What's Wrong with the Suburbs? (Atlanta, Sandy Springs: transplants, home, employment)
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.
i hate the suburbs because i grew up there. i hate the elitist uppity people who live there, who somehow think that they're better than everyone in the metro area because they threw away $800,000 on a garish tasteless house built out of plywood and drywall in the middle of what used to be a cow pasture.
however, there are plenty of suburbs that don't fit that mould anymore— marietta, roswell, sandy springs, etc. i don't mind those places because they are diverse and the people there are not elitist social-climbers.
but when it comes to the style of development, i still prefer the intown neighbourhoods over the inner suburbs. why? because i would like to live in a place where i don't have to spend a large amount of my life driving. being at the end of a cul-de-sac inside a maze of other houses means that i have to get and the car to go shop, i have to get in the car to go to work, and oxymoronically i have to get in the car to go take a walk in the park. the entire function of these suburbs is built around people who commute to work, and the development style assumes that this is the only thing these people do, like robots. all roads lead together and out of the subdivision, in an efficient freeway style fashion. is that any kind of way to live?!
the second reason is the lack of density— i like seeing people, and being located in a giant lung-type formation of houses where people always have to drive to go anywhere they want to go, means i don't ever see anyone out walking down the road. yeah, every 45 minutes someone will walk by with a dog, but it isn't like intown neighbourhoods— and when i say intown neighbourhoods i'm not necessarily talking about urban areas. even places like kirkwood where you have your own house and it's as big as you need, the streets are laid out where all the streets intersect each other, and there are sidewalks everywhere, and the park is just around the corner, the grocery store is two blocks away, etc. it's a more free-form setup that accommodates everyone in that you can branch out in any direction and you're not limited by how the developer saw fit to border off your neighbourhood. for example look at this:
in a traditional neighbourhood, this would not be a problem, you just go a block over. if a different architect designed their house, it doesn't mean you're completely cut off from them because they're not in the same subdivision.
Go back and choose any of the hundreds of posts I have made about Atlanta and environs and see where I have derided the city or areas ITP at any time. Yes, I have pointed out the snobbery of ITPers, but I have yet to deride the area itself.
Saintmarks, there is no doubt that you don't do this but a lot of people do.
Unfortunately there is also a small contingent of people who bash the suburbs.
People in the suburbs look down their noses at ITP'ers alot more than people in the city look down their noses at people from OTP. Dont even front. There were even a few jabs in this very same thread. Like someone actually said that without the 'burbs Atlanta would be another Memphis. And I actually took offense to that, and if that wasn't a snobbish ass backwards statement then I dont know what is.
It always cracks me up when people say things like that. The suburbs as a whole are not nicer than the city, yeah you have some nice ones, but most look old and run down and not in a cool way either. And when I say run down I dont mean in a grimey, crime infested way. They look run down in a country, slow, backwater type of way. What is so nice about that I will never know.
Not even touching on the traffic, that by itself is enough for me to never even think about OTP. I like to joke that the only time I touch the interstate is when I am going out of town. In the middle of rush hour on a Friday afternoon I can get from East Atlanta in SE to Howell Mill Rd in NW without touching the Interstate and I cant imagine living any other way.
People who were born ITP do not grow up and move OTP, its the people who were born OTP who grow up and move ITP. The only exceptions are when people just cant afford it and they have no other choice but to move out there.
Don't front? Dude, you're not regulating anybody on here. That's your opinion that suburbanites look down there noses more, and mine is the opposite. Like I asked in the original post, "What is wrong with the suburbs?" You nor anyone else has come up with any type of real anwer based on facts. In reality, there is nothing wrong with the 'burbs. It's all about preference.
Woodstock is VERY cookie-cutter apart from it's downtown area which is decent for a small suburban city.
Exactly my point.
Quote:
Just look at all the businesses on the main drag(HWY 92). It's like an exact replica of driving down 138 in Conyers. Boring. Cities are unique and interesting. Cities have stories to tell. Suburbs don't, especially the newer ones. They are sterile.
