Eventhough I know that pretty much all SSC users are city limits all the way, I was just curious, what city do you think has the best suburban area overall?

Detroit should be on there.
I think distressed cities lead to very affluent suburbs.

oh damn, I meant to put detroit on there. Can you edit polls?

I dont know.

Going with ny suburbs cuz, thats all i know... basically think about Long Island, which has shitty and ordinary and glamorous suburbs.
same thing with Connecticut, Westchester, dutchess, rockland, counties.. North Jersey...
I like south jersey alot too. So i would say philly second. Been to chicago, the suburbs seem so cliche, and boring. Not to deflect from the city, its great but come on the suburbs anywhere sucks.

Been to chicago, the suburbs seem so cliche, and boring. Not to deflect from the city, its great but come on the suburbs anywhere sucks.


Well, depends on where in Chicago. I think Chicago's north shore are some of the best and most unique suburbs (not to mention affluent) with all the great perks of suburbia. (yes, great perks. If you like big houses, lawns, high degree of safety, then suburbia is your thing) These towns were mostly built prior to WWII. However, the western and southern burbs of Chicago, I can agree with you, are pretty bland. I usually go out of my way to avoid having to go out there...

I would think some of L.A's suburbs are among the best.

I voted for chicago burbs. Evanston is beautiful. Chicagoland is quintessential suburbia. Probably the most connected city-suburb relationship.

Chicago's northshore suburbs are beauitiful, and yes, there is a well defined city-suburban relationship here in the Chicagoland area. It's pretty cut and dry.

Overall, I think L.A.'s suburbs are the most developed. The reason being is that they mainly developed seperately or independently from the central city, so they act in many ways like a mini-city.

My vote goes to Los Angeles suburbs.

Going with ny suburbs cuz, thats all i know... basically think about Long Island, which has shitty and ordinary and glamorous suburbs.
same thing with Connecticut, Westchester, dutchess, rockland, counties.. North Jersey...
I like south jersey alot too. So i would say philly second. Been to chicago, the suburbs seem so cliche, and boring. Not to deflect from the city, its great but come on the suburbs anywhere sucks.

I'll agree with that!
I've lived in the city all my life, and I wouldn't think of raising my children anywhere else (unlike many other people).

LA, NYC, Chicago, Detriot...

we know the real answer is LA, but I'll go and pick Chicago, because suburbs like Evanston and Milwaukee ;)

Well, at the end of the day, its tough for any american suburb to compete with the likes of Beverly Hills or Bel Air or whatever else L.A. offers.

You know, I actually debated putting LA on there at all. It is ALL suburbs. It's strange to me that as of right now, it's in the lead.

Los Angeles, of course.

Detroit should be on there.
I think distressed cities lead to very affluent suburbs.

I do agree that Detroit need on list because it's huger suburb. Just more older suburb and developed than Atlanta.

Yeah, I completely forgot about Detroit, I had every intention of adding it when I started making the thread, but then just totally forgot. It really sucks that you can't edit your polls. That is really stupid and should be changed

I had to vote for DC because of Bethesda, Silver Spring, Alexandria, Arlington and others. DC has lots of suburban areas that are either very historic and beautiful and/or oriented around subway stations.

i vote for dc like expat says theres silver spring, alexandria, bethesday, chevy chase, arlington, pentagon/crystal city, fairfax, rockville, potomac, mclean, langley, tysons corner, etc. some of these like bethesda/alexandria are as urban as US suburbs get. the suburb cities are in fairfax and montgomery county, which are two of the wealthiest in the nation. public education in these two counties are also at tops in the nation.

LA, DC, NYC, Chi, SF.

Even though suburbs are evil, DC is pretty much all good except for a couple isolated areas in PG county. IMO, Great Falls, Alexandria, Arlington, McLean, Fairfax Station, Bethesda, Silver Spring are some of the nicest around.

Detroit is good enough to be mentioned, but I don't think it's in the top 3. It's got the Grosse Pointes, Oakland County, and Detroit's border cities. It's very good though, as you can expect having a high metro pop. compared to it's city size.

You know, I actually debated putting LA on there at all. It is ALL suburbs. It's strange to me that as of right now, it's in the lead.
LA isn't all suburbs. If you mean LA County, in some ways, yes. but there's so many big cities in LA county it's hard to tell nowadays, especially with so many people coming in. You could say Compton is a suburb of LA, or a suburb of Long Beach, or a suburb of Torrance.


But if you think suburbs are middle class houses on a never ending pattern where very few people walk, most of LA, especially the Southern parts, would definitely go against the definition of "suburb".

LA, DC, NYC, Chi, SF.

Even though suburbs are evil, DC is pretty much all good except for a couple isolated areas in PG county. IMO, Great Falls, Alexandria, Arlington, McLean, Fairfax Station, Bethesda, Silver Spring are some of the nicest around.

Detroit is good enough to be mentioned, but I don't think it's in the top 3. It's got the Grosse Pointes, Oakland County, and Detroit's border cities. It's very good though, as you can expect having a high metro pop. compared to it's city size.

What's wrong with Prince George's County? Is it's bad area?

PG county is kind of Red Neck isn't it?

PG for the most part is the avg. part of DCs suburbs. It has some nice parts, and is oozing with potential, but it also borders the bad part of SE DC. This has had a very very negative impact on the county. A lot of the lower income people are being pushed out of DC b/c of the housing prices and many are going to PG county, b/c it's the cheapest part of the metro. The schools aren't as good as the rest of the area, and the crime isn't good either. But like I said, it has the proximity and some nice developments, good light rail, lots of potential, but if it wasn't there than another place would be serving the same purpose.

I guess it has some redneck parts closer to charles, anne arundel and st. marys counties, but it's not enough to call redneck in general, and just as much as the whole area. Lower income areas almost always have less educated and "dignified", not trying to sound elitist. Even in west chester or nassau and suffolk county you get your fair share of more hick like ppl.

PG for the most part is the avg. part of DCs suburbs. It has some nice parts, and is oozing with potential, but it also borders the bad part of SE DC. This has had a very very negative impact on the county. A lot of the lower income people are being pushed out of DC b/c of the housing prices and many are going to PG county, b/c it's the cheapest part of the metro. The schools aren't as good as the rest of the area, and the crime isn't good either. But like I said, it has the proximity and some nice developments, good light rail, lots of potential, but if it wasn't there than another place would be serving the same purpose.

I guess it has some redneck parts closer to charles, anne arundel and st. marys counties, but it's not enough to call redneck in general, and just as much as the whole area. Lower income areas almost always have less educated and "dignified", not trying to sound elitist. Even in west chester or nassau and suffolk county you get your fair share of more hick like ppl.

I see, How about Charles County? I thought it was great and Good Charlotte bands were formed in Waldorf, MD.

You know, I actually debated putting LA on there at all. It is ALL suburbs. It's strange to me that as of right now, it's in the lead.

LA is NOT all suburbs, the suburbs for me are mainly in S. orange county, inland empire and the sf valley, but most of the basin is like one big city, not really suburbs, it'd hard to explain, it's unique

they are suburbs but they resemble LA proper a lot, it's like a continuation in a lot of parts, that from what i've seen at least.

anyway, charles is alright, a lot of pg people are going out there because they don't like pg as much, but it's kinda nice, very avg. Waldorf just next to the pg line. Out PG and Charles is very similar they're avg. It's just the inner parts of pg. And Charles goes west so you get a different feel out that way. Pg is a pretty good size county compared to others in the area.

they are suburbs but they resemble LA proper a lot, it's like a continuation in a lot of parts, that from what i've seen at least.

anyway, charles is alright, a lot of pg people are going out there because they don't like pg as much, but it's kinda nice, very avg. Waldorf just next to the pg line. Out PG and Charles is very similar they're avg. It's just the inner parts of pg. And Charles goes west so you get a different feel out that way. Pg is a pretty good size county compared to others in the area.

That remainds me about alot of white families from PG are moving out to Charles County for some reason. How about demographic change in Charles County?

Detroit's got a good variety of suburbs. You have the Grosse Pointes, urban streetcar suburbs developed in the 1920's and 30's for Detroit's wealthiest citizens. Then you have Bloomfield Hills, with its large collection of country estates and fine institutions (Cranbrook, etc.). Then there's Hamtramck where 54% of the citizens speak a different language. Next up is Dearborn with the largest concentration of Arabs outside of the Middle East. Ferndale, home to Detroit's gay community. Royal Oak, Detroit's artsy community. Birmingham, Detroit's urban chic suburb.

But if you're looking for a safe suburban community complete with mega shopping centers and cul-de-sacs you have Troy, Sterling Heights, Livonia, and Farmington Hills, four of the 25 Safest Cities in the country.

BTW, I just wanted to point out that Detroit is the only MSA in the country that has four cities in the top twenty-five safest cities according to Morgan Quitno. The New York and Los Angeles MSAs only have three each.

You know, I actually debated putting LA on there at all. It is ALL suburbs. It's strange to me that as of right now, it's in the lead.

i cant believe you even typed that. have you ever been here before??

just my two cents, but having living in arlington, VA: the arlington co. suburbs are quite possibly the "sterile-ist" suburbs in the nation.....

just a thought

It's not my preference but a lot of people like sterile when it comes to suburbs. And with it's proximity to DC and access to light rail, I don't even think it's an issue with many there.

But your point is take, I can understand that view. Crystal City is very sterile, but it's gonna get better, they're putting more street level development, and with the BRAC decisions there will be less of a military, bureaucratic presence. Rosslyn is right across from G'town, and Ballston is a nice community. I think convenience and recreation is a big plus despite the lack of street level life.

LA isn't all suburbs. If you mean LA County, in some ways, yes. but there's so many big cities in LA county it's hard to tell nowadays, especially with so many people coming in. You could say Compton is a suburb of LA, or a suburb of Long Beach, or a suburb of Torrance.


But if you think suburbs are middle class houses on a never ending pattern where very few people walk, most of LA, especially the Southern parts, would definitely go against the definition of "suburb".


Oh don't pay attention to him, he's well aware that the city isn't all single family homes and suburban. He and a couple other forumers does this (insults) often whether its appropriate or not.

Anyway I say LA overall has the best and most interesting suburbs. In many ways quite different in development from what I've seen of many other american cities burbs. NY metro comes in at 2nd. Chicago northshore is very nice, but as others said many of the other burbs are just plan boring and bland.

LA. Opulent, beautiful, great weather, lots of diversity in terms of suburb types too.

NY's suburbs have superior rail service compared to the others, so I voted for NY.
Though it also depends on how you define suburb, would Jersey City be considered a suburb for instance? Yonkers? Paterson? Some suburbs are relatively nice, but many, especially the outer suburbs, suck.

BTW, what makes so many people vote for Chicago's suburbs? I've never been there, but my (perhaps uneducated) perception of Chicago's suburbs is that it essentially consists of the type of endless sprawl you find in most US cities.

BTW, what makes so many people vote for Chicago's suburbs? I've never been there, but my (perhaps uneducated) perception of Chicago's suburbs is that it essentially consists of the type of endless sprawl you find in most US cities.

The Suburbs around Lake Michigan in 3 states, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Indiana, probably Michigan too in the future.

The suburbs around fox lake, in the North-central part of the region.

Also Oak Park. And the big suburbs, such as Aurora, Naperville, Joliet, Elgin, Kenosha, WI and Gary, IN.

Probably also, about what I said about Milwaukee being a Chicago's suburb too, it was a sarcastic remark.

Philly has interesting suburbs. Valley forge, mainline, reading...

i cant believe you even typed that. have you ever been here before??

You have asked me that before, I have answered you before too. YES. I have. You can't tell the diffrence between much of the City Of Los Angeles, and many of it's suburbs. A lot of its suburbs are actually completely surrounded by the city limits. Who does that? I think Dallas has Park Cities, and that is about the only other example I can think of. Who was it that said "Los Angeles, 19 suburbs in search of a city"?

Philly has interesting suburbs. Valley forge, mainline, reading...

Philly would have been my second choice. Philly is probably the only city listed here where pretty much all of the suburbs actually fit the real criterea for a "suburb"; Lower density, much lower crime, inhabited by people originally from (or who descended from) the city. Chicago has really nice suburbs, and is what considered the essential "suburbia" but many of it's suburbs are really poor inner-cityish. Maywood comes to mind.

Some of the south suburbs of chicago are like that too, I think every metro has some less than stellar areas and their better ones. Philly's are nice too, but because of today's growth it's losing some of the charm I thought they used to have.

^^ Yeah, most cities' suburban towns are really older than the cities themselves, a lot of them were quaint little towns until suburbia reached them.

Somebody called Arlington, VA sterile. I don't agree with that. It has lots of interesting areas and it gets more interesting all the time. It has a nice energy. Regarding Princes Georges County, MD. It is terribly misunderstood in the way a lot of inner cities are misunderstood. It has some really bad neighborhoods and a lot of dull boring suburban neighborhoods. But, it has tons of good middle class areas and some very wealthy areas that are popular with the black country club set. In the older areas of Northern PGCO you can find some bohemian enclaves with a diverse population. Most of the elected officials in Mt. Rainier are gay and they just built artists lofts on their traffic circle. Hyattsville has some charming old areas with bungalows, cape cods, colonials that are attracting the artsy crowd, Cheverly, too. College Park has some extremely stable and beautiful areas with elegant tudors, colonials, etc. Most of these neighborhoods are served by Metro and only minutes from downtown DC. Laurel is total sprawl except for a tiny historic district, but has a diverse population supporting things like asian and hispanic grocers and Bollywood movie houses. Bladensburg is now becoming known as Little Mexico. I could go on about the different nabes. Since DC is getting so pricey, bohemian bargain hunters are discovering these areas. I don't live in PG and don't represent it, but I think people dismiss it too quickly.

Although its not mentioned in the poll, Miami has some pretty nice suburbs and secondary cities in its metro, ranging from Miami Beach and Coral Gables to Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach and Aventura.

[QUOTE=ROCguy]You have asked me that before, I have answered you before too. YES. I have. You can't tell the diffrence between much of the City Of Los Angeles, and many of it's suburbs. A lot of its suburbs are actually completely surrounded by the city limits. Who does that? I think Dallas has Park Cities, and that is about the only other example I can think of. Who was it that said "Los Angeles, 19 suburbs in West Hollywood and Beverly Hills if I'm not mistaken. You must've been high when you went down here, because you can tell between the city by the street layout, the street signs, the building sizes, turning lane rules, and many other things.

I've been to L.A. three times, and I also found it difficult to see the difference between city and suburbs. I'm not nocking L.A. at all, I actually found it to be quite an experience.
It really does have a "suburban" feel even though the population density levels of the L.A. MSA are greater than any other in the country. Maybe it's the overall layout of the city? I dunno? However, Wilshire, Koreatown, and several other areas have quite a city feel to them.

IMO, the LA people shouldn't be pissed at all, I thought it was unique b/c the outskirts of LA and at times quite a ways away, look and feel just like the city proper do, with moderate density and pretty high when compared to most suburbs.

And, IMO, things like street signs are huge gives, but there are so many other aspects as far as aesthetics that give it a very similar feel.

Most deff, Detroit
i no a lot of ppl in the detroit suburbs, and they are incredible
compared to any other city suburbs ive seen
but if i was to choose from a name on that list, id say DC

I would say L.A.. its pretty diverse imo

Having visited Skokie and Evanston on my last Chicago trip 2 weeks ago, I was dissappointed. Some people here made it sound like these places were extensions of the city. That is not even close to the truth.

LA metro is the most interesting in the nation, imo. There are so many different business districts, even the poorer immigrants areas offer alot of urbanity with streetlife, like Huntington Park, East LA, etc. The basin really feels like a mega city of some 15 million people or so. It is a real unique place, alot LA's suburbs feel more urban than some large cities in this country.

