Do Suburbs Really Make Us Happy?
Posted in Environment, Lifestyle by George
I was born and raised in the suburbs of Northern Virginia. It’s a very beautiful place. The yards in my current neighborhood (OK, well, I’m living in my parents’ house during law school) are large, there are plenty of trees, and it is quiet and far away from any major roads, so children can play on the streets without fear.
However, it takes me an hour and fifteen minutes to get to work. Some people that live in this neighborhood spend even more time commuting. Northern Virginia is also fairly spread out, so to drive to the store, or to a mall, a lot of time is spent in the car.
So is it worth it? Is living in a pretty house with a nice yard and a car worth giving up 2+ hours a day commuting to work plus even more time driving to the grocery store, the mall, and the gas station instead of spending time with friends and family? Is it worth being dependent on a machine that could break down at any point and leave you stranded? Or being dependent upon a fuel that could increase in price significantly at any moment (see: now) and strain your budget?
One thing I’m really missing from living in Williamsburg, VA is that I can’t bike everywhere. In Williamsburg, everything was easily accessible on bike. I could bike to all of my classes, grocery stores, restaurants, and even bars in less than fifteen minutes from my apartment. Sure, I could drive if I wanted to, but biking is cheaper and feels better. I could even walk if I wanted to, to pretty much everywhere in less than 30 minutes. That is a great feeling.
That’s pretty much impossible in Northern VA, and in many of the suburbs throughout the country. Destinations worth going to are often a twenty minute drive, which means if you want to get there via bike or walking, you’re looking at an hour or more.
Orson Scott Card writes that our current way of life is not only detrimental to ourselves, but to our children:
Even if you like things fine the way they are — you’re proud of your SUV and love spending most of your free time in it, and you adore mowing the yard every week instead of doing things with your family — then think about this:
Because of the rate we’re burning oil, our kids, or maybe grandkids, won’t have any.
So they’ll have to live in smaller neighborhoods. They’ll have to walk or take public transportation.
The difference is, it will have come on them as a disaster, an economic collapse, and they really will be poor.
May 27th, 2007 at 8:27 pm
This brings up two concepts: suburbanization and time-space convergence. As you know, suburbanization was fueled by the desire to have a larger yard, a less urban feel but still retaining all the urban amenities, and to escape the restlessness of inner-city crime so that a family can be raised. This process is essentially what Northern Virginia develops by as a whole. NoVa is just the overgrowth of DC and its impetus is what was just said, so as long as people are willing to make the commute, suburbanization will continue.
Time-space convergence is the idea that as technology, most namely transportation improvement, develops, the time it takes to get to a particular place is inversely related. For example, when the car was developed, many opted to live farther away from his or her own jobs and places of interest since the automobile shortened the amount of time required to get from place-to-place.
These two theories, even though briefly explained, should provide some explanation to your questions. I would research deeper however.
With regards to the last point about Williamsburg being much more bike-friendly; it is an older city. Cities are much more compact that suburbs and metropolitan areas and are thusly more accessible.
May 27th, 2007 at 11:41 pm
Ugh.
May 29th, 2007 at 10:50 am
I would just like to point out that it’s hilarious that Cadillac is advertising on this article…. I have been thinking about the practicality of suburbs quite a bit recently, but my thoughts aren’t exactly well constructed, so I’ll wait a bit before commenting further. I do think that the ideas you’re talking about are really really important. If you ask our sociolgy friends they’ll tell you that suburbs contribute to all sorts of other social ills. That’s as far as I’ll comment, because I don’t know enough to sound intelligent on anything else. But I’ll be back…
May 31st, 2007 at 10:48 am
Reasons to like cities:
1. Close proximity to necessities, work, arts, sports, and entertainment.
2. Diversity. You can find people of all religions, nationalities, political leanings, etc.
3. There’s always something going on.
Reasons to like suburbs:
1. Less Crime. I’m not being biased here, just simple math.
2. Less Diversity. Some people want to be surrounded by successful a upper-class community.
3. Better Schools. Why send your kids to private school in the city when they can go to public school in the suburbs.
4. For me personally, personal recreation (running, biking) is better in the suburbs.
And honestly, George, I don’t really consider Williamsburg a city. It’s more like a tourist/college town. So the town is pretty much centered around the College and Colonial Williamsburg, which makes it much simpler to bike everywhere.
May 31st, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Chris, I’m not arguing that Williamsburg is a city. I agree with you that there are definitely some various benefits to living in the suburbs that should be indicated… education particularly. I just wanted to point out that there are some serious costs (mostly time and resource depletion) involved in living in the suburbs that many people try to ignore.
May 31st, 2007 at 5:06 pm
I think we have a “chicken or the egg” issue here. Maybe education is typically better in the suburbs, but why is that? When most people, including myself, here the word “urban,” the demographic that comes to mind is of minorities, particularly African Americans in low income houses. Cities were not always like this, there was the great white flight into the suburbs. With them went the money out into the suburbs. The reason there is poor education systems in most urban places is that there is poor funding caused in part by the flight of upper middle class citizens to suburbia. I’m not blaming any individual for the poor schools in cities, but I think that we, by which I mean upper middle class citizens, have the influence to change this self-perpetuating cycle.
June 1st, 2007 at 11:05 am
That’s a good point, Steve. Does anyone have any information on the historical quality of urban education systems?