Which is why I don't live off of 92 (and yes we did look at houses down that way). Some suburban cities also have a story to tell. They are not boring or sterile.
i hate the suburbs because i grew up there. i hate the elitist uppity people who live there, who somehow think that they're better than everyone in the metro area because they threw away $800,000 on a garish tasteless house built out of plywood and drywall in the middle of what used to be a cow pasture.
however, there are plenty of suburbs that don't fit that mould anymore— marietta, roswell, sandy springs, etc. i don't mind those places because they are diverse and the people there are not elitist social-climbers.
but when it comes to the style of development, i still prefer the intown neighbourhoods over the inner suburbs. why? because i would like to live in a place where i don't have to spend a large amount of my life driving. being at the end of a cul-de-sac inside a maze of other houses means that i have to get and the car to go shop, i have to get in the car to go to work, and oxymoronically i have to get in the car to go take a walk in the park. the entire function of these suburbs is built around people who commute to work, and the development style assumes that this is the only thing these people do, like robots. all roads lead together and out of the subdivision, in an efficient freeway style fashion. is that any kind of way to live?!
the second reason is the lack of density— i like seeing people, and being located in a giant lung-type formation of houses where people always have to drive to go anywhere they want to go, means i don't ever see anyone out walking down the road. yeah, every 45 minutes someone will walk by with a dog, but it isn't like intown neighbourhoods— and when i say intown neighbourhoods i'm not necessarily talking about urban areas. even places like kirkwood where you have your own house and it's as big as you need, the streets are laid out where all the streets intersect each other, and there are sidewalks everywhere, and the park is just around the corner, the grocery store is two blocks away, etc. it's a more free-form setup that accommodates everyone in that you can branch out in any direction and you're not limited by how the developer saw fit to border off your neighbourhood. for example look at this:
in a traditional neighbourhood, this would not be a problem, you just go a block over. if a different architect designed their house, it doesn't mean you're completely cut off from them because they're not in the same subdivision.
And this is what I am getting at, about it being about PREFERENCE. Your preference is fine and your response is respectful. However, when I have read comments on City-Data (in various city forums), people act like something is really wrong with the suburbs, as if it has ruined their cities, and that's why I asked the question.
For me, coming from a small town, spending a lot of time in rural areas, living all over Atlanta (ITP and OTP), and spending a good amount of time in other countries, I am at the point where I don't like density. I don't care for seeing people all over the place, all the time. I don't need to have a suppossedly unique restaurant within "walking distance" when I rarely eat out and when it probably doesn't serve the food I eat anyway as a vegan, and being fairly self-sufficient a lot of this stuff that is raved about as benefits of living intown I don't require. It reminds me of people coming from other places like NYC and saying they are unable to sleep they're accustomed to hearing sirens and gunshots in the night and it's too quiet here. So it's really ridiculous that people are making all this fuss about how bad the suburbs are, especially when you have choices. The same song about strip malls and cookie cutter this and that are overblown. Like someone mentioned earlier, many places ITP are similar to the suburbs in look and feel.
These comments are not directed at you, they are for the general disdain for the suburbs, which is nonsense. Look, if I was single, overweight women would not be my preference, but I don't knock them. If intown life is so great, enjoy it and leave it at that.
A co worker of mine used to always brag that she lived in Alpharetta. I think I was supposed to be impressed and jealous. She even brought a pic of her house to work and showed it to me. I thought that was very weird. She was always talking about how her family had money and their house.
I had lived here three years at that point. Never heard of Alpharetta before I movedhere and didn't know or care anything about it when she was bragging So I wasn't at all impressed. I thought was strange.
I guess for me its about minimizing driving. When I first moved to Atlanta, my wife and I located in Dunwoody, Perimeter Center, so I could walk to work. When we started looking for homes we look for areas close to MARTA stations. We fell in love with the historic, intown neighborhoods and our first and only choice was Kirkwood. We wanted to get in on the ground floor or an improving neighborhood were we could show our kids what hard work get you. Its easy to maintain the status-quo like in the suburbs. It takes people with a good work ethic and ain't afraid of hard work to move into areas, improve the neighborhood, and then reap the benefits. People did this in 20 years ago in Candler Park, Inman Park, and 30 years ago in Virginia-Highlands, Midtown, etc.