Having visited Skokie and Evanston on my last Chicago trip 2 weeks ago, I was dissappointed. Some people here made it sound like these places were extensions of the city. That is not even close to the truth.

Well, due to El access in these suburbs, it gives them a somewhat "urban" feel (skokie to a much lesser degree).

I don't think anybody could argue anything but LA. With suburbs like Huntington Beach, Long Beach, Manhattan Beach, Hollywood, Venice Beach, Anaheim, and the list goes on and on and on...

Yeah, L.A. #1, Chicago #2

That's all I can really speak for.

LA isn't all suburbs. If you mean LA County, in some ways, yes. but there's so many big cities in LA county it's hard to tell nowadays, especially with so many people coming in. You could say Compton is a suburb of LA, or a suburb of Long Beach, or a suburb of Torrance.


But if you think suburbs are middle class houses on a never ending pattern where very few people walk, most of LA, especially the Southern parts, would definitely go against the definition of "suburb".


Everything in the LA area is a suburb of LA (that is to say, it can thank LA for its development for the most part). And Downtown is not a suburb. It was once the epicenter of it all, then branched out into other places. Then it fell to a more equal level. Still its the only place in LA that can claim non-suburb status.

Other cities like San Gabriel, and San Fernando may have had earlier settlements but they didnt grow until DT LA grew.

I think DC has some really nice suburban areas and cities. Alexandria VA, Chevy Chase Md, Bethesda MD, Silver Spring MD, Annapolis MD just to name a few.

I think Saint Louis should be on here as well. In Saint Louis County alone there are 96 suburban towns and cities. Then there are the around 50 to 60 in Saint Charles County and in the Metro East.
Most of the older streetcar and commuter train suburbs are in STL county. You have Clayton which is the county seat, Ladue is where St. Louis' old line families built there country homes in the teens and 20s. Webster Groves and Kirkwood which have to be some of the first ever suburbs in the country, where built along a commuter rail line in the 1870s and 80s and have fine downtowns. Maplewood and U. City are also both wonderful urban inner suburbs. The there are the very weathy towns of Town&Country,Chesterfield,Creve Coure, and Wildwood they are much newer then places like Ladue and Clayton and most homes have acre lots or more.
Then there is StC county and thats where the largest and newest suburbs are. Saint Charles,Saint Peters,Lake Saint Louis, O'fallen and so on. And then the Metro East over in Ill has some very nice and very bad Suburbs, East Saint Louis and Granite City are old still mill cities and are very run down, Fairview Heights and Belleville are some of the finest.
Also back on the Missouri side Saint Louis County is broken up into four areas, they are Mid-County, North County, South County and West County.
1. Mid-County. Home to some of the largest companys in the world and home to some of the countrys wealthest. Ladue,Clayton,U.City,Huntleigh,Brentwood,Maplwood,WebsterGroves,Olivette and more.
2.West County. More new money then old and area is very hilly and wooded. Wildwood,Chesterfield,Manchester,Ballwin,Kirkwood,Maryland Heights.
3. North County. Working class and some of the first post war suburbs in the area. Area is also becoming more african american because large numbers are living the city to buy home and the city is becoming more expensive. Florassiant,Jennings,Fergason,Hazelwood and way to many more to name.
4.South County. Working class and very suburban. Lemay,Shrewsbury,Mehlville,Oakville,Affton, and Sunset Hills and many more.

I think Saint Louis should be on here as well.


Actually yes. St. Louis has some very beautiful suburbs.

Post pics if you have them.

^True, St. Louis has beautiful suburbs. Especially the the ones that are older and close-in. Some of my favs are University City, Webster Groves, Clayton, Pasadena Hills, Richmond Heights, Kirkwood, Ladue. On the Illinois side, I love the historic homes built on steep hills in Alton and the old areas of Belleville.

Dallas-Fort Worth I think by far. Any Texans agree with me.


Though I must say that second nicest would have to be Tulsa. I don't know much about Dallas's suburbs, but I can make a point for Tulsa if I need to.

Dallas has some nice burbs, IMO not as nice as the others, I don't know if any of them are really really urban. They have some nice wealthy areas and some old charming ones too. And to say "by far" I know is off.

Cities don't have suburbs, they are infested with them.

Quote from discussion on Urban OK about Tulsa's Arkansas River masterplan:

http://urbanok.9.forumer.com/index.php?showtopic=637

Yes, Spartan, very impressive. I've extracted and resized a few "concept sketch" images:

Sand Springs:

http://www.dougloudenback.com/misc/sandsprings.jpg

71st Street:

http://www.dougloudenback.com/misc/71ststreet.jpg

Jenks:

http://www.dougloudenback.com/misc/jenks.jpg

Broken Arrow:

http://www.dougloudenback.com/misc/brokenarrow.jpg

Of course, there's lots more in the link you made than is shown here.

New Shopping Center for South West Tulsa

(Tulsa, OK) -- It will be called "Tulsa Hills". A new shopping center, that could rival Woodland Hills in scope, is planned for the area between 71st and 81st along Highway 75. City officials estimate the center could pump over $5-million into Tulsa's tax base. Construction is expected to cost nearly $60-million. The center should be finished in time for Christmas 2007 shopping. Some nearby residents are not pleased with the project and are considering their legal options.

http://img316.imageshack.us/img316/8906/296720stfrancischildren20large.jpg

St. Francis hospital is bulding a new childrens hospital.

It will be 7 floors, with it being expandable up to 10.

It's set to open 05/07.

Bass pro is opening October 20th. The various restarants, retail, and two hotels are in various stages of progress (concept -> completion)

Pictures of bass pro available here:
http://www.brokenarrowok.gov/features/2005...pro%20walls.htm (http://www.brokenarrowok.gov/features/2005/bass%20pro%20walls.htm)

Map of bass pro and the three new shopping centers:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/images/2005/050805_E1_BassP49586_hotel5.jpg


Related Story:

Bass Pro area nets two HOTELs
TIM STANLEY World Staff Writer 8/05/2005

Holiday Inn sees the store drawing 2.4 million visitors a year.
A local group behind an upcoming two-HOTEL project believes it's found the perfect site in a $500 million Broken Arrow development.

Jeff Hartman of Tulsa-based SJS Hospitality LLC said the company will break ground this month on the first HOTEL, with the other to follow next year at the same location in the Stone Wood Hills commercial and residential village.

The development, to feature 153 acres of retail and office properties, will be anchored by a Bass Pro Shops Outdoor World store, which is under construction and scheduled to open Oct. 20.

The first HOTEL, an $8.3 million Holiday Inn Express & Suites, is targeted to open next June. Construction will then begin on the second HOTEL, a yet-to-be-determined brand that will join Holiday Inn on the 4.4-acre site, Hartman said.

A 24-year HOTEL industry veteran, Hartman said the Stone Wood development is a HOTELier's dream location.

"We didn't really consider any other locations after this one became an option," the Broken Arrow resident said.

The $20 million Bass Pro store is projected to draw about 2.4 million visitors a year, and Hartman said the retailer estimates that some 40 percent of its out-of-town visitors will stay overnight in the area.

The HOTELs won't target tourists alone, he said.

"Of course, there's the weekend leisure crowd, families coming into town to see the Bass Pro," he said. "But we also expect a lot of business travelers, too, who'd like to stay out here."

Hartman said the Holiday Inn HOTEL represents a new strategy -- combining the chain's Express and Family Suites concepts.

The 69,000-square-foot facility will offer 121 rooms on four floors and employ 30 to 35 people. Amenities will include a complementary breakfast area, business center, meeting room, indoor swimming pool, fitness center, spa and a game room.

Hartman said guest rooms will come in the standard HOTEL variety, as well as themed suites catering to various customer needs.

The HOTEL will offer the chain's KidSuites, which feature bunk beds and TVs with PlayStation games, to better accommodate families with children.

The Family Suites will offer similar features spread out over a larger area.

Several executive suites will come with dining rooms, living areas with fireplaces and bedrooms with whirlpool units.

Hartman said the planners are still discussing room rates.

HOTEL design, he added, will fit in with the Stone Wood Hills theme.

"They're going for the 1940s Main Street look," he said. "So we thought we'd have our HOTEL designed to look like a courthouse -- the kind you'd find at the center of the old town squares."

The neighboring HOTEL will have about 85 rooms and em ploy around 20 people, Hartman said.

Stone Wood Hills broker Mike Parrish said securing good HOTELs was key to making the development -- north of the Broken Arrow Expressway between 145th and 177th East avenues -- a destination for travelers.

"With all of today's travel being as expensive as it is, we anticipate that people might come from, say, Fort Smith (Ark.) and then stay all weekend," Parrish said. "These HOTELs will offer a good value for families and business travelers. And then they'll have restaurants and shopping right here at hand."

The Stone Wood projects will be SJS Hospitality's second and third HOTELs. The group owns the Candlewood Suites HOTEL in Tulsa.

Plans include opening about five HOTELs total over the next five years, Hartman said.

"We're looking at possibly putting the others in either Jenks, Owasso or south Tulsa," he said.

HOTEL guests should have plenty of dining options at hand. National restaurant chains Steak 'n Shake and Lone Star Steakhouse have claimed nearby sites, with construction on their facilities to begin soon.

Site developers are in various stages of negotiations with other restaurants, Parrish said.

Stillwater National Bank & Trust Co. is financing the HOTEL project.

Site and landscape plans have been approved by the Broken Arrow Planning Commission.

SJS Hospitality has joined the Broken Arrow Chamber of Commerce, Hartman said, adding that a ribbon-cutting at the site with chamber officials will be held in September.

"We're going to start moving dirt any day now, though," he said. "We're ready to get rolling."

KTUL

Tulsa - If you hear more noise in your neighborhood, it could be the sound of new construction. Across the nation, housing starts are up 11 percent. The last time new construction was this good was in 2002. NewsChannel 8's Kim Jackson went to find out what that means for you.

Some areas of Green Country are getting a boost. One place you've probably never seen before is only about five minutes from downtown Tulsa. And, soon, it will be covered with new homes.

Dave Peyok and his guys are installing gutters on a brand new house. And, they're two weeks behind schedule.

"Too many buildings," he says. "We just can't get it put up as fast as they can get new houses put up."

Right now, they're working at the Northwest passage. Only two homes are up and finished. But, you can expect 89 more houses, soon.

"We thought it was a hidden area in Tulsa, pretty pristine, rolling hills and trees that weren't being developed, so we tapped into that."

And, that is only the beginning. Located in Osage County close to the Gilcrease Museum, there is a master plan.

"There are people tired of commuting that want to be close to downtown and third, there was pent up demand, people wanting a whole new neighborhood, with all new houses."

You only see about 30 acres cleared. But, there are more than six hundred additional acres waiting. There is also a plan for a new school for the kids that will come and fill up this neighborhood.

But, before then, contractors like Dave will take it over and build the foundation families are looking for.

Most of those houses will start around 139-thousand dollars and go up to nearly 200-thousand dollars. Builders expect more houses there in June.

http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/0505/229019.html

Concerned citizens packed a meeting in south Tulsa Monday evening to rally against a toll bridge in their neighborhood.

The bridge would span the Arkansas River near 121st Street and Yale.

39 neighborhood groups and some 5,000 residents have reportedly joined the fight against it. The Tulsa City council voted against letting the bridge connect to Tulsa streets, but bridge opponents say that might not be enough. They say the county might try to exercise eminent domain over the city, and condemn the city land.

Bridge opponent Michael Covey: "This toll bridge issue has not gone away. The county has not gone away; the private investors have not gone away. We've won some battles, but we have not won the war."

Covey says there is not a lot of precedent of counties trying to take over city land, but from the court cases he's seen, he doesn't think Tulsa County can do it.

Investors raise $1 million toward statue






TULSA, Okla. (AP) -- Fifteen months after picking Tulsa as the site of a massive American Indian monument, fund raising for the effort took a step closer to completion when three local families joined together to invest $1 million in the endeavor.
Mayor Bill LaFortune announced that the Mayo, Sharp and Oliphant families will be the first group of local investors to begin filling the financial gap that occurred when backers of the privately funded project spurned Oklahoma City and came to Tulsa.

"These families have given to Tulsa for generations, and here they are once again stepping up in the same style as they have stepped up in the past," LaFortune said.

The $40 million monument project is short $10 million, which its management team is looking to Tulsa to fill. The $1 million investment announced Wednesday is intended to help shrink the $10 million gap.

"The American," a 21-story bronze monument, is the creation of artist Shan Gray. It depicts an American Indian warrior with a bald eagle landing on his shroud-covered forearm.

Completion of the 176-foot statue, 25 feet taller than the Statue of Liberty, is scheduled to commemorate the centennial of the state that began as Indian territory and is home to about 270,000 Indians.

The monument will stand on a four-story limestone base and will include an observation area in the brave's head reachable by elevator. In the sculpture's midsection, plasma television screens will show a 360-degree view of outside. It will be built to withstand winds from an F3 tornado.

As planned, "The American" will be five feet higher than the Statue of Mother Russia in Volgograd, Russia, which is currently billed as the world's tallest freestanding sculpture. The Statue of Liberty rests on a 154-foot pedestal, so it will still be a taller overall monument.

A visitors' center is also proposed to house a gift shop, food service and theater area, all of which would be owned by the private investors.

The monument is set to be located on a peak in Osage County, which is part of the 300-acre site of the Centennial Botanical Garden, about seven miles northwest of downtown Tulsa.

"This is not a publicly funded sculpture. It's privately funded. It's a business venture," LaFortune said.

Securing investors has resulted in delays in breaking ground on the project, LaFortune said.

Gray, who was unavailable for comment, has said he wanted to unveil the sculpture during the state's centennial celebration in 2007. LaFortune said Wednesday that if that deadline isn't met, it shouldn't have an effect on whether the project occurs.

Gray, who lives in Edmond, has said he lost an Oklahoma City investor when he chose the state's second largest city over its capital in March 2004.

LaFortune said infrastructure improvements were planned for the area prior to the sculpture coming to Tulsa.

"So as far as public investment, we have nothing to lose and everything to gain in what this private venture will do for Tulsa," he said.

Tulsa suburb makes splash with river development
by Kelly Kurt
Associated Press
3/11/2005


JENKS - When this Tulsa suburb set out to develop its Arkansas River waterfront, it gambled on the fish to lure people in.
Not the stripers in the river, but the fish on the west bank, swimming in the $20 million Oklahoma Aquarium in Jenks.

The aquarium, which opened in 2003, has spawned a development boom unseen elsewhere on the river's 42-mile curl through metropolitan Tulsa. As Jenks makes a splash, Tulsa and other suburbs are working to navigate obstacles to long-range development dreams.

"It had to start with somebody doing it and showing it could be done," said Gaylon Pinc, an official with the Indian Nations Council of Governments, an association of local governments that is creating an Arkansas River master plan.

A hotel is scheduled to open next to the aquarium this month. Restaurants and small boutiques are filling the nearby Riverwalk Crossing, a 47-acre Mediterranean style development with a riverfront boardwalk and amphitheater.

On Tulsa's opposite bank, a few chain restaurants also have opened, although not directly on the waterfront.

Private developers are showing interest in doing more at this spot, about nine miles downstream of where the river enters the city's downtown. And the Creek Nation Casino expects to complete a $100 million expansion of its riverfront operations a short ways upstream by late 2006.

But other major river projects hinge on a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' study on the feasibility of the master plan, which was created with public input from Tulsa, Bixby, Sand Springs, Jenks and Broken Arrow. The Corps' final report is due in June.

The plan includes visions of water taxis scooting across the river to the shopping and entertainment stops, a riverfront baseball stadium, new bridges and easier pedestrian access to recreation trails - and a landscape free of odor from Tulsa's riverfront oil refineries and wastewater treatment plant.

