heritage. From prominent architects like Frank Furness and Horace Trumbauer, to a preponderance of colonial-era and loads of masonry and rowhouse architecture, I've yet to come across another region outside of the Philly area that evokes the same look and feel architecturally.
I'd also add that the greatest appeal of the Philly area that you may be undercounting in the fact that it's received the most votes is that, in my mind, has the greatest balance of any major metro area. I'll tick off the reasons why:
- Overall, especially to most of the rest of the US, the area is very well-planned and is well-prepared to accommodate growth
- It is extremely dedicated to open space preservation and has a fantastic gardening tradition (http://americasgardencapital.org/)
- It maintains an "old world" village-y feel (which, counter to what another posted indicated, STRENGTHENS community)
- It has a very high income-to-COL ratio which (despite your implication that places like Camden or Chester are not extreme exceptions) provides a sense of widespread affluence.
To me, the Philly area has a soul in a way that most places do not. Places like DC are more modernized and fast-growing for sure, but there's very little identity or sense of place.
I value areas with as little "generica" and as much uniqueness as possible, and for that Philadelphia is among the top contenders.
Last edited by Duderino; 04-12-2017 at 11:09 AM..
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.
