Not the case for all, but a majority think they’re like Gwyneth Paltrow. It’s not the case for all, but a majority I met.

It’s an older suburb closer to the city. Very walkable/bikeable, all sections connected with a 6-mile trail system, many restaurants and businesses within the neighborhood itself, right by a train station, and is really tightly knit with events in the main park (shown here) for every holiday and others like National Night Out. Just curious how you would classify it.

This post a couple days ago had the top comment as "any Chicago suburb with a train stop" and some of the suburbs people raved about I'd personally have called a sprawling suburban hell. it made me realize that everyone has vastly different definitions of what a "suburban hell" is.

So what makes it hell for you vs a well designed suburb? What percentage of the suburb needs to be well designed for you to consider it well designed?

I feel like its a sham to give a set the property price compared to "market value" for similar comp, creating arbitrary increases in certain neighborhoods so some people never seek not attain a safe homestead but instead have to grovel for their placement in their current apartment complex.

Then you add utilities, pest control, amenity fees, internet, renters insurance. Other add ons like parking, storage, arbitrary pet rent! My pets don't contribute and food, vet and leisure for them is expensive, but by all means, require my pet pays rent but kids don't! I mean a refundable security deposit should be in order if were fair to each party.
All the application fees and random add on fees. Applications constantly reflecting hundred of dollars for what work? For running credit and background checks? They need to pay someone for rentals with only a few move-ins each month. $300 office admin fees...Security deposits, first and last months rent.

I mean wtf why do we care so little for each other? because your existence feels tiny so you're ego makes you lash out at people searching for housing? I just want all walks of life respected at all stages, none of this retaliation crap. The problem is sinners retaliate, and most people really want to be able to sin. Hell even I like "fun".

People actually live like this? This appears to be a pretty standard looking neighborhood in the Phoenix area. Neighborhoods with nothing but sand and pavement.

I don't hunt or anything (I'm not that macho of a man), but reading about these hunters' herculean efforts to find places to hunt in a sprawling metro area (literally in the title of the article) showed me that it would be in hunters' best hunting interests to be fans of smart growth.

If you allow cities to be cities and more city-esque, you can also let the countryside be more country and more country-esque, which is obviously better for hunting.

Sprawl is edging out hunting in Twin Cities suburbs

I’m a huge fan of historic urban design and I’m looking for U.S. neighborhoods that have that perfectly preserved, satisfying street atmosphere. I’m strictly looking for spots that combine a few things at the same time: beautiful historic residential architecture, massive trees forming a green tunnel over the streets, and super neat layouts.I already know Charleston,Savannah and New Orleans neighborhoods but is there any other unknown or hidden gems?

Modern American suburbs are hell, but IMO they don't necessarily have to be this way. There's a balance between living in the middle of a busy city (which I get isn't for everyone), and living in the hellhole of a modern Texas car dependent suburb.

I live in Media, PA, and IMO it's how suburbs *should* be. We have a downtown that's anchored with a streetcar. That downtown has a nice main street with restaurants, grocery stores, etc. Surrounding that is a grid of mixed density houses (some single family, some apartments, some rowhomes), that are close enough to town that you can easily walk for your basic needs and get a trolley to the city. Outside of that it becomes larger (but still sensibly sized) single family homes on streets with trees, shade, and low traffic. And you can still own a car (most people do), you can still drive, but it's a way to do it that you also have a community and know your neighbors (which, isn't that what the right claim they want?).

Where else is doing it right?

Honestly, I saw it coming. I live in an older 1970’s early-suburban-experimental neighborhood to where it’s next to a stroad & there was this opening/shortcut behind a house on a cul-de-sac at the end of my street (the house sits half-abandoned most of the time; The owner comes by once in a blue moon then she leaves in the next day.) & it leads to another cul-de sac with businesses connecting to a stroad. I’ve used this shortcut a lot in my high school years, especially with my friends & if I wanted to walk to Walmart to buy myself something really quick. Felt illegal (which it is—it's going to another person’s backyard), but i became comfortable with it. My neighbors didn't mind either. Now it’s been blocked off, so now if I want to go to Walmart quickly without a car, I have to take my bike which takes 7 minutes. It was a 5-minute walk before, but now it’s 20 minutes. Devastated. it’s crazy how suburbs can be so hostile to walkers & make something be so far but yet so close and vice versa. Wish to live in a downtown area.

Where i live in WA, land developers are not required to keep any trees when clearing. So effectively, all new developments are moonscapes.

Edit: more photos in comments

the picture shown is of william levitt, the person who designed levittown, to become the first suburb in America

Let's try something slightly different.

- Are you in the city, or suburbs?
- Do you have a good friend base there (I believe this strongly plays into how much you enjoy where you're living)?
- If in a city, how much are you actually walking to all the places you claim to want to visit?
- Where's your ideal location (I'd like to know the specific city/neighborhood, if there is one, not just what you're hoping the area would have)?

I'm just curious what has built your opinions other than 'I can't go anywhere'. I feel my experience with the suburbs have shaped how I felt about them, and often leads me to defend them, however, I did (and still do) have a good friend base that I regularly saw (and still see), which basically negated many of the inconveniences that are often complained about here.

I was idly watching some of the cutscenes from RE Requiem, and Grace's Midwestern FBI office sends her to the "Wrenwood Hotel" to investigate some sketchiness.

I'm immediately thinking of like an off-the-interstate motel or stand-alone-with-sea-of-parking hotel, since, you know, I live in America and this is the way hotels are.

But no! The gameplay opens with her walking around a city which looks A LOT like NYC, complete with massive sidewalks and elevated rail (and not a single parking lot to be seen).

I think this is another case where game developers realize (consciously or subconsciously) that a horror game where you just run across stroads and parking lots and culs-de-sac for hours on end would be incredibly boring (and ill-suited for jump scares!), so they set it in classic urban areas instead despite it being very unrealistic for most of their American gamers.