"If we put a baseball stadium in with a few thousand people there on summer nights and they've got some odor problems, it won't be an attraction," said Pinc, INCOG's manager of environmental and engineering services.

The refineries have assured officials they are putting in place standards that will reduce odors, he said. And city officials are weighing new technology to control odor from the treatment plant.

But the odor is just the start of hurdles to making the dreams reality, he said.

There are protected wildlife to consider: Bald eagles nest along the river, and the endangered least tern makes its home on sand bars constantly threatened by changes in the river's flow.

And water quality: Though improvements at water treatment plants mean the river is much cleaner than it was when Pinc came to INCOG 30 years ago to address pollution, bacterial levels are still too high for safe swimming, he said.

And flooding potential: The flood of 1986 set floodplain standards that mean some of the riverfront is suited for sports fields and farmers' markets, but not hotels or aquariums.

And, perhaps most importantly to waterfront development, the river's capricious flow: Pinc said power generation upstream means the current can go from 12,000 cubic feet per second to "next to nothing" in a matter of hours.

To have riverfront development, "we have to have water in the river," said Tulsa Mayor Bill LaFortune, who calls two proposed low water dams being studied by the Corps top priorities.

Voter approval of about $24 million in funding for the dams and other river projects as part of the Vision 2025 county sales tax increase showed they are ready for action after decades of seeing river plans go nowhere, he said.

"We started with the people's vision. Now we need to know from the technical experts what we can do and what we can't do," LaFortune said.

With just a stringy strip of available land on its east bank and a west bank occupied by refineries to the north and the waste plant to the south, Tulsa faces some development challenges Jenks did not.

But Jerry Gordon, developer of Jenks' Riverwalk Crossing, said politics is the biggest stumbling block.

"I would not even be out of the ground yet on the Tulsa side, I guarantee it," he said, blaming a combination of Tulsa city government, environmentalists and the Corps for slowing development efforts.

Gordon, who is about to add a movie theater and hotel to his property in Jenks, questioned the need for lengthy studies, believing some improvements could be started without them.

"Everybody's got their hands tied," he said. "We are on a good roll. The excitement levels are getting up there. They need to get it in gear so we can attract more development."

A decade-long effort to build the aquarium on Tulsa's side fell apart in 1994, when the River Parks Authority passed on the proposal. Jenks jumped at it, knowing a destination was critical to draw other development, said Jenks city planner, Robert Bell.

The city backed the bonds for the aquarium's construction, and it opened June 2003 after several delays. The aquarium expects to log its millionth visitor this summer.

LaFortune said he doesn't know why previous administrations in Tulsa didn't make the river a priority but that "we have done this right" by getting the Corps involved.

In Oklahoma City's Bricktown, the Corps helped turn "what was basically a ditch" into a featured waterway, he said.

On any given day, frisbee golfers, fishermen, cyclists and joggers - including the mayor at times - take advantage of Tulsa's River Parks now. The master plan proposes extending the beloved trails along the entire river corridor.

LaFortune also likes the idea of a San Antonio-style river development linking Tulsa's Brookside district and the river. He wants whatever happens along the Arkansas' banks to be a "great legacy" of his office.

But even with federal funding and technical help, it could take about five years to see the first low water dams, officials said.

"It will take time," Lafortune said. "You can't just transform something overnight."

Developers of The Park at Adam's Creek envision a bustling mix of retailers, restaurants, hotels and a credit union.

A new 15-screen movie theater with stadium seating is just the tip of the iceberg for The Park at Adam's Creek in Broken Arrow.

Once the 140-acre development is finished, it should bring more big box stores, hotels and restaurants to the community, according to officials at KMO Development Group Inc.

"We're excited," said Ted Allison, president of the Broken Arrow Chamber of Commerce. "This project has great potential, and the fact that a movie theater has announced will add a lot of momentum to the project."

Bruce Bolzle, principal at KMO, which is developing the property, said the time was right for the project because Broken Arrow's days as a bedroom community are coming to a close.

"The suburban markets are ready for more retail infrastructure," he said. "Before, people in Broken Arrow would shop in Tulsa. Now, the suburbs have reached the size to where national establishments are looking at them as potential locations for their stores."

Bolzle said the development includes land north of the Broken Arrow Expressway between Lynn Lane
and County Line Road. A Lowe's home improvement store, which opened two years ago at 1900 E. Madison Ave., is part of the development.

The first phase of construction, including 71 acres on the eastern side of the property and the Carmike Cinemas theater, should begin in six to eight months for a spring 2006 opening, he said.

The remaining 69 acres to the west will be developed later. Grant Stewart, a broker at KMO, said the organization hopes to attract office space, more retailers and a hotel for the second phase.

Several restaurants as well as the Tulsa Teachers Credit Union have signed letters of intent to purchase land and build franchises in the eastern segment, Bolzle said, and CBL and Associates Properties, a Chattanooga, Tenn., real estate investment trust, is under contract to build a 200,000-square-foot retail center.

Stewart said CBL has signed two national retail chains as tenants, one of which will occupy 60,000 square feet, with the other taking 30,000 square feet.

CBL will begin construction once it has confirmation of a third major tenant. Smaller chain stores will open in the remaining space.

Neither KMO or CBL representatives would identify the tenants under contract. The restaurants are also unidentified.

However, Carmike Cinema announced in a press release its intent to build a 15-screen theater with stadium seating, wall-to-wall screens and digital sound.

Stewart said the property has not yet been sold to Carmike, though the parties have signed a letter of intent.

Carmike, a 282-theater chain based in Columbus, Ga., currently has nine theaters in Oklahoma, including theaters in Muskogee, Cushing and Stillwater. The release said Carmike focuses its business in small to mid-size communities.

Officials from Carmike were unavailable for comment Wednesday.

Currently, Broken Arrow's only theater is the Cinema 8, which shows first-run movies.

Developers of The Park also have sold some adjacent land that could be used for a housing addition.

Bolzle said the The Park began to attract more national retailers after Bass Pro Shops officials announced they would build an Outdoor World in Broken Arrow, at the northeast corner of Elm Place and the Broken Arrow Expressway.

"The Bass Pro project increased the visibility of Broken Arrow," Bolzle said. "It started people looking at BA in a new light."

Allison said Bass Pro officials expect their store to open by the fall.

http://www.cityofowasso.com/Econ_DEV/96thRetailandAvailPropertyWeb.gif
http://www.cityofowasso.com/Econ_DEV/96thR...PropertyWeb.gif (http://www.cityofowasso.com/Econ_DEV/96thRetailandAvailPropertyWeb.gif)


Target
Belk
Hobby Lobby
PetsMart
LinensNThings
TJMaxx
Dry Cleaning Station
Reasor's Grocery Store #2
Pier 1
Old Navy
Kirkland's
Lane Bryant
Rue 21
Justice Clothing Co.
Dress Barn
ProNails
SportClips
Payless Shoes
Rack Room Shoes
Camile's
Nordaggio's
Starbucks
Quizno's
Wild Noodles
Da'Boat
Applebee's
Lone Star
Red Robin
Barnes Elementary
YMCA
Rejoice Christian School
Firestation #2
Firestation #3
Bailey Medical Center
Tulsa Tech
Bank of the Lakes #2
Firestone
Vintage Stock
Cor Fitness Center
Chase Bank
Shopping Center at 116th and 129th
I thought Moore was growing rapidly. B)

You may be wondering how on earth Owasso got all of this. They asked is how.


I'm exhausted. I might go dig up some more stuff later, but I think that is enough for now to show the growth in Tulsa's suburbs.

The Bay Area's suburbs are both more urban and more physcially beautiful than those of any other major city.

http://www.incog.org/ark%20river/default.htm

List of Arkansas River projects. The map is what you want.

The Bay Area's suburbs are both more urban and more physcially beautiful than those of any other major city.
maybe physically but not architecurally.

Evanston
http://www.jackweissassociates.com/signagehome_images/evanston.jpg
http://tigger.uic.edu/depts/ahaa/imagebase/maclean/aerials1/09.JPEG
http://www.wereamshallbe.com/photos/20040906_5.jpg

Wilmette
http://www.yangviolins.com/images/wilmette.jpg
http://www.glsbpa.com/images/2.jpg
http://www.chamberscross.com/images/photos/photo_wilmette.jpg

Oak Park
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/fa267/flw/flwhouse_01.jpg
http://tigger.uic.edu/depts/ahaa/imagebase/maclean/aerials1/55.JPEG

I don't think anybody could argue anything but LA. With suburbs like Huntington Beach, Long Beach, Manhattan Beach, Hollywood, Venice Beach, Anaheim, and the list goes on and on and on...

Hollywood and Venice Beach aren't suburbs, they're part of the city of Los Angeles.

http://www.cityofowasso.com/Econ_DEV/96thRetailandAvailPropertyWeb.gif


I honestly think this is the most disgusting thing I've ever seen on SSC! Exurban "power centers" must die!

Well, whose to say that a suburb can't build a town center, with a square mile of commercial mega development?


The best suburb would no doubt lead to the worst downtown. The best suburb's function is to be as self reliant as possible, and sustain itself economically. It needs to attract people with excellant schools and low crime. It's function is to provide a way of life that the inner city doesn't.

But I suppose it is also possible to have excellant suburbs and a well used, and well planned downtown. Take OKC for example. The main employer is the FAA out by the airport, and Tinker AFB out in Midwest City, the eastside suburb. The third largest employer is probably OU, out in Norman which is a completely differant story. I would classify Norman as it's own metro, kind of like Saint Paul to Minneapolis. So we have a triangle of the largest emplyers that formed between Norman and I 240 in OKC.

But Downtown also has it's fair share of employers. If you combined all of Downtown it would no doubt employ more than the FAA and Tinker Field. I mean, the city, the state (some offices in downtown though most are off of Lincoln Boulevard) and of course Devon, Kerr-McGee, Dorcester Capital, Chesapeake Energy, and Marathon Oil. Then there is the Northwest Expressway, an exact copy of Westheimer in Houston. It provides employment and transportation for the city's northwest sector. But this section of the city commutes to Downtown more than the others. Edmond too, which is OKC's star suburb. Edmond is home to about 80,000 of the most ultimate NIMBYists you sould ever imagine. Let's just say they challenged Wal Mart when they tried to move in.

It is possible to have good suburbs and an excellant downtown. But if you have both, I guarantee you will have a hefty slum. Or if you live in the South or Southwest, you'll have a barrio.

Oklahoma City's huge barrio is the inner south side. The African American neighborhoods are on the NE side, by the state capital, and the gays mostly reside in the inner north side of town, side by side with oil barons.

Your inner city makeup will be much less diverse if you have no good suburbs.

Even then, how is this at all unique, this kind of development is everywhere, and it's not the most desired, for the avg. person here, it is sufficient but it's not what we probably should be doing.

This is just your typical exurban sprawly development.

Don't forget what thread your in, and mind the first post in this thread. Very insightful.

Dude, not all suburbs are what you showed in that photograph. There are plenty of suburbs with urbanity, mixed-use development and plenty of TODs with light rail and many other transit options available for the area and into town. Even if they don't have this, they have the wealth, charm, natural beauty or exclusivity to balance it out. Nothing in that photo or in the long ass post that preceeded it shows why it should be in the BEST suburbs thread. It's fine that the area is developing, that's fantastic, but more than being in the appropriate thread, it just looks like another opportunity to boost your town in which there's nothing wrong to a certain extent.

Think about it, you think DFW's suburbs, which are nice don't get me wrong, but by far?, and Tulsa, are the top two. With all the nice cities in the US(NYC, LA, etc.), Dallas and Tulsa not being the most exemplary examples, how could you so come to your reasoning and even then, to make any of these cities by far the best is just a little ignorant.

Speaking of which, Dallas actually has commuter rail running through it's suburbs and that never got any mark up in this thread.

I am not a booster. That should be another thread. (watch how quickly it fills up with personal attacks against me)

"Speaking of which, Dallas actually has commuter rail running through it's suburbs and that never got any mark up in this thread."

So does Chicago, NYC, and DC along with others that I'm probably forgetting. And I don't want you to be criticized, but you were the one to questioned my understanding of the thread.

I stand by my questioning, because obviously I got a sufficient response or I'd still be "nagging" you. No worries. :)

Dallas has more accomplished suburbs then most metros but at the exspense of DTDallas. Lots of jobs and several growing/developing town centers. Companies outside of Dallas but in DFW include Exxon-mobil, American Airlines, EDS, JCpenney, Frito-lay, Dr. Pepper, Ericcson, Radioshack

For Sunbelt cities I would only rank LA higher

DT Plano
http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/4562/aerialdowntown9yo.th.jpg (http://img293.imageshack.us/my.php?image=aerialdowntown9yo.jpg)

Collin County briefs
10:21 PM CDT on Friday, May 20, 2005
From Staff Reports


Panel recommends firm for remaking Rice Field

PLANO – The city's goal of getting more living spaces near the DART light rail platform downtown could get another development jolt. Next up: the remaking of city-owned Rice Field, west of downtown. Lexington Luxury Builders LLC of Dallas has been recommended by a city committee to do the project. More than 6 acres will probably be redeveloped as townhomes, 90 to 120 dwellings in all. The Plano City Council is to discuss the developer's selection Monday. If council members concur, the city will begin negotiations with Lexington to hammer out development details. Already, downtown has seen a spate of residential building. The council has set a goal of adding 1,000 new housing units within a quarter-mile of the Dallas Area Rapid Transit system station.

I want to continue on the Chicago's suburbs...

I posted this in the CvsC forum about 2 times now.

Chicago's metro

Wilmette

http://www.glsbpa.com/images/2.jpg
http://www.bahai.com/persian/images/Wilmette.jpg

Oak Park

http://www.oppl.org/reference/graphics/galehouse2.jpg

Evanston

http://www.northshorechicago.com/images/skyline.jpg

Gurnee


http://currancontracting.com/assets/images/gurnee333.jpg

http://www.princessmonkey.com/travels/images/flying_over_six_flags_great_america.jpg

Gary

http://www.southshoreart.com/citypictures/gary.jpg

http://www.ocexcelsior.com/entretenimiento/newswires/images/1203_en_wr_micheal_jackson.jpg


Michigan City

http://www.catfleet21.org/images/jpg/Micty.JPG

http://www.minimountaincampground.com/outlet.JPG
http://www.millerbeachway.com/images/chishyline3.jpg

The Micheal Jackson picture is a joke, even though he was born in Gary

Although its not mentioned in the poll, Miami has some pretty nice suburbs and secondary cities in its metro, ranging from Miami Beach and Coral Gables to Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach and Aventura.

I agree, Miami has some awesome suburbs. I drove the Tamiami trail the other day and one minute you are in the middle of NOWHERE in the Everglades, then in 10 minutes you are in one of the most dense suburbs in the USA. Awesome.

Although i love Atlanta, it has the WORST suburbs,with the exception of a few areas like Marietta and Decatur. Everything is so spread out and it is like being in an endless scape of cul-de-sacs and big box stores. The only redeeming factor for Atlanta are all the scattered skyscrapers around in the suburbs, and the beautiful greenery.

If your taking CSA, then New York wins. Think: CT: Greenwich, New Canaan, , Westport, Litchfield, Ridgefield..........NY: Bronxville, Scarsdale, Hastings on Hudson, Dobbs Ferry, Irvington, Larchmont, Rye, Bedford, Katonah, Mahopac, Great Neck, Manhasset, Locust Valley, Oyster Bay, Roslyn, Cold Spring Harbor, Northport, Port Jefferson, Easthampton, Southampton.........NJ: Tenafly, Cresskill, Ridgewood, Ho Ho Kus, Wyckoff, Denville, Madison, Chatham, Summit, Short Hills, Harding, Basking Ridge, Bernardsville, Peapack and Gladstone, Tewksbury, Hope, Sparta, Princeton, Cranbury, Westfield, Cranford, Weehawken, Hoboken, Rumson, Navesink, Atlantic Highlands, Spring Lake, and the list goes on...