I enjoy the time I get to spend with my wife on the bus and train. Much better than stressing out, sitting in a car by myself.
People in the suburbs look down their noses at ITP'ers alot more than people in the city look down their noses at people from OTP. Dont even front. There were even a few jabs in this very same thread. Like someone actually said that without the 'burbs Atlanta would be another Memphis. And I actually took offense to that, and if that wasn't a snobbish ass backwards statement then I dont know what is.
What's offensive about that? What he said is not snobbish...it's TRUE.
I'm from Memphis and even people in Memphis remark about how Memphis and Atlanta were basically in the same tier until the '96 Olympics came to Atlanta and infused Atlanta with so much money and recognition that they surged way ahead of Memphis, so it's true.
Memphians even admit it. Hell, people in Memphis who are waiting for Memphis to finally wake up and join the New South in the 21st Century have always referred to Atlanta as a model city for what Memphis could potentially come and where it should be now (even though I think that time has passed now and Memphis has WAY too much catching up to do). And people who like Memphis being a sleepy, slow, overgrown town with an Old South look and vibe always make the statement, "We don't want to become another Atlanta".
So yes, Atlanta would be another Memphis if it's metro wasn't so huge and influential. Even people in Memphis on both sides of the debate for what direction Memphis should go in acknowledge that.
You sound like you're probably from Memphis, and if you are, then you should know that and know EXACTLY what he meant. No need to take offense; it's not his fault that Memphis city leaders and the majority of Memphians are complacent and don't do anything to fulfill their city's dormant potential.
What's offensive about that? What he said is not snobbish...it's TRUE.
I'm from Memphis and even people in Memphis remark about how Memphis and Atlanta were basically in the same tier until the '96 Olympics came to Atlanta and infused Atlanta with so much money and recognition that they surged way ahead of Memphis, so it's true.
Memphians even admit it. Hell, people in Memphis who are waiting for Memphis to finally wake up and join the New South in the 21st Century have always referred to Atlanta as a model city for what Memphis could potentially come and where it should be now (even though I think that time has passed now and Memphis has WAY too much catching up to do). And people who like Memphis being a sleepy, slow, overgrown town with an Old South look and vibe always make the statement, "We don't want to become another Atlanta".
So yes, Atlanta would be another Memphis if it's metro wasn't so huge and influential. Even people in Memphis on both sides of the debate for what direction Memphis should go in acknowledge that.
You sound like you're probably from Memphis, and if you are, then you should know that and know EXACTLY what he meant. No need to take offense; it's not his fault that Memphis city leaders and the majority of Memphians are complacent and don't do anything to fulfill their city's dormant potential.
Just to add (as if I haven't gone on on this thread enough already) I am not deriding Memphis at all. Just making the comparison on size and national influence/recogntion. In many ways, I wish Atlanta had not grown so rapidly... I miss the size and feel of Atlanta of the 70s (my coming of age years) when the area was not so spread out and traffic not so thick and MARTA went most places you wanted to go.
There are definitely positives of being a medium sized city that has had time to process growth. Their is a downfall as well, that basic "if you aren't moving forward, you are slipping backward" ideal that some Memphians are probably feeling. Growth has its benefits as well and Atlanta has reaped that. And inner city dwellers who slam the suburbs... again, I point out that Atlanta the city has benefitted from the growth of Atlanta the metro.
And it goes without saying (well strike that phrase, apparently you have to spell everything out) the inverse of that last statement is just as true. No doubt Atlanta is the goose that laid the golden eggs, but smash the eggs and the goose ain't much to look at either.
Atlanta and Memphis were not in the same tier prior to the Olympics imo. Atlanta was still bigger and had much more of a skyline. I think, just like with Dallas and Houston, Atlanta was poised to become a large metro regardless of the Olympics or not. The Olympics simply sped that process up.
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.
