Most folks online seem to only know cheap HOA Florida style neighborhoods with zero places to walk, cheap construction and 10 ft between houses.
Everyone makes assumptions of what “dense apartment living” , “suburban living” etc looks like, and folks are generally wrong on both sides of the perspective.
At its best, suburban living is great. I’m biased because I have an awesome suburb home I bought for cheap many years ago, and have awesome neighbors and no need for an HOA. I can access public transportation easily and use it often. Many other great things, including privacy and quiet. I can access the city center in about 20 minutes or great outdoor spaces in say 30. By bike. That’s not normal for lots of folks
But again, I’m biased. My experience is not universal.
suburb you described is pretty much the exception and these are expansive generally as any city.
South or West US style burbs is just the same corporate ghetto except this one does not produce sufficient tax base to support its existence without “growth”
I clarified my bias, but fyi my suburb is in the “west US”. As I said, everyone here is making assumptions. Reducing whole regions of the country to a described “corporate ghetto” isn’t a realistic reflection
Southern US has been development 70-80% post WW2 entire fucking region is corporate ghetto from poorly designed urban cores to the shiti mcmansion burbs 30 miles out.
Sure there are good places near the urban core with 2 million dollar house. That shit is great but kinda not accessible.
No need to argue, we (edit spelling) agree many bad neighborhoods exist. but that’s the exact generalization I’m talking about: not all neighborhoods are alike. My house is nowhere close to 2mil.
Point being broad generalizations exist on both sides of the conversation, and a more nuanced perspective (and a tighter scope of discussion) will better serve this topic, and aid meaningful discussion. Else we end up with this thread.
Using globals, and the biases that come with them is always weaker than focusing on specific areas and the needs therein.
Like I wouldn’t want to assume that all European apartment blocks are Soviet era shoeboxes. That would be a poor understanding of the very different dense housing in Europe.
Most folks online seem to only know cheap HOA Florida style neighborhoods with zero places to walk, cheap construction and 10 ft between houses.
Everyone makes assumptions of what “dense apartment living” , “suburban living” etc looks like, and folks are generally wrong on both sides of the perspective.
At its best, suburban living is great. I’m biased because I have an awesome suburb home I bought for cheap many years ago, and have awesome neighbors and no need for an HOA. I can access public transportation easily and use it often. Many other great things, including privacy and quiet. I can access the city center in about 20 minutes or great outdoor spaces in say 30. By bike. That’s not normal for lots of folks
But again, I’m biased. My experience is not universal.
suburb you described is pretty much the exception and these are expansive generally as any city.
South or West US style burbs is just the same corporate ghetto except this one does not produce sufficient tax base to support its existence without “growth”
I clarified my bias, but fyi my suburb is in the “west US”. As I said, everyone here is making assumptions. Reducing whole regions of the country to a described “corporate ghetto” isn’t a realistic reflection
Southern US has been development 70-80% post WW2 entire fucking region is corporate ghetto from poorly designed urban cores to the shiti mcmansion burbs 30 miles out.
Sure there are good places near the urban core with 2 million dollar house. That shit is great but kinda not accessible.
No need to argue, we (edit spelling) agree many bad neighborhoods exist. but that’s the exact generalization I’m talking about: not all neighborhoods are alike. My house is nowhere close to 2mil.
Point being broad generalizations exist on both sides of the conversation, and a more nuanced perspective (and a tighter scope of discussion) will better serve this topic, and aid meaningful discussion. Else we end up with this thread.
Using globals, and the biases that come with them is always weaker than focusing on specific areas and the needs therein.
Like I wouldn’t want to assume that all European apartment blocks are Soviet era shoeboxes. That would be a poor understanding of the very different dense housing in Europe.