Well, depends on where in Chicago. I think Chicago's north shore are some of the best and most unique suburbs (not to mention affluent) with all the great perks of suburbia. (yes, great perks. If you like big houses, lawns, high degree of safety, then suburbia is your thing) These towns were mostly built prior to WWII. However, the western and southern burbs of Chicago, I can agree with you, are pretty bland. I usually go out of my way to avoid having to go out there...

Urban, certainly Oak Park is anything but bland. Riverside is a classic suburb, designed by Olmstead, I believe. Historic parts of towns like Naperville and Wheaton are loaded with character. Hinsdale and River Forest could fit nicely on the North Shore. Oak Brook is wealthy....but wealth with class. And if you include the Fox River valley as part of west suburbia, you're definitely in the charm belt.

I voted for chicago burbs. Evanston is beautiful. Chicagoland is quintessential suburbia. Probably the most connected city-suburb relationship.

Call it the anti-Detroit relationshiip. Our topography ties city to suburbia most effectively. And with Chicago's incredible period of growth that started in the early 90's, the old edgy, often poltitcally based rivalry between city and suburbs has eroded. Chicago instead has become suburban Chicago's best friend, spiking real estate prices throughout the area with particular emphasis on area's closest to the city.

I know this is a generalization, but so many suburban Chicagoans absolutely love the city (and would fully admit they would die living there with the congestion, the traffic, the pace) that the relationship is pretty solid.

IMHO, we do suffer some degree of city elitism among those in the city's core along the lakefront. That "312" mentality is very Manhattan-like and some of these folks would take pride never having stepped out of a car (which is a form of transportations they may abhor) outside city limits. This group, however, is not pervassive.

Having visited Skokie and Evanston on my last Chicago trip 2 weeks ago, I was dissappointed. Some people here made it sound like these places were extensions of the city. That is not even close to the truth.

must be all those farms and endless strip malls in Evanston that give it that feel. Or maybe the city's two-storey cap on height of buildings.

I want to continue on the Chicago's suburbs...

\
Evanston

http://www.northshorechicago.com/images/skyline.jpg
\

Azn, I'm afraid this one is actually Belmont Harbor, less than half way to Evanston from downtown.

Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, Santa Monica, Compton, Long Beach(but don't tell them) would all be considered suburbs of LA but are pretty urban, in fact really urban (directly connected to LA's urban rail network or will be in the future)for the traditional suburb. In fact W. Hollywood is the densest city west of the Mississippi and Santa Monica is home to one of the only pedestrian only converted streets from the auto in the country. In fact most of these cities would be more urban than parts of Queens and def more urban than many many parts of Staten Island, both suburban like places that lie within the city limits of NYC. And not to mention that HANDS DOWN these are the most famous and infamous suburbs on Earth.

Dorothy Parker was quoted as saying “Los Angeles is 72 suburbs in search of a city”.......probably in the 40's or around the same time that she arrived here with her husband. The city now is close to 3 times that size.

I don't think anybody could argue anything but LA. With suburbs like Huntington Beach, Long Beach, Manhattan Beach, Hollywood, Venice Beach, Anaheim, and the list goes on and on and on...

Hollywood isn't a suburb. Its part of LA city. So is North Hollywood and East Hollywood. West Hollywood is a separate city almost surrounded by LA.

Altough many of NYC's and especially Chicago's suburbs are very nice, nothing compares to LA's suburbs. Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Manhattan Beach, Hermosa beach, Redondo Beach, PAsadena, the OC. What other city has suburban sites to compare with the Rose Bowl, Malibu, Disneyland, Knott's Berry farm, Magic mountain, two presidential libraries, more than 50 miles of year round beach, ski resorts, gondola rides, Rodeo drive, South coast plaza, Simon museum, Huntington gardens, four county Arboretums, half of the busiest port in the country, the Aquarium of the Pacific, etc. etc.?

Never been to LA, so I can't judge.

I barely passed through Chicago's burbs at night when going down I-90.

I'm sure they are both nice though, but it is all up to opinion.

I voted for New York's suburbs. I like them the most, from what I've seen. North Jersey, Westchester, Long Island, Connecticut, that packs a big punch. Newark, Jersey City, Yonkers and Bridgeport are almost as urban as certain parts of the city.

Why are topics being brought back from the dead, BTW. :runaway:

I'm very surprised there hasn't been more votes for NYC and Boston. Two of the oldest cities in the country with beautiful suburbs. The burbs in these 2 cities seem to do really well breaking away from the actual city in my opinion. I live on the South Shore of Boston in a small town called Scituate (pronounced sit-chu-it). We're 25 miles away from downtown but you wouldn't ever know it. We don't have any highways in our town (the closest is about a 20 minute drive so there's decent accesibility to Boston) and I'm about a 15 minute drive from a T-Station. When it opens next year I'll be about a 10 minute walk from the new commuter rail that is coming to town.

The thing I enjoy most about roads in suburban Boston is the fact that many of them don't follow a grid. Since all of these towns have been around as long as Boston has, there's a center to mostly every town instead of the mega-sprawl of you see in many of the cities being developed in the Post-War era. There's nothing more that I hate about the area I go to school in than the roads. Every road has at 2 lanes on each side, and there are stop lights every 100 feet--talk about a boring drive.

The point I'm trying to raise by the roads is the fact there isn't anything "quaint" about the newer developed suburbs. Boston's burbs are definitely not without their share of sprawl, but I feel that there are more areas that are kept up historically and have a more welcoming feeling.

I personally haven't spent an extended amount of time in the Western or North Shore suburbs, but I'm sure many of them share the same qualities of my hometown. Natick, Wellesley, and Weston are all gorgeous (they're also three of the most wealthy towns in the state, so I would expect them to be) and they keep up the historical feeling that I've been talking about. I'm going back to Massachusetts this weekend for Christmas, so I'll try and remember to take some pictures so I can share with you what I mean.


New Yorks suburbs are also amazing. Most of the reasons are because they share the same qualities that I was describing about Boston's suburbs (quaint, historical, etc). I would assume that Philadelphia would share the same qualities but I've never been there so I can't say they do. I haven't been to DC too often but I have family in Silver Spring, and it's always seemed like a really nice area to me.


No offense to LA or anything, but I don't understand why it's getting so many votes. I agree that their suburbs are gorgeous, and very wealthy--but they aren't any different from the city (at least it doesn't seem that way). I know most people here all hate the suburbs, but I think that suburbs are nice when they can break away from the city and cast their own image. I didn't even know until reading this thread that Beverly Hills wasn't in LA. Same goes for Compton, West Hollywood, and Long Beach. As Klamedia mentioned, all these suburbs are really urban compared to a traditional suburb...they're basically just a continuation of Los Angeles, so what makes them different than living in the city of LA? Again, this isn't an attack on Los Angeles, but what makes the suburbs so special if they're just a bunch of smaller LA's surrounding the main city?

Boston has some nice suburbs, IMO.

The lack of a grid is something that I never liked about Greater Boston. While it looks good and adds beauty to Boston, some of the suburbs can REALLY be hard to navigate through for a new-comer. Hartford isn't any different on that respect, must be a NE thing.

I thought Cambridge, Somerville and Newton were great when visiting the area for the first time. I wouldn't mind owning a home there.

Philadelphia's Mainline definitely belongs in the top contenders for best suburbs. I'm saying this and I'm not even a suburb booster at all.

What exactly defines a good suburb?

I'd say the best suburbs are in LA, DC (this may be biased!) and NY. Chicago has some good suburbs too (Winettka, Kenilworth etc), but they're too relient upon the city for amenities.


I haven't been to DC too often but I have family in Silver Spring, and it's always seemed like a really nice area to me.



A few years ago Silver Spring was seen as inferior to Bethesda, Chevy Chase, Rockville, Mclean, Arlington, Ballston and Alexandria. It has come a long way over the past 5 years and has reestablished itself as a first tier city in the world of Washington's burbs, most of which aren't suburbs but extensions of the District. While the city has caught up, the wealth of Silver Spring hasn't quite kept the pace, but I think wealthier Washingtonians will begin to realize how great of a place Silver Spring is after the recent decades it spent in decay.

Well according to Relocate-America and Universal Publications, Edmond (OKC's overgrown suburb that anchors the north side of the metro) is the "Best small town in America" to live in.

So that's two accolades. Can we count them as votes for OKC as well? Well I guess that would be 'other' in this poll? I think I already voted Atlanta, because I wanted to keep it between the choices.

I will say atlanta! my opinion of course. The pure definition of suburbs reigns in north central georgia. They serve a great purpose. A moat with millions of monsters and alligators to protect the castle (atlanta). Okay, my analogy failed once again.

How can we even consider a city like evanston, ill an american suburb. Its just Chicago a few miles away. Its been engulfed by urbanity. Is the question asking which city has the most urban suburbs? or what city has the best prime cut american suburbs. The answer would be an obvious ny

NY... on the prime cut or urban?

NY... on the prime cut or urban?

I actually have never seen or been to NYC, but i'd imagine that the urban core has put several influences to the surrounding suburbs. So i say NYC for its obvious high rate of urban suburbs. I'd imagine that it- like most cities has several boring suburban cities as well.

im thinking of prime cut steak or something...that was another bad word to use.

No offense to LA or anything, but I don't understand why it's getting so many votes. I agree that their suburbs are gorgeous, and very wealthy--but they aren't any different from the city (at least it doesn't seem that way). I know most people here all hate the suburbs, but I think that suburbs are nice when they can break away from the city and cast their own image. I didn't even know until reading this thread that Beverly Hills wasn't in LA. Same goes for Compton, West Hollywood, and Long Beach. As Klamedia mentioned, all these suburbs are really urban compared to a traditional suburb...they're basically just a continuation of Los Angeles, so what makes them different than living in the city of LA? Again, this isn't an attack on Los Angeles, but what makes the suburbs so special if they're just a bunch of smaller LA's surrounding the main city?

Very good point. Upon moving to LA it was hard to distinguish between the "suburban" cities that I mentioned above say, the demarcation for Santa Monica or Beverly Hills or really hard West Hollywood. The difficult task is because how the city had a relentless need to grow clear out to the ocean around 13-15 miles depending where you start which is about the length of Manhattan. In doing so it swallowed up the cities in its path although they retained their sole cityhood w/ the exception of Weho which annexed itself and became a city later. If your idea of a suburb is to take a break away from the city, LA is not for you. This is where suburbia/urban have no distinction. The density alone of some of these "suburbs" rival legit urban areas around the country.

LA myth busting #114:


Sprawl is typical of all large cities, namely N. American cities.
Rank:
NYC 6720 sq miles of sprawl
Chicago 7212 sq miles of sprawl(w/even a lesser core population than the following)
LA 4850 sq miles of sprawl

LA metro cannot grow anymore unlike many of your big cities that are surrounded with an endless amount of seductive virgin land. It's either halted by an ocean, a mountain range or yet another MSA i.e. San Bernadino-Ontario.

Even with the conservative interpretations of the size of US MSA's Chicago drops down considerably but LA hardly comes out on top and is still beat again by cities with much less size.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population#_note-us
http://www.sprawlcity.org/losangeles.html

This question can interpreted in different ways....are we talking about suburbs or the areas of the metropolitan area outside the primary city's city limits (which may in fact include many urban areas).

If we base the question on primary city and its metropolitan area, I'd have to put San Francisco first on the list.

No primary city has as vibrant and exciting metropolitan area outside its own city limits IMHO; LA would clearly come in second in this regard.

The Bay Area offers two othe cities of size: Oakland and San Jose (the Bay's biggest city, ahead of SF). The Bay Area divide into special zones outside SF, each with its own unique personality nutured by the separation that the huge bay in the middle of the metropolis fosters: so you have mellow and spectacular Marin, the traditional bedroom communities of the Peninsula, Silicon Valley's high tech world built around one major university (Stanford), the industrial East Bay strongly influenced by the other major university (Cal), the wine country in Napa and Sonoma, the towns across the Berkely Hills offering more open space, etc.

So tourists themselves are drawn to include the Bay Area in their SF itineraries: Muir Woods, Mt. Tamalpais, Sausalito, Stinson Beach, Angel Island, Cal, Stanford, Jack London Sq, Winchester Mystery House, the fabulous winneries, Berkeley's restaurants, etc.

The jam packed nature of San Francisco continues as you go to other parts of the Bay Area....and no city's surrounding area can truly compare.

But now since San Jose is the larger of the metro cities, wouldn't it be justifiably known now as the San Jose MSA?

This question can interpreted in different ways....are we talking about suburbs or the areas of the metropolitan area outside the primary city's city limits (which may in fact include many urban areas).

If we base the question on primary city and its metropolitan area, I'd have to put San Francisco first on the list.

No primary city has as vibrant and exciting metropolitan area outside its own city limits IMHO; LA would clearly come in second in this regard.

The Bay Area offers two othe cities of size: Oakland and San Jose (the Bay's biggest city, ahead of SF). The Bay Area divide into special zones outside SF, each with its own unique personality nutured by the separation that the huge bay in the middle of the metropolis fosters: so you have mellow and spectacular Marin, the traditional bedroom communities of the Peninsula, Silicon Valley's high tech world built around one major university (Stanford), the industrial East Bay strongly influenced by the other major university (Cal), the wine country in Napa and Sonoma, the towns across the Berkely Hills offering more open space, etc.

So tourists themselves are drawn to include the Bay Area in their SF itineraries: Muir Woods, Mt. Tamalpais, Sausalito, Stinson Beach, Angel Island, Cal, Stanford, Jack London Sq, Winchester Mystery House, the fabulous winneries, Berkeley's restaurants, etc.

The jam packed nature of San Francisco continues as you go to other parts of the Bay Area....and no city's surrounding area can truly compare.


good point. For some reason i overlooked that.

i say newyork because there are very nice burbs in three different states,
and many are very old, so very diverse and intersesting,

chicago does have a tristate area but indiana burbs arent too great, okay will get better with time and kenosha is a bit of a burb but kinda far,

whereas due to newyork unique geography you have three different states worth of burbs right there, leads to more unique burbs also to the amazing largeness of newyork.

LA myth busting #114:


Sprawl is typical of all large cities, namely N. American cities.
Rank:
NYC 6720 sq miles of sprawl
Chicago 7212 sq miles of sprawl(w/even a lesser core population than the following)
LA 4850 sq miles of sprawl

LA metro cannot grow anymore unlike many of your big cities that are surrounded with an endless amount of seductive virgin land. It's either halted by an ocean, a mountain range or yet another MSA i.e. San Bernadino-Ontario.

Even with the conservative interpretations of the size of US MSA's Chicago drops down considerably but LA hardly comes out on top and is still beat again by cities with much less size.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population#_note-us
http://www.sprawlcity.org/losangeles.html

this is a good point though is overblown, tis true that LA is dense in itself,
but its bedroom communities are far far flung. we are arguing over semantics.
how long before its the LA/Sandiego metro?
and the inland empire ends where?
what is wrightwood and palmdale and beyond? sprawl due to LA.
the mountains are there but you simply just build where you can, (on the other side of them)

But now since San Jose is the larger of the metro cities, wouldn't it be justifiably known now as the San Jose MSA?

we'll definitely get back to you when San Jose passes LA in population and they start singing "Do you know the way to old LA?"

Wow, this is old. I had forgotten all about making this thread. It's over a year old.

we'll definitely get back to you when San Jose passes LA in population and they start singing "Do you know the way to old LA?"

Yeah right, that'll be around the time LA passes NYC in population.......um, in 2345????

Yeah right, that'll be around the time LA passes NYC in population.......um, in 2345????

Vegas, baby

Wow, this is old. I had forgotten all about making this thread. It's over a year old.

