I guess it varies. Our suburb is in the city, and the traffic isn't very bad. In our case, living downtown would make traffic a worse problem in addition to having all the one way streets. My wife works North of town and I work all over it. I do wish suburbs had more interesting architecture, particularly newer developments which seem to just grind out the same house one after another.Popeye_Card wrote:It's kinda like movies. Plenty of people like Michael Bay movies, but others find them stupid and predictable. Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.ghostrunner wrote:
While I'll cop to not being edgy, I'm not sure how a car or city townhouse affects that.
Not trying to pick a nit with you specifically, but the perception of suburbs on this board continues to perplex me. I'm trying to understand it.
Suburbs are fine. They're inexpensive, convenient, etc. They're just not for me. I don't like the maze of subdivision streets. I don't like the traffic. I don't like the architecture. It screams "comfort". I'm not comfort driven--I like things to be a bit interesting, even if they're inefficient.
Seems to me like you have to either live in large cities (Chi, NY) or find a good location in a smaller city to live what I'd call the city life. I'd love to live in Chicago, where you can just hop on a train and avoid cars altogether. In Austin, you can live in the city but unless you live right downtown it's still a matter of getting in your car and driving to some other part of town to eat or see a movie or shop. Indy is fairly boring as a city, so there's not much difference culturally between being downtown and being somewhere else.
Anyway, let the freaking out over money resume.