:) and to think you missed all those posts in the middle of the thread that said that Rochester had the best suburbs in the US!

It depends on the definition of "best." But, I'd have to say New York City, tops them all. In Westchester there's small, quaint, New-England-esque villages. On Long Island there are beach towns, charming Martha-Stewart type towns, and remote "hamlets" that seem 1,000 miles from the big city. In Connecticut you have rolling, wooded hills graced with country clubs, golf courses, swank villages and towns with New England charm and grace. New Jersey has its share of all the above, with LA-type suburbs mixed in. Hands-down, NYC. And I've been to most all other cities listed.

This question can interpreted in different ways....are we talking about suburbs or the areas of the metropolitan area outside the primary city's city limits (which may in fact include many urban areas).

If we base the question on primary city and its metropolitan area, I'd have to put San Francisco first on the list.

No primary city has as vibrant and exciting metropolitan area outside its own city limits IMHO; LA would clearly come in second in this regard.

The Bay Area offers two othe cities of size: Oakland and San Jose (the Bay's biggest city, ahead of SF). The Bay Area divide into special zones outside SF, each with its own unique personality nutured by the separation that the huge bay in the middle of the metropolis fosters: so you have mellow and spectacular Marin, the traditional bedroom communities of the Peninsula, Silicon Valley's high tech world built around one major university (Stanford), the industrial East Bay strongly influenced by the other major university (Cal), the wine country in Napa and Sonoma, the towns across the Berkely Hills offering more open space, etc.

So tourists themselves are drawn to include the Bay Area in their SF itineraries: Muir Woods, Mt. Tamalpais, Sausalito, Stinson Beach, Angel Island, Cal, Stanford, Jack London Sq, Winchester Mystery House, the fabulous winneries, Berkeley's restaurants, etc.

The jam packed nature of San Francisco continues as you go to other parts of the Bay Area....and no city's surrounding area can truly compare.

^^ Very well said... and I happen to agree that San Francisco has the most attractive suburbs in the U.S. when you consider Marin County, the Wine Country, etc...

So... why isn't San Francisco on this list?

... as well as Seattle, Washington; Portland, OR; San Diego; Denver; Salt Lake City ... etc. Seems very eastern-centric (in other words flawed).

I voted for NYC suburbs because they are the largest and most diverse. There urban areas like Newark, Jersey City, Hoboken, Paterson, Yonkers, Mount Vernon, Hempstead. Rich suburbs like the Hamptons, Alpine, Saddle River, Greenwich plus of course many working class and middle class suburbs. The surrounding area has rivers, bays, forests, oceans, beaches. Plus the New York metro area has extensive commuter rail service. You can take a commuter train from Manhattan and be at the Jersey shore about an hour!

I voted for NYC suburbs because they are the largest and most diverse. There urban areas like Newark, Jersey City, Hoboken, Paterson, Yonkers, Mount Vernon, Hempstead. Rich suburbs like the Hamptons, Alpine, Saddle River, Greenwich plus of course many working class and middle class suburbs. The surrounding area has rivers, bays, forests, oceans, beaches. Plus the New York metro area has extensive commuter rail service. You can take a commuter train from Manhattan and be at the Jersey shore about an hour!

NYC suburbs are neither the largest nor the most diverse.

If your idea of a suburb is to take a break away from the city, LA is not for you. This is where suburbia/urban have no distinction. The density alone of some of these "suburbs" rival legit urban areas around the country.

I wouldn't be so fast to throw the word "suburb" in quotes. Inner-ring NYC suburbs ("suburban ones"... I'm not counting Yonkers, Mount Vernon, Hoboken or any obviously urban places) have densities upwards of 10K and 11K. There's not a single apartment building and nary an attached house in New Hyde Park, and its density is 11,281 per mi sq. The highest density for an inner-ring suburb in LA I found was not even 10K. The terms "dense" and "urban" are all relative. Off the topic of suburbs and into city propers, all of Queens, over 100 mi sq, is a few thousand per mi sq denser than the densest 42 mi sq. of LA (the number came from a comparison with SF)... hell, Queens is denser than every city in America over 100,000... yet Queens is referred to as being "suburban" over and over again in the mass media.

My point is that it doesn't take much to reach "density" by American standards, as long as you have 30x100 foot lots with single-family homes sitting on them, you can pass 10,000 damn easy. Perhaps Compton isn't so urban as much as LA city is suburban, hence the lack of distinction. The difference when you look at the big metro picture comes only from the density of the exurbs... so LA is not more consistently urban, but more consistently surburban. The "city-ish" densities of Compton and Long Beach etc etc don't have anything to do with that statistic.

If your idea of the city is to break away from the suburbs, LA is not for you.

If your idea of the city is to break away from the suburbs, LA is not for you.

You don't understand. LA is the American city that best combines the virtues of both the city and the suburbs. We have all the cultural advantages of New York, and yet the semi rural feel of the suburbs.

In my personal instance, my single family home in Santa Monica is only two blocks from Wilshire, 10 minutes from UCLA, and less than half an hour from downtown (assuming non rush hour conditions) yet I see hummingbirds, racoons, and the occasional golden eagle in my back yard which is planted with citrus, stone fruits, avocado, and guavas and have beautiful roses growing most of the year. You would have to be way out in Westchester or the Island to match that.

In no other city can you live the suburban life while still truly living in a world class city. None of the other alpha world cities can offer the same experience.

LA is NOT suburban. If anything it's URBAN! You've got a city with 4.1 million people with a metro population of about 18 million. LA's suburbs are truly unique they're NOTHING like the suburbs found in Connecticut and Kansas.

I believe between LA and Chicago 4 sure, LA has denser burbs than Chicago and much more interconnecting with its highways!

You're right, the L.A. MSA is in fact the most dense metro area in the country. Seems counter-intuitive, but it's true. Not a lot of room to build out there so they have very small plots of land.

The highest density for an inner-ring suburb in LA I found was not even 10K.

Huntington Park, Bell, Maywood, are inner-ring suburbs, and I do believe these are bordering the 30,000 mark. I suspect Lynwood, South Gate, Paramont also are well above the 10k per square mile.

Long Beach is another I suspect have many hoods above that mark. Overall city density isn't above 10k (It approx 50 sq miles with a population approching 500,000), but their are lots of city neighborhoods well above it.

I said D.C. It has awsome and charming suburbs like Frederick,MD, alexandria,VA, and annapolis(some may not consider annapolis, but I do).

LA. DC burbs arent that interesting and somewhat overrated on this forum. It has TODs, but not much outside of that. Its basically just standard suburbia. Fairfax County has 1 million people, and basically no walkable downtown area or village. The closest thing it has is Old Towne Fairfax, which cities like LA, NYC and Chicago have all over their suburban areas. Yes, LA. I think most people would be suprised how many LA burbs have walkable, older villages.
LA Metro is the most unique area in the U.S. if you actually visit it outside of its tourist traps. Vibrant ethnic neighborhoods are scattered all over the burbs like nowhere else.

I found Inglewood far more interesting than most DC burbs, and that is considered one of LA's more infamous areas. LA burbs are just non stop dense development throughout. In Fairfax County, you can take roads between major burbs that make you feel like you are in some bumb fuck metropolitan area. Hunter Mill Road? Fox Mill Road? It goes on and on. They dont have crap like that in LA.

Alexandria and Frederick arent charming either. They have "Old Town" districts that are nice and historic. The rest of it...bleech. Alexandria has some sketchy, gritty areas and Federick is like saying Naperville IL is "charming".

Alexandria and Frederick arent charming either. They have "Old Town" districts that are nice and historic. The rest of it...bleech. Alexandria has some sketchy, gritty areas and Federick is like saying Naperville IL is "charming".


you really have it out for DC don't you? never let a nice comment about DC passby, which itself is already pretty rare on a skyscraper forum.. obviously according to the results and comments people both from the dc area and not think its a winner =)

I personally think DC has some of the best burbs with lots of history and diversity compared to even the big 3.

I was raised there and know it much better than you do. This is about the best, and DC burbs arent.
It would say the burbs are better than most, but ahead of NYC, LA, Chicago...dont think so. It still find it funny that my native Fairfax County has 1 million people and NOT ONE attractive walkable area. It's also getting less attractive as a whole too. Places like Annandale, Falls Church, Herndon are becoming suburban slums.

The more I go back and visit my family, the more often I say "What the fuck is happening to this county??"

I was raised there and know it much better than you do. This is about the best, and DC burbs arent.
It would say the burbs are better than most, but ahead of NYC, LA, Chicago...dont think so. It still find it funny that my native Fairfax County has 1 million people and NOT ONE attractive walkable area. It's also getting less attractive as a whole too. Places like Annandale, Falls Church, Herndon are becoming suburban slums.

The more I go back and visit my family, the more often I say "What the fuck is happening to this county??"


You obviously have me fooled for someone that wouldnt know the DC area. I too am from there, lived in fairfax/burke/gaithersburg/potomac/alexandria/springfield/georgetown/adams morg
went to rosemont/garfield/robinson/quince orchard/ridgeview/etc.......


beyond that.. we obviously have different points of view..... just bc you are from there doesn't mean your opinion is all mighty. It's an opinion. I lived in Chicago afterwards and think its a horribly boring city for its size, however at least i realize its my opinion and not pure fact for all beings alive.

I was raised there and know it much better than you do. This is about the best, and DC burbs arent.
It would say the burbs are better than most, but ahead of NYC, LA, Chicago...dont think so. It still find it funny that my native Fairfax County has 1 million people and NOT ONE attractive walkable area. It's also getting less attractive as a whole too. Places like Annandale, Falls Church, Herndon are becoming suburban slums.

The more I go back and visit my family, the more often I say "What the fuck is happening to this county??"

You can keep your LA suburbs. I'll continue sitting pretty here in Bethesda-Chevy Chase, Maryland. We're the most educated city in the country (that's right, higher than your beloved Pasadena; and Cambridge, Mass and Palo Alto!) and we've actually got higher incomes than Beverly Hills and Malibu (according to the census). We've also got 3 fortune 500 companies based here and the largest biomedical research facility on earth here to employ us. Not to mention the heavy rail metro stations here. Your LA suburb arrogance is unfounded.
I think I'll stay here in the suburbs of BalWash.

You obviously have me fooled for someone that wouldnt know the DC area. I too am from there, lived in fairfax/burke/gaithersburg/potomac/alexandria/springfield/georgetown/adams morg
went to rosemont/garfield/robinson/quince orchard/ridgeview/etc.......


beyond that.. we obviously have different points of view..... just bc you are from there doesn't mean your opinion is all mighty. It's an opinion. I lived in Chicago afterwards and think its a horribly boring city for its size, however at least i realize its my opinion and not pure fact for all beings alive.

I feel the same about DC. Extremely sleepy and boring for being the nation's capitol.

Out of all those places you listed, only 2 of them are interesting. Georgetown and Adams Morgan. The rest are boring as hell.

I feel the same about DC. Extremely sleepy and boring for being the nation's capitol.


as long as you understand its only your opinion, then we're all fine and dandy =)

You can keep your LA suburbs. I'll continue sitting pretty here in Bethesda-Chevy Chase, Maryland. We're the most educated city in the country (that's right, higher than your beloved Pasadena; and Cambridge, Mass and Palo Alto!) and we've actually got higher incomes than Beverly Hills and Malibu (according to the census). We've also got 3 fortune 500 companies based here and the largest biomedical research facility on earth here to employ us. Not to mention the heavy rail metro stations here. Your LA suburb arrogance is unfounded.
I think I'll stay here in the suburbs of BalWash.

Good. Doesnt change the fact that Beverly Hills ACTUALLY looks wealthy in its commerical area, while place like Potomac and Great Falls VA have stupid strip malls that could be in bumble fuck Anytown U.S.A.
I will take Pasadena over any DC burb in a second.

DC metro has a great economy but is a lame place.

as long as you understand its only your opinion, then we're all fine and dandy =)

Its not just my opinion, believe me.

Its not just my opinion, believe me.


well believe me i'm not the only one who thinks Chicago is a major bore. so lets let it go kiddo

Good. Doesnt change the fact that Beverly Hills ACTUALLY looks wealthy in its commerical area, while place like Potomac and Great Falls VA have stupid strip malls that could be in bumble fuck Anytown U.S.A.
I will take Pasadena over any DC burb in a second.

DC metro has a great economy but is a lame place.

Apparently you've never driven up Wisconsin, Massachusetts or Connecticut avenue into Bethesda or Chevy Chase. You know, those are the roads you'll pass by such stores as Saks Fifth Avenue, Bang & Olufson, Brooks Brothers, Barneys Co-Op, BVLGARI, Jimmy Choo, Max Mara, Louis Vuitton, Chanel, Christian Dior, Ralph Lauren, Mervis Diamond Importers, Tiffany & Co., Yves Saint Laurent, Saks Jandel, Gucci, Cartier, Lacoste, and Van Cleef & Arpels. Clyde's, Max Mara Cafe', Famosa, Maggiano's, the Cheesecake Factory. You'll also pass by many 200+ foot buildings. Bethesda is also the restaurant mecca of the entire Metro area (that's right, over DC itself), could you say anything like that about any of LA's burbs? Potomac and Great Falls are for people who want less of an urban lifestyle and thus, live further from the city than Bethesda, Chevy Chase, Silver Spring, Arlington or Alexandria.

IMO, there are some disgusting burbs in the DC Area, but LA1 just likes to pick what he wants and critique, deciding to completely exclude any positive quality. LA1st is obviously a younger person, probably doesn't represent the demographic that even the nice burbs like to cater to. The DC area has a massive upper middle class which is why it may be boring, yes there are lots of sprawly areas, and yes this is a skyscraper site, but good schools, economy, relatively low crime, etc. should mean something, and do to most normal everyday people, not hipsters, indie kids and urbanites. You can point out some northside chicago burb and not mention some of the less than stellar burbs south and southwest of chicago. Every area has it's negatives. Fine, talk about Great Falls not having a nice commerical strip or whatever, oh well, the houses are nice, and are in a great location w/ respect to nature and the city.

So, maybe many of the DC burbs are boring, but that's fine to most people. Maybe you see it as a problem that many people don't want to live in a vibrant and hectic place, as LA1 admitted Tenleytown is too suburban. So basically, LA1, is a bitter, snide person most of the time, very easy to become sarcastic and argumentative, and not just in DC area related threads.

Go to any county with more than a million and tell me there are no grittier areas. Even in Orange, Westchester, Bergen, Oakland, etc. you can find areas that are more run down than the rest. So just picking and choosing does not work. There are suburbs in every area where there is higher crime, so just saying oh look at Fairfax compared to ten yrs ago and not seeing that crime in the county is still very low, is just dumb. I've been dealing with LA1 for such a long time, he doesn't know how to ignore, as if there's no boosting from anyone else from anywhere else in America on this forum. We get it already, you don't like the area, DC is an awful place, and you took your first train ride to LA, went to Chicago and fell in love and your sister cried when she left Chicago, but it's getting real old.

Less of a urban lifestyle? Thats a understatement. They dont know what urban is. Those towns/areas are almost rural-like.
The fact remains that these places offer nothing except ugly strip malls.

Bethesda is the restaurant mecca of the metro? That downtown area? Umm...

How can a burb beat LA in anything? LA is a massive, complex city of countless commerical streets and districts full of retail and restaurants. DC is not. Its too damn residential.

I would put Pasadena, Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, Santa Monica, Newport Beach restaurants against any suburb or even most city neighborhoods in this nation. Im not even mentioning the great ethnic restaurants that are found in places like the San Gabriel Valley.

Less of a urban lifestyle? Thats a understatement. They dont know what urban is. Those towns/areas are almost rural-like.
The fact remains that these places offer nothing except ugly strip malls.

Bethesda is the restaurant mecca of the metro? That downtown area? Umm...

How can a burb beat LA in anything? LA is a massive, complex city of countless commerical streets and districts full of retail and restaurants. DC is not. Its too damn residential.

I would put Pasadena, Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, Santa Monica, Newport Beach restaurants against any suburb or even most city neighborhoods in this nation. Im not even mentioning the great ethnic restaurants that are found in places like the San Gabriel Valley.


ok.... this isnt a LA vs DC thing we have going on....
You gotto let it.. maybe its that of the month or something... but dude just let it be your opinion and go on

Less of a urban lifestyle? Thats a understatement. They dont know what urban is. Those towns/areas are almost rural-like.
The fact remains that these places offer nothing except ugly strip malls.

Bethesda is the restaurant mecca of the metro? That downtown area? Umm...

How can a burb beat LA in anything? LA is a massive, complex city of countless commerical streets and districts full of retail and restaurants. DC is not. Its too damn residential.

I would put Pasadena, Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, Santa Monica, Newport Beach restaurants against any suburb or even most city neighborhoods in this nation. Im not even mentioning the great ethnic restaurants that are found in places like the San Gabriel Valley.

I guess you have nothing to say to my previous post that proves the urbanity/superiority of Bethesda/Chevy Chase compared to LA's burbs. As to your supposed ethnic restaurants...Bethesda has a goddamn Afghan restaurant. I guess that's because we have true diversity brought about by the diplomat core and other international organizations (World Trade Organization, World Bank, etc), not just a ton of Hispanics, Whites and Blacks like LA.

Also, Fairfax County is a great place to live. Obviously it's going to have run down and underdeveloped areas though...it's huge.

Who cares? There are only 2 places in the country that can really compete for best suburb by most standards and that's NYC and LA, and LA would probably win that one. But obviously other places are pretty good in their own right, and people like to acknowledge it. If someone simply says that DC has nice burbs, you don't need to continue your endless crusade.

And you're going way overboard with your "almost rural-like" comment, that's just bullshit and you know it. Of the places being mentioned, Arlington, Alexandria, Chevy Chase, Bethesda, Silver Spring, etc. How are these places almost rural-like compared to what's offered in 95 percent of the rest of the country's suburbs?

And let's not say LA isn't diverse, it is very diverse, but it's not about that, it's about LA1 making an effort almost all the time to put DC in a bad light, as if there isn't enough of that already. Please tell me how DC is so bad compared to the rest of the country.

^
Read again. I was talking about Great Falls, Potomac.

Someone isnt saying DC has nice burbs, but the best burbs in the country. Read the thread.

You people bore me of your suburban talk.

Especially when 95% of American suburbs look like this, here's a Hartford suburb.

http://www.chartweb.com/filecabinet/Photo%20Files/Shaw's%20Shopping%20Center%20-%20Newington%20CT/Shaw's%20S.C.,%20Newington%20CT%20Aerial.jpg

Now you can continue your flame wars!

I guess you have nothing to say to my previous post that proves the urbanity/superiority of Bethesda/Chevy Chase compared to LA's burbs. As to your supposed ethnic restaurants...Bethesda has a goddamn Afghan restaurant. I guess that's because we have true diversity brought about by the diplomat core and other international organizations (World Trade Organization, World Bank, etc), not just a ton of Hispanics, Whites and Blacks like LA.

Also, Fairfax County is a great place to live. Obviously it's going to have run down and underdeveloped areas though...it's huge.

You cant be serious if you think DC metro can honestly compete with LA metro's ethnic restaurants or markets. Thats insane.
LA metro has the largest Asian population in the U.S. Its not just whites, blacks and hispanics. Talk about ignorance.

^
Read again. I was talking about Great Falls, Potomac.

That is what is adored by people who live there, being less than 15 minutes from the city and living in a mostly exclusive, attractive and clean environment, it's the best of both worlds which is why it's so expensive to live there. Big deal if you can't walk 10 minutes and grab a slice.

Its not about that. Its about being a wealthy town without an attractive commerical area to go along with the residential areas. Its just odd.

Its not about that. Its about being a wealthy town without an attractive commerical area to go along with the residential areas. Its just odd.

well you do realize some people find LA odd. It's all a matter of opinion/preference..

LA is odd to many because of its culture and such....GF and Potomac are odd to me because their commerical areas dont reflect the wealth they have like many wealthy suburban areas do. Its just strange to me.

LA easily wins this one.

Beverly Hills
Santa Monica
Malibu
West Hollywood
Pasadena
Glendale
Long Beach
Manhattan Beach
Palos Verdes
Redondo Beach
Laguna Beach
Newport Beach
Calabasas

I would even in thrown Costa Mesa with its cultural attractions and South Coast Plaza (the Rodeo Drive of U.S. shopping malls).

Apparently you've never driven up Wisconsin, Massachusetts or Connecticut avenue into Bethesda or Chevy Chase. You know, those are the roads you'll pass by such stores as Saks Fifth Avenue, Bang & Olufson, Brooks Brothers, Barneys Co-Op, BVLGARI, Jimmy Choo, Max Mara, Louis Vuitton, Chanel, Christian Dior, Ralph Lauren, Mervis Diamond Importers, Tiffany & Co., Yves Saint Laurent, Saks Jandel, Gucci, Cartier, Lacoste, and Van Cleef & Arpels. Clyde's, Max Mara Cafe', Famosa, Maggiano's, the Cheesecake Factory. You'll also pass by many 200+ foot buildings. Bethesda is also the restaurant mecca of the entire Metro area (that's right, over DC itself), could you say anything like that about any of LA's burbs? Potomac and Great Falls are for people who want less of an urban lifestyle and thus, live further from the city than Bethesda, Chevy Chase, Silver Spring, Arlington or Alexandria.

yes actually, amny of them. Pasadena, Santa Monica, A few other beach cities, Glendale, etc etc.

You obviously have me fooled for someone that wouldnt know the DC area. I too am from there, lived in fairfax/burke/gaithersburg/potomac/alexandria/springfield/georgetown/adams morg
went to rosemont/garfield/robinson/quince orchard/ridgeview/etc.......


beyond that.. we obviously have different points of view..... just bc you are from there doesn't mean your opinion is all mighty. It's an opinion. I lived in Chicago afterwards and think its a horribly boring city for its size, however at least i realize its my opinion and not pure fact for all beings alive.

Joe its alotta money, hustling, and fun to be had in the CHI. Always something to do. Juke joints for the kids and clubs for the adults. Summers are the sh-t wit picnics at the parks and women showing it all. Plus how everybody and they momma be outside 20 deep at night wit white tees hanging behind apartment complexes or on the corner like they ready for mob action. Maybe you just a boring guy if you missed all that. Or maybe you wasnt living where yall got it popping or DC n-ggas in general are just boring and wanna listen to that go-go bull all day instead of chilling on the block.

Apparently you've never driven up Wisconsin, Massachusetts or Connecticut avenue into Bethesda or Chevy Chase. You know, those are the roads you'll pass by such stores as Saks Fifth Avenue, Bang & Olufson, Brooks Brothers, Barneys Co-Op, BVLGARI, Jimmy Choo, Max Mara, Louis Vuitton, Chanel, Christian Dior, Ralph Lauren, Mervis Diamond Importers, Tiffany & Co., Yves Saint Laurent, Saks Jandel, Gucci, Cartier, Lacoste, and Van Cleef & Arpels. Clyde's, Max Mara Cafe', Famosa, Maggiano's, the Cheesecake Factory. You'll also pass by many 200+ foot buildings. Bethesda is also the restaurant mecca of the entire Metro area (that's right, over DC itself), could you say anything like that about any of LA's burbs? Potomac and Great Falls are for people who want less of an urban lifestyle and thus, live further from the city than Bethesda, Chevy Chase, Silver Spring, Arlington or Alexandria.

Nothing particularly wrong with DC's burbs, but you obviously know very little about LA. Most of those stores you mentioned can be found in Beverly Hills within walking distance of each other. Some like Cheesecake factory originated there. As for the best restaurants being in the suburbs, everyone out here knows the best restaurants in the LA area are by and large found in Pasadena, Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, and Santa Monica, all suburbs.

So tell me where is the beach in Montgomery county?

The guy acts like he has never left the DC area.

Unlike Bethesda, which basically has all of its restaurants in one part of town, places like Santa Monica or West Hollywood have their unique "districts".

Alexandria has Old Town and NOTHING ELSE. Sorry, but I dont find it impressive compared West Hollywood.

Actually, Cheescake Factory's earliest ties are to the Detroit area. Though, Los Angeles does indeed have the greatest suburbs.

Joe its alotta money, hustling, and fun to be had in the CHI. Always something to do. Juke joints for the kids and clubs for the adults. Summers are the sh-t wit picnics at the parks and women showing it all. Plus how everybody and they momma be outside 20 deep at night wit white tees hanging behind apartment complexes or on the corner like they ready for mob action. Maybe you just a boring guy if you missed all that. Or maybe you wasnt living where yall got it popping or DC n-ggas in general are just boring and wanna listen to that go-go bull all day instead of chilling on the block.

to me it was more the "being in the middle of nowhere" thing that made it suck. I'm not saying DC is better but DC is a much smaller city then Chicago but its proximity to balt/philly/nyc/bost/ac definetely sure helped to easily change it up any other weekend simply by a car or bus

Cities that I have visited, and spent a decent amount of time in.

NYC
Philly
DC
L.A.
Las Vegas
Phoenix
San Fran
Boston
St Louis
Houston
Dallas
Miami
New Orleans
Detroit
and let's throw in Toronto

Los Angeles suburbs far outpace any of the suburbs of the above cities (of course including Chicago) imo. When I visited L.A., I had a very difficult time distinguishing where the city limits ended, and where the suburbs began. Why? maybe because many suburbs grew independently from the city of L.A. more so than midwestern and eastcoast cities. L.A. is a multi-nodal metropolitan area.

L.A. was coined "100 suburbs in search of a city"

Does anyody have pictures of these "infamous" LA suburbs? And when you say suburbs are these low-rise sprawling areas or do they have intense high-rise density linked with mass transit (in that case it really would be fair to call them suburbs but urban districts or urban nodes)? Do they have definitive bounds or are they just endless lowrise sprawl like riverside?

Actually, Cheescake Factory's earliest ties are to the Detroit area. Though, Los Angeles does indeed have the greatest suburbs.

No disrespect to Detroit, but the first cheesecake factory was opened in Beverly Hills. Below is from Wikipedia. I have been going to one or another Cheesecake factory for 25 years now.

David M. Overton, the company's founder, opened the first Cheesecake Factory restaurant in Beverly Hills, California, in 1978. Overton's goal was to showcase a model dessert specialty restaurant for prospective foodservice customers of the wholesale bakery. The restaurant established the future chain's pattern of offering an eclectic menu, big portions, and signature cheesecakes, and the chain became a multi-million-dollar sales performer. The company went public in 1992.

BY the way, Detroit has some pretty nice suburbs too.

Does anyody have pictures of these "infamous" LA suburbs? And when you say suburbs are these low-rise sprawling areas or do they have intense high-rise density linked with mass transit (in that case it really would be fair to call them suburbs but urban districts or urban nodes)? Do they have definitive bounds or are they just endless lowrise sprawl like riverside?

L.A first suburb
http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g280/Joey313_photos/21351442_36e341caca_o.jpg

^That's the Echo Park area which is NOT part of the City of Los Angeles.

:weird: I thought echo park was a district of Los angeles

Echo Park isn't a suburb.

I didnt find the best pics but even from these i think these burbs look rather nice
Bethesda, MD
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/100_2197.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/sidewalkX1.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/sidewalkX2-eating.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/skylineX1.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/trolley01.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/wisconsinaveX1.jpg

Alexandria, VA
1863 map
http://www.lva.lib.va.us/whoweare/exhibits/mapping/technology/alex1.jpg
http://www.twofrog.com/images/oldtown25.jpg
http://www.roadsidephotos.com/old/1992-214a.jpg
http://www.planetware.com/i/photo/alexandria-vaax2.jpg
http://misty-river.com/images/Alexandria%20by%20water.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/alexandria/oldtown/kingst01.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/alexandria/oldtown/performers01.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/alexandria/oldtown/sidewalk03.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/alexandria/oldtown/waterfront02.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/alexandria/carlyle-kingst/apts02.jpg

Chevy Chase, MD
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/neimanmarcus01.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/streetscene03.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/streetscene04.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/wisconsinave02-dcside.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/chasetower03.jpg

Silver Spring, MD
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/silverspring/downtown/aerial01.jpg

Rossyln, VA
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/rosslyn/skyline11-rcw.jpg


Say what you will about DC surburbs, but I personally think they are some of the best.

Echo Park isn't a suburb.

I never said it was
okay well the first suburb was angeleno heights
which is in the pic

Bethesda Panorama, doesn't look suburban at all imo. Oh ya, this only about 2/3rds of the main strip.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c4/Bethesda_downtown_panorama.jpg

interesting^^

You should see the skyline building up in North Bethesda...it's higher than Bethesda!
I can't wait until White Flint Crossing and North Bethesda Center are built...then we'll have to work on building up in Rockville more.

Also, that Bethesda panorama doesn't even include Bethesda's tallest building, the Naval Medical Center.

interesting^^

I would really like to see more pictures of the LA towns.

In no other city can you live the suburban life while still truly living in a world class city. None of the other alpha world cities can offer the same experience.

New York City, silly.

What the hell definition are you people using for best suburb anyway? Suburbs are suburbs, unless they were built pre-Levittown, they all look the effing same anyway. If anything, Boston has the best suburbs with its satellite cities. Though I suppose everyone in Cambridge and Quincy will murder me should I call their hometown a suburb...

Cambridge, Somerville, Newton, Quincy, Milton, Malden, Medford, Revere (yeah, I said Revere), and the best suburb in the US, Brookline . . . Boston's inner ring burbs are great.

^That's the Echo Park area which is NOT part of the City of Los Angeles.

What? Echo Park is part of L.A. city. I thought you knew that?

^I meant to say that it was not a suburb. I stand corrected.

New York City, silly.

Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx, and Staten Island seem rather urban to me. And please don't think about counting New Jersey. Nope. Sorry. ;)

Besides, I'm surprised that you even insist on arguing the validity of my statement when you were the one who stated that LA was nothing but suburban. LA, a CITY of 4.1 million people with a metro population of 18 million is one of the most famous, global, hip, cultured, important, influential, unique, and fascinating cities in the world. ANYONE who denies LA to be an actual city is a complete moronic and ignorant fool who obviously is a hater. You and ROCguy fit that description perfectly I'd say.

why are you dragging me into this? I just made the thread!

Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx, and Staten Island seem rather urban to me. And please don't think about counting New Jersey. Nope. Sorry. ;)

Besides, I'm surprised that you even insist on arguing the validity of my statement when you were the one who stated that LA was nothing but suburban. LA, a CITY of 4.1 million people with a metro population of 18 million is one of the most famous, global, hip, cultured, important, influential, unique, and fascinating cities in the world. ANYONE who denies LA to be an actual city is a complete moronic and ignorant fool who obviously is a hater. You and ROCguy fit that description perfectly I'd say.

Parts of the outter boroughs are pretty suburban in nature like Eastern Queens and south/west Staten Island. Especially in Staten Island you can live a suburban car-oriented life and still technically be a top 4 world city.

I didnt find the best pics but even from these i think these burbs look rather nice
Bethesda, MD
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/100_2197.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/sidewalkX1.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/sidewalkX2-eating.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/skylineX1.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/trolley01.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/wisconsinaveX1.jpg

Alexandria, VA
1863 map
http://www.lva.lib.va.us/whoweare/exhibits/mapping/technology/alex1.jpg
http://www.twofrog.com/images/oldtown25.jpg
http://www.roadsidephotos.com/old/1992-214a.jpg
http://www.planetware.com/i/photo/alexandria-vaax2.jpg
http://misty-river.com/images/Alexandria%20by%20water.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/alexandria/oldtown/kingst01.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/alexandria/oldtown/performers01.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/alexandria/oldtown/sidewalk03.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/alexandria/oldtown/waterfront02.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/alexandria/carlyle-kingst/apts02.jpg

Chevy Chase, MD
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/neimanmarcus01.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/streetscene03.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/streetscene04.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/wisconsinave02-dcside.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/chasetower03.jpg

Silver Spring, MD
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/silverspring/downtown/aerial01.jpg

Rossyln, VA
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/rosslyn/skyline11-rcw.jpg


Say what you will about DC surburbs, but I personally think they are some of the best.

I think part or all of the chevy chaase pics are chevy chase in dc but maybe I'm being picky .

I think part or all of the chevy chaase pics are chevy chase in dc but maybe I'm being picky .
The first picture is taken in Maryland across the state line (Western Avenue) to DC.
The second picture is taken in and of DC.
The third picture is taken in Maryland of Maryland (right next to Ristorante Terazza if I'm not mistaken)
The 4th picture is in DC of DC.
The 5th picture is in MD of MD.

If I have time tommorrow, I'll take and upload some pictures of all the new stores in Chevy Chase.

Within the MD portion of Metro DC, are Bethesda, Chevy Chase, and Silver Spring the chief places where the skyline has shot up to city-like proportions?

I find Metro DC fascinating. I get the sense that the city's height limits has created a suburban area with more high rises in urban settings (as opposed to edge cities....although goodness knows you have those right across the Potomac) than in any other metro area I've ever seen.

I found it mind boggling how urban and high rise so many parts of the MD suburbs were. In particular, I saw structues in the DC suburbs that seem almost unique to the area (I believe): the 25-30 story high rise that remarkably ends up being more wide than tall.....those bemouths with untold number of units per floor. Is this a DC suburb phenominum or am I wrong?

The other observtion: DC Metro is probably the most extensive in the nation in offering joint city/suburban service. It seems that there are so many places in VA/DC/MD that plug into Metro that the sense of urbanization area-wide is more fostered than in any other city. DC is in sharp contast to NYC rapid transit in that that system only serves the city or than BART where Bay Area trains get you in and out of SF with very little attempt to serve SF eternally. Metro gives the impression of being the greates unifier in the nation's rapid transit system and perhaps in allowing for more high rises in suburbia, along with the forementioned skyline limit in DC itself.

I'd be interested in what people in Metro Washington would say about my observations.....valid? invalid?

Within the MD portion of Metro DC, are Bethesda, Chevy Chase, and Silver Spring the chief places where the skyline has shot up to city-like proportions?

Bethesda and Silver Spring are the largest urban districts in Montgomery County, they cluster the most high-rises. Silver Spring is the largest in the entire D.C. metro if measured by geographical size and population, it also has one of the top 5 busiest metro stations in the entire system with about 60,000 patrons a day. Chevy Chase is smaller scale with mid-rise structures but intensely affluent.

The county designates Silver Spring, Wheaton, Bethesda and Friendship Heights as downtowns but I'm not sure why Wheaton or even friendship heights qualifies.

There are small skylines in Rockville and Gaithersburg's Washingtonian Waterfront but not as intense as Silver Spring or Bethesda.


I find Metro DC fascinating. I get the sense that the city's height limits has created a suburban area with more high rises in urban settings (as opposed to edge cities....although goodness knows you have those right across the Potomac) than in any other metro area I've ever seen.


This may be because the Maryland side developed much earlier than the Virginia side, before age of office parks and suburban mentality.


I found it mind boggling how urban and high rise so many parts of the MD suburbs were. In particular, I saw structues in the DC suburbs that seem almost unique to the area (I believe): the 25-30 story high rise that remarkably ends up being more wide than tall.....those bemouths with untold number of units per floor. Is this a DC suburb phenominum or am I wrong?


There are no 30 story buildings in MoCo and the rest of the Capital Regionof MD, I think the max is about 25 stories. Our zoning laws suck and don't make any sense, I have brought this up with county officals and the planning dept. Talking to them I can tell they just don't know what's going on. One planning dept official told me Silver Spring has taller buildings than Bethesda when this has not been true for years now.

For example, it is unquestionable that Silver Spring and Bethesda are the most urban places in the county but the height limits are 200'feet.

Ironically there is a 24 story, 289'ft building in the works in an area called North Bethesda which is far from Bethesda and far more suburban at the moment. This new building would be the tallest in the state outside Baltimore. The new zoning (TS-M) allows for this, while the real urban places have been neglected in updated zoning since they are CBD zones.

The current tallest building in the county is at the Gaithersburg's Washingtonian Waterfront at 275'feet. Another project adjacent to Gaithersburg's Washingtonian Waterfront is allowing buildings up to 250'feet.

Gaithersburg is far more suburban and does not have mass transit rail to serve it so it doesn't make any sense why the tallest buildings should go to those less urban places.

Our buildings do have large foot prints though and I don't know why architects don't design a few taller slender buildings. I know about commercial demand but still...


The other observtion: DC Metro is probably the most extensive in the nation in offering joint city/suburban service. It seems that there are so many places in VA/DC/MD that plug into Metro that the sense of urbanization area-wide is more fostered than in any other city. DC is in sharp contast to NYC rapid transit in that that system only serves the city or than BART where Bay Area trains get you in and out of SF with very little attempt to serve SF eternally. Metro gives the impression of being the greates unifier in the nation's rapid transit system and perhaps in allowing for more high rises in suburbia, along with the forementioned skyline limit in DC itself.

I'd be interested in what people in Metro Washington would say about my observations.....valid? invalid?

For the most part you are correct.

What 30 story apartment buildings are you talking about? I have seen any in the DC burbs. Im a native too. Metro doesnt cover as much as the suburban area as you think either. Unlike NYC or Chicago, these people are screwed because DC has no commuter rail in comparison to those 2.

^I think MARC in Maryland and VRE in Virgina qualify (with MARC being more efficient at present).

Not compared to Chicago and NYC commuter rail. DC metro covers more suburban areas, thats it.

It seems every other burb in those metros have commuter stations to the city. That is far better than DC metro covering some of its burbs.

Outer Fairfax, PG, Montgomery, Loundon and Prince William ARE SCREWED when it comes to transit.

What 30 story apartment buildings are you talking about? I have seen any in the DC burbs. Im a native too. Metro doesnt cover as much as the suburban area as you think either. Unlike NYC or Chicago, these people are screwed because DC has no commuter rail in comparison to those 2.

maybe as said by SilSp, they were more in the 20-25 range. in augsut we stayed in Rockville and when we stayed off the expressways we took Wisc Ave into MD and continued on its extension...and saw these type structures frequently.

What 30 story apartment buildings are you talking about? I have seen any in the DC burbs. Im a native too. Metro doesnt cover as much as the suburban area as you think either. Unlike NYC or Chicago, these people are screwed because DC has no commuter rail in comparison to those 2.

Yes and no, in Chicago, suburbanites using Metra are served basically by it going downtown. Metra does little to help suburbanies internally or in getting where they want in the city.

I think one differentiating characteristic between "great suburbs" and "terrible suburbs" is the pre-existence of the city or town outside of the major city before suburbia hell began. More specifically--and for example--Stamford, CT--40 miles outside of NYC. Stamford was a city long before it was a "New York City" suburb. Suburbia grew AROUND Stamford and past it. There can be much character and an enhancing quality in cities/towns that resist the cookie-cutter mentality of suburbs. "Terrible suburbs" by the way, can be found in many metropolitan areas in the country. Most notable are in Los Angeles, Phoenix, Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas, and yes, New York. But New York has far better suburbs overall than any of the other cities listed. But that is only an opinion.

Yes and no, in Chicago, suburbanites using Metra are served basically by it going downtown. Metra does little to help suburbanies internally or in getting where they want in the city.

The point is they can get to the city. DC doesnt have an extensive commuter network, and vast, vast portions of DC metro dont have access to the city like Chicago and NYC suburbanites do.
Its much easier for those city's suburbanites to reach the city overall than DC does.

DC metro rail does cover a nice part of suburbia, but it is a very small compared to the sprawling DC burbs.

Three words:

Malibu, Manhattan Beach, Laguna Beach.

Case closed.

Three words:

Malibu, Manhattan Beach, Laguna Beach.

Case closed.
That's 5 words.

^^ I think he means three names but it's clear that everyone is voting for the city they like the most and not the one that truly has the best suburbs.

That's 5 words.

Three words:

Los Angeles suburbs.

Three words:

Los Angeles suburbs.

Yet no one pumping LA can post pics?

Pasadena, my favorite LA suburb:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/38/75856005_c140e28c4b.jpg?v=1135155274

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/27/92069913_69b156db70.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/46/170313613_5e5d54beef.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/9/12706788_ed4b8705a5.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/115/303337953_039cce2acf.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/80/252426131_d4fcc0ab6c.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/95/278031770_e3ab33234d.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/116/278031735_d21d542d7d.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/110/278031697_9c5766dbd1.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/92/269420238_2c8afe63af.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/93/269417960_1946c76d2d.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/86/269418333_876ff8b963.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/84/271422258_74e321d44e.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/88/268315610_6e09b0bed4.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/111/269107581_76ce18684d.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/41/84920009_dee79325de.jpg?v=0

http://misheli.image.pbase.com/u7/peterkwok/large/41241903.IMG_1620s.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/112/302079372_0586f8c385.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/94/273076851_4269db16c1.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/34/100294876_1ac7998cce.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/69/200108216_94e8a0c00c.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/117/315775905_31c31c8dd0.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/105/315779780_2c080e2d13.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/122/280203172_c609b224de.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/40/75854047_a769d54d36.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/54/128325476_148f07bec3.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/32/102935019_f4c74a86b3.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/56/193948573_37d28c695e.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/70/193942759_8453a44e51.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/67/193930107_ce221712ce.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/46/129200394_a1464acda2.jpg?v=1145156610

I have a cousin who lives in Pasadena, she absolutely loves it there.

Wow, I really have to go out west and check out LA for myself eventually...

Pasadena is more interesting than any DC burb, and that isnt even LA's best. I would go on to say Old Town Pasadena is more vibrant than most of DC hoods. Sure as hell beats out places like Tenleytown, Cleveland Park, Foggy Bottom, Capitol Hill, Woodley Park.

Thats another thing about LA's burbs. Many have their own identies, and with top notch cultural attractions or great architecture. Some are so awesome they have their own unique districts within the burb.

Anyone who has explored LA Metro cant deny its place in this thread. Its number 1, period.

Pasadena is more interesting than any DC burb, and that isnt even LA's best. I would go on to say Old Town Pasadena is more vibrant than most of DC hoods. Sure as hell beats out places like Tenleytown, Cleveland Park, Foggy Bottom, Capitol Hill, Woodley Park.

Thats another thing about LA's burbs. Many have their own identies, and with top notch cultural attractions or great architecture. Some are so awesome they have their own unique districts within the burb.

Anyone who has explored LA Metro cant deny its place in this thread. Its number 1, period.
You hate DC more than any one I've ever met, and you're not afraid of telling everyone how much you hate it.

The worst part is that you criticise DC using unverifiable observations (that I generally disagree with).

I dont care if you disagree with it.
Im a native of the area, and as far as urban living goes, its quite limited.

You have alot of observations that are really off the mark to more people than me. Chicago not be diverse or bland being one of them.

Pasadena is truly an amazing place. the transformation of the city, from run down to upscale in 15 years is astounding. im either going to move to Pasadena or Downtown LA, and i cant lose either way.

Yes and no, in Chicago, suburbanites using Metra are served basically by it going downtown. Metra does little to help suburbanies internally or in getting where they want in the city.

That is true at the moment. However if the STAR line gets built, that will change very quickly. It would also, in my opinion, lead to a real sustained urbanization of the core cities along the line, as all of sudden their downtowns will be connected to what, 5 million new potential commuters from the other spokes.

from a website...
The Metra STAR (Suburban Transit Access Route) Line will provide a new dynamic of mobility for residents, workers and visitors in our region. Introduced by Metra in January 2003, the STAR Line will become the first commuter rail line in northeastern Illinois designed specifically to address suburb-to-suburb commutes. Instead of serving as a route to downtown Chicago like other traditional commuter services, the STAR Line utilizes the EJ&E railroad corridor to provide north-south service to a direct connection to the northwest suburbs and other existing Metra commuter lines.

The STAR Line connects the Northwest Corridor, an existing residential and employment center, with the rapidly growing corridor along western Cook, DuPage, and northwest Will counties. Running along the Northwest Tollway from O’Hare Airport west to the Prairie Stone development in Hoffman Estates, the STAR Line will provide a direct connection between Arlington Heights, Chicago, Des Plaines, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, Mount Prospect, Rolling Meadows, Rosemont and Schaumburg. From Hoffman Estates, the STAR Line will follow the EJ&E south to directly connect Aurora, Bartlett, Elgin, Joliet, Naperville, Plainfield, and West Chicago with the Northwest Corridor. The STAR Line also provides the opportunity for future expansions along the EJ&E into the growing south suburbs in Cook and Will counties and the north suburbs in Lake County, thus making it the first truly regional transit system for the suburbs.

http://www.metrarail.com/Press_Releases/starline-map.gif

The Star line is absoloutely essential for the outer suburbs. There is more gridlock in Naperville than there is in the Loop for crying outloud! It has a better chance of being built than the CTA's Cirlce line. Although I also think that the Cirlcle will be built as well......

however, it seems a bit far out....maybe Metra needs an inner loop as well, connecting the north suburbs to O'Hare and then down south through eastern DuPage cities...

just a thought

Hey, Pasadena, looks like the little ol' lady is doing quite well for herself!

Tis sad. Pasadena has but one fault. Two teams that don't want to be playing there on New Years Day!

Who in the history of the Big Ten and Pac Ten would have thunk it!

Pasadena looks nice but it looks like the sprawl goes on for miles and most of it is low-rise structures. The architecture has that Spanish vernacular, looks good in it's own respects but that won't fly in north east. I do wish we had some of the architecture to that degree though, like the building with the rotunda.

I prefer the contained definitive, high density growth of the D.C. areas urban districts imo but to each his own, a different flavor is good.

I prefer the contained definitive, high density growth of the D.C. areas urban districts imo but to each his own, a different flavor is good.

Los Angeles suburbs are easily more dense than DC/Baltimore in terms of population. In fact, L.A. has some of the densest suburbs in the US. as a result of geogaphic factors. On the same token, Riverside and San Beranrdino which make up part of the Los Angeles CSA, is the greatest sprawling area in the U.S.

Los Angeles suburbs are easily more dense than DC/Baltimore in terms of population. In fact, L.A. has some of the densest suburbs in the US. as a result of geogaphic factors. On the same token, Riverside and San Beranrdino which make up part of the Los Angeles CSA, is the greatest sprawling area in the U.S.

Well I meant more in terms of high-rises contained in a smaller area not single family or low-rise stuctures close together, that's inefficient imo but when you're as large as CA...

There has to be better pics reppin Silver Spring, this is the largest urban district outside D.C., by geographical size and population.

check out more...http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=321968

Silver Spring is home to AFI's (American Film Institute) east coast facility.
http://www.afi.com/silver/new/images/sunset.jpg

http://www.1110bonifant.com/admin/images/silverspringpan3.jpg

http://www.blairapartments.com/uploads/Thomas__Uploads/Blair_Park_afternoon[1].JPG

http://img283.imageshack.us/img283/8587/silverspring10sc.jpg

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/9389/core22jr.jpg

http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/4791/silverspring75jf.jpg

http://img501.imageshack.us/img501/5968/ballons27vq.jpg

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/1536/nightshark1nb6.jpg

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/7038/nightshark2ge9.jpg

An old aerial photo before Discovery moved in and entertainment center was built.
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/silverspring/downtown/redevelopment01-aerial.jpg

http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/silverspring/downtown/metroctr14-3.jpg

or than BART where Bay Area trains get you in and out of SF with very little attempt to serve SF eternally internally.
SF can probably serve herself.:banana:

The DC area is rather funky, the tallest buildings are across the river in Arlington County, which is often mistaken as a city (Census considers it a central city I think) and has 4 skylines of its own (Rosslyn within it looks like a real city compared to European-looking DC), then you have Silver Springs and Bethesda in Maryland (Bethesda looks nice in pics, haven't been to that state) Reston/Herndon and Tysons Corner, (a tiny jurisdiction which has more retail space than anywhere on the East Coast except for NYC) in Virginia. I lived in Tysons Corner when I was younger, I thought it was a big city of some sort. It's Tiffany & Co. outsells the flagship in Manhattan:bash:

Now for some mini-urbanness's:

Bethesda MD
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/clark02.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/bethesda/central03.jpg

Chevy Chase (?)
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/streetscene04.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/chevychase/wisconsinave02-dcside.jpg

Silver Spring MD
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/silverspring/downtown/apts02-density.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/md/silverspring/downtown/metrostation02.jpg

Ballston Arlington VA
http://beyonddc.com/galleries/Ballston/images/d-100_0378.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/galleries/Ballston/images/f-100_0937.jpg

Crystal City Arlington VA - 1980's highrise graveyard
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/crystalcity/frommetro04-skyline.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/crystalcity/length.jpg

Rosslyn Arlington VA - downtown _______?
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/rosslyn/wilsonblvd02.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/rosslyn/from1881-04.gif
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/rosslyn/from1881-01-night.gif

Tysons Corner VA
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/tysons/galleriaskyline02.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/tysons/towerscrescent05-3bldgs.jpg

Reston VA
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/reston/towncenter/sidewalk03.jpg
http://beyonddc.com/images/photos/va/reston/towncenter/marketstX1-night.jpg

Detroit should be on there.
I think distressed cities lead to very affluent suburbs.
That's why DC is there :okay:

The three highest income counties in the nation (2006) are just outside of Washington (and most educated?) Loudoun Co. VA, Fairfax Co. VA, and Howard Co. MD!

SF can probably serve herself.:banana:



cute! and correct. the "city that knows how" certainly can. but on a serious note, it is a shame some of the Muni Metro service couldn't have been part of BART.

meanwhile, vast parts of the dense and important northern part of the city would have been well served by BART service down the Geary corridor....if only the GGB could have accomodated rail and Marin hadn't dropped out of the initial BART service. At least the peninsula (with no water to cross) was able to be a late joiner; sadly service north to Marin...with expense being what they are today....is an impossiblity.

That's why DC is there :okay:

The three highest income counties in the nation (2006) are just outside of Washington (and most educated?) Loudoun Co. VA, Fairfax Co. VA, and Howard Co. MD!

Tysons Corner is not on the same level as Bethesda, Silver Spring or Arlington when measuring urbanity. It's just an office park with tall buildings.

That's why DC is there

The three highest income counties in the nation (2006) are just outside of Washington (and most educated?) Loudoun Co. VA, Fairfax Co. VA, and Howard Co. MD!
I think San Francisco should've been included, it has one of the best and most recognizable suburbs: Silicon Valley. Well I like that one anyway.

cute! and correct. the "city that knows how" certainly can. but on a serious note, it is a shame some of the Muni Metro service couldn't have been part of BART.

meanwhile, vast parts of the dense and important northern part of the city would have been well served by BART service down the Geary corridor....if only the GGB could have accomodated rail and Marin hadn't dropped out of the initial BART service. At least the peninsula (with no water to cross) was able to be a late joiner; sadly service north to Marin...with expense being what they are today....is an impossiblity.
I'm quite clever, but Marin is too good for mass transit anyway. Maybe they should have clean busses heading towards a people ferry, it could head to the new pier project in SF.

Tysons Corner is not on the same level as Bethesda, Silver Spring or Arlington when measuring urbanity. It's just an office park with tall buildings.
Arlington isn't really urban, its mostly flat overall. The Corner is definitely a car park although sometimes it would be much faster to cross it by crawling like a baby (that only has one limb - I read an interview on someone who'd been sitting in traffic for hours, and moved a few feet, she was interviewed in her car). It seems to be working on true urbanness, but I don't see how it will be able to compete with Arlington's Metro and underground city.

deleted.

Detroit. They're wealthy and Caucasian with no immigrants. Just the way I like it.

:bash: :bash: :bash:

Detroit. They're wealthy and Caucasian with no immigrants. Just the way I like it.

^^
:ohno:

says a guy from, east Chicago?

That is true at the moment. However if the STAR line gets built, that will change very quickly. It would also, in my opinion, lead to a real sustained urbanization of the core cities along the line, as all of sudden their downtowns will be connected to what, 5 million new potential commuters from the other spokes.

from a website...
The Metra STAR (Suburban Transit Access Route) Line will provide a new dynamic of mobility for residents, workers and visitors in our region. Introduced by Metra in January 2003, the STAR Line will become the first commuter rail line in northeastern Illinois designed specifically to address suburb-to-suburb commutes. Instead of serving as a route to downtown Chicago like other traditional commuter services, the STAR Line utilizes the EJ&E railroad corridor to provide north-south service to a direct connection to the northwest suburbs and other existing Metra commuter lines.

The STAR Line connects the Northwest Corridor, an existing residential and employment center, with the rapidly growing corridor along western Cook, DuPage, and northwest Will counties. Running along the Northwest Tollway from O’Hare Airport west to the Prairie Stone development in Hoffman Estates, the STAR Line will provide a direct connection between Arlington Heights, Chicago, Des Plaines, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, Mount Prospect, Rolling Meadows, Rosemont and Schaumburg. From Hoffman Estates, the STAR Line will follow the EJ&E south to directly connect Aurora, Bartlett, Elgin, Joliet, Naperville, Plainfield, and West Chicago with the Northwest Corridor. The STAR Line also provides the opportunity for future expansions along the EJ&E into the growing south suburbs in Cook and Will counties and the north suburbs in Lake County, thus making it the first truly regional transit system for the suburbs.

http://www.metrarail.com/Press_Releases/starline-map.gif


I don't see how any of this is relevent to this conversation...anything that might or might not get built has nothing to do with which city has the best suburbs...

i can include this:

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j142/damienwg/goodmon_final.gif

and say LA is better

umm,

the STAR line is well past being a mere proposal. Millions have been spent on feasibility studies and public hearings are under way. Remember, most of the towns on this proposed line ALREADY have train service to Chicago. The Star Line will simply expand their transit options to neighboring suburbs. And yes, I do believe that the nation's first suburb to suburb transit line, even if it is only currently on the drawing boards, is important to this discussion.


After a bit of surfing, I found that Goodmon's map is simply that, a map. Whereas the StarLine is already receiving funding and construction plans call for its completion within ten years.

BTW, I love LA and would love to see Goodmon's plan become reality.

It seems like you all don't know the Atlanta suburbs!
Decatur, Sandy Springs( Has the two tallest buildings in a suburb in the United States, 95,000), Duluth(25,000), Alpharetta(57,000), Marietta(61,000), Newnan(30,000), Fayetteville(20,000), Peachtree City(40,000), Jonesboro(20,000), Morrow(20,000), Riverdale(30,000), McDonough(30,000), Stockbridge(20,000), Union City(15,000), Roswell(90,000), Smyrna(50,000), Candler-McAffee(30,000), John's Creek(65,000), East Point(40,000), Griffin(25,000) etc! There are many well made suburbs sorrounding Atlanta, that sometimes there's no need of going to Atlanta to have a job.

WWOOOW those ar big numbers!! ATlanta suburbs wins!

WWOOOW those ar big numbers!! ATlanta suburbs wins!

:hilarious :bow:

Miami has the best reaching up to Boca Raton.

Absolutely love my NYC burbs, Philly burbs are cool, Detroit's was, and id imagine DC is nice too, have yet to go.

Just from my experiences, I would say LA's suburbs are probably the best, specifically due to the huge diversity, but I still find many of LA's suburbs to be very stuck up and spoiled...And we all know, that spoiled white kids means bad drama and drugs...Regardless you're going to get varying degrees of that kind of stuff everywhere, so I'd still have to go with LA's suburbs on this one.

That would be so cool if that was built.


http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j142/damienwg/goodmon_final.gif

^The great thing is that a lot of those rail lines are built, being built or imminent! a rail system like this, or very close to it, is not out of the question for 2025.

New York City definitely has the best suburbs. Long Island, Northern New Jersey, Westchester County(and other Southestern NY counties-Rockland County, etc.), and Western Connecticut. You really have a diverse array of towns. You can have your typical suburbia, cities, rural areas, beach communities, etc. All within either driving or commuter rail distance to the largest city in the country. Not only do the suburbs have various characteristics that make them distinct, they also have actual cultures, which I find important. Long Island has a distinct culture, NJ does, CT, does, etc. We even have different accents! Our region is known for food(come on, NY pizza!), beaches(Hamptons, anyone? Or for the less wealthy and more normal(haha), walk the boardwalk at Jones Beach, Rockaways, Sands Point, the South Shore Long Island, the Jersey Shore, etc.), business(CT and Westchester), wine(Long Island North Fork), and so much more. Shopping? We have Roosevelt Field Mall, Palisades Center, downtown areas in places such as Garden City, NY, and White Plains, NY. Want upscale shopping? Go to the North Shore of Long Island to Americana Manhasset. And with the Long Island Rail Road, Metro North, NJ Transit, and PATH trains, we have the most extensive suburban commuter rail sytem in the country, with the top 3 systems(according to ridership) all in the suburban NYC area. NYC clearly wins this.

I have to go with D.C. It's the only city on the planet I could even think about living in the burbs. Not that I would but if I had to Northern Virginia is so beautiful and very accessible to downtown.

delete

Where DC's burbs excel is the urban factor. I think someone misrepresented themselves and said Arlington was not urban? What? From Rossyln to Ballston, that whole corridor has been built around smart growth. Each area in between has its own Metro stop.

Also, I have to mention the transit factor. All of DC burbs that have been mentioned here are accessible by heavy rail. Not commuter rail! Subway lines going into the city. Even Tyson's is joining the party, although rather late.

LA is quite matchless in this regard, I think.

Time to refresh this ancient thread eh :colgate:

LA!!!!
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee65/1xXFallenXx16/Temecula_big.jpg

Temecula is a suburb of LA right?

^^uhh yea it should be

Then LA. lol.

^^well i mean i don't know but if its not part of LA then whos it part of? i mean the closest big city is los angeles i think

Yes, Temecula is considered part of the I.E. and the Greater L.A. Area consist of the I.E MSA
L.A. Orange county MSA
Ventura MSA

I thought the IE was part of the LA CSA not MSA since it is grouped with the San Bernadino MSA.
But LA is vastly different from other US cities perhaps because of it feeling like one huge continuous monster where "suburbs" here have their own skylines! Check it....the city of Long Beach (arguably a suburb of LA) which is part of the LA MSA is larger in pop than both Atlanta or Miami, LA "suburbs" are not really suburbs at all. They consist of there own culture, economy and tourism in fact "Edsg" and I have discussed and appreciated this fact many times. For anyone to assume that LA is just '88 suburbs in search of a city' misses the phenomena and unique growth pattern that distinguishes the area from the popular notion that a suburb needs a strong mother city to sustain itself. The idea of what a suburb is and isn't is so blurred in LA that you have districts that are part of the city of LA holding secession movements to become an official suburb. With "suburbs" like Beverly Hills, Malibu, Pasadena, Burbank, Santa Monica, West Hollywood and Long Beach, LA really can't be compared to any other city nor can its suburbs to any other 'burbs in the country. Surprisingly many of these supposed suburbs are very walkable, high dense, have nice central cores and have access to some form (or are in planning stages) of rapid rail mass transit.

I vote for DC.
DC has nice suburban areas such as Bethesda, Silver Spring, Chevy Chase, Arlington, Rosslyn, Rockville and the smaller areas of PG County (Hyattsville, New Carrolton, Suitland, Largo etc).

Chicago, Atlanta, then New York would be after.

Boston's burbs are generally nice, not as nice as DC's or NYC's though. However, a few places stand out as without a doubt among the best burbs in the country. I would put the likes of Brookline and Newton up against any inner-ring burb from any other metro in the country any day of the week.

Brookline is in my opinion the most ideal suburb in the US.

LA definately wins this one IMO, with DC coming in at a close second. Both LA and DC have very "urban" suburbs, many having their own walkable downtown areas. For me, LA just edges out DC because of how independent its suburbs are of the central city; Santa Monica, Pasadena, Long Beach, etc really act as individual cities, rather than looking to Central/Downtown LA for guidance. Places like Bethesda, MD or Arlington, VA, though quite urban, still ultimately look to DC proper as the central city.

I thought the IE was part of the LA CSA not MSA since it is grouped with the San Bernadino MSA.

San Bernardino is a part of the Inland Empire and in essence the last "stop" on the suburban LA express... There is no "end" to Los Angeles and "beginning" to the Inland Empire. The Census Bureau should have already added it to the Los Angeles urban area. In any case, they are one and the same.

Nah, the MSA is still Los Angeles-Santa Ana-Long Beach essentially LA and Orange Counties while the CSA (combined statistical area) envelopes the San Bernadino-Riverside pop that is within its own MSA(metropolitan statistical area).

LA all the way. i usually spend a month out of the year in pasadena and another month in other LA suburbs. i really like the area.

LA AND THEN SF
ALL THE WAY :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:

easily L.A.

Washington, DC hands down! :banana:

I put LA, but I would also say Chicago, DC, Detroit, Atlanta, and definitely Houston, Austin, and Dallas. How come you didn't put any of them on the poll?? Houston, Dallas, and Austin all have very very nice suburbs. Like Sugar Land, TX for example (Houston suburb) is very new, very well planned, and very very well kept. It is the 5th safest city in the country and has many times been on the best places to live list. Grapevine, TX (Dallas suburb) is very nice too. The neighborhood my aunt and uncle live in has a beautiful park. It has a gorgeous forest and stream/river. Austin suburbs are absolutely beautiful. The suburbs are on beautiful wooded hills. You could almost consider the hills small mountains. Anyway, the houses are beautiful and have great views. One could easily argue that the austin hills are prettier than LA's hills.

I hate LA burbs.

Im saying Buffalo, you have Williamsville(I love the waterfall), Clarence Hollow(Love the view), Clarence Center(Love the coffee house), Kenmore(Love the municipal building), all nice small villages that add charm to their manicured lawn surrounding towns and neighborhoods. There are also actually 20+ years old trees for the most part, expect for Clarence in many parts.

Philly is my second choice.

Detroit easily has some of the most underrated suburbs.

Royal Oak, Birmingham, Grosse Pointe, Dearborn, Hamtramck, Ferndale, Wyandotte, etc. offer some of the most urban neighborhoods you'll find in a suburban setting. And if you're looking for a more traditional suburb/sprawlburb you have places like Southfield, Troy, Livonia, Farmington Hills, etc.

Most Detroit suburbs have at least one traditional business district (Main St.) and those that don't have been building lifestyle centers to make up for it.

I wouldn't even label D.C.'s ring cities as suburbs, they're far too dense, a better term to describe them would be Urban Districts. So if you're talking about suburbia and sprawl then yes L.A. wins.

^ Long Beach and Santa Monica don't qualify as suburbs either. Both are denser and more diverse than Arlington and Alexandria. ;)

I wouldn't even label D.C.'s ring cities as suburbs, they're far too dense, a better term to describe them would be Urban Districts. So if you're talking about suburbia and sprawl then yes L.A. wins.
clearly, you have no idea what your talking about.