An area that you like without knowing why you like it

[AMcCL]

What's one?
Or perhaps, is there any love in here for "undesirable" aspects of the built environment, such as overgrown old parking lots, the backs of big box stores, ghetto alleyways, concrete canals, etc.?
I think it's a matter of being in such a space and observing it, without considerations for its overall cause and effect on the city.
I've had a fascination with visiting spots like these lately, and I was just wondering if any of you-all can identify or shoot me down. Any input is valuable.

Incidentally, this is my first thread outside of an introduction, so "hey guys!"

[Otis]

I like the gritty, industrial parts of cities, like the way the bottoms used to be in Kansas City, the Fells Point area of Baltimore, lower downtown Denver, or some of the industrial parts of Manhattan or Brooklyn. Give me brick factories and warehouses, riveted steelwork, pipes running everywhere, tracks in the street, steam and smoke.

Now all these areas are gentrified with upscale lofts and boutiques. Sigh.

[Howard Roark]

Originally posted by Otis

I like the gritty, industrial parts of cities, like the way the bottoms used to be in Kansas City, the Fells Point area of Baltimore, lower downtown Denver, or some of the industrial parts of Manhattan or Brooklyn. Give me brick factories and warehouses, riveted steelwork, pipes running everywhere, tracks in the street, steam and smoke.

Now all these areas are gentrified with upscale lofts and boutiques. Sigh.

Ha! I am just opposite, there is a certain indescribable feeling of comfort I get in brand new suburban areas, clean, well lit, new signage, before the ravages of entropy settle in. Honestly they look pretty dated with 3 or 4 years and flat out bad after about a decade.

Maybe I am just not exposed to it enough, I live and work in an urban environment, going to new suburbia, with its chains, new roads, landscaping and water down, 5 years behind the magazines architecture feels like heading into a new city.

That being said, if I lived there it would probably get old pretty quick.

[AMcCL]

Originally posted by Howard Roark

Ha! I am just opposite, there is a certain indescribable feeling of comfort I get in brand new suburban areas, clean, well lit, new signage, before the ravages of entropy settle in. Honestly they look pretty dated with 3 or 4 years and flat out bad after about a decade.

Maybe I am just not exposed to it enough, I live and work in an urban environment, going to new suburbia, with its chains, new roads, landscaping and water down, 5 years behind the magazines architecture feels like heading into a new city.

That being said, if I lived there it would probably get old pretty quick.

Ah, interesting. I can identify with both attractions. The run-down utilitarian pockets can be just as satisfying as the ultra-manicured residential areas. I haven't encountered much respect for brand new housing developments, that seems to be an unusual view.
I suspect a lot of it has to do with tourism-- since my neighborhood isn't particularly upscale or bad, both types are a treat to move through. The rich neighborhoods I prefer at night, though. And as you mention, Roark, if you lived in one of the places you like, it would get old.
Is there any sort of nostalgia factor in these preferences, for either of you?

[Dan]

I think that as you grow as a planner, architect, or observer of the built environment, you start to realize what it is about certain places that you like. Also, over time, you'll find that your preferences may change, and those places that once gave you the warm fuzzies now make you cringe.

I always felt comfortable in middle- to upper middle-class inner ring suburbs in the northeastern and midwestern US. I always liked such areas since I was a teenager. I think it's the mix of architectural styles with a sense of timelessness and solidity, the street grid, an established tree canopy, lots that seemed sized just right (45'-50' frontages for mid-end houses, 60' for higher end development), a pedestrian-oriented environment that isn't necessarily hostile to cars, traditional civic and institutional architecture, and quirks like remnants of the Great Depression (in South Euclid, Ohio, where I once lived, it would be ghost streets and blocks with very large high-end homes built in the late 1920s interspersed among small Cape Cods built after WWII). To me, such inner ring burbs have most of the advantages of more urban neighborhoods, and few of the disadvantages. Such areas just feel comfortable, unpretentious and timeless.

For the OP: an area like Brookside in KC.









Back in my hometown of Buffalo: areas like North Park and Central Park, and the southeastern end of South Buffalo; Kenmore village, and the Eggertsville and Snyder neighborhoods in Amherst.

[Rygor]

Similar to Dan, I've always liked some of the inner ring suburbs that have an array of housing types, architectural styles (most of the housing stock pre-1950's), and thriving civic identities. They are usually far enough away from the urban center to have their own identity but close enough to easily take advantage of the urban amenities or their larger neighbor. They also have a history of their own. And mature tree. I love places with mature trees. Places like Oak Park, Elmhurst, or Evanston near Chicago.

I have a strong dislike for places built out during the 50's and 60's. They all seem too uniform with their nearly the same cracker-box houses and ranches or two and 3-flats made of blond brick. Single-story blond brick first-generation strip malls with old school gaudy signage make me cringe, too. No thanks.

[JimPlans]

As far as liking areas I probably shouldn't, I was always fascinated by the walled/fenced-in suburban subdivisions in Florida. Sometimes I would drive down streets where both sides were fenced and all you could see was the tops of houses and trees poking above the fenceline. Even though walled-in communities violate my sense of good community planning, there was a certain symmetry and neatness about the lines of the walls that I always liked.

Also, while I hate teardowns in older neighborhoods (when smaller period homes are demolished and replaced with giant barely-legal abominations) I was very impressed with one in Teaneck, NJ that was obviously built out to every legal setback and to the height limit. The way it totally filled out its lot reminded me of a computer-generated build-out scenario gone wrong. The giant F-U that this big grey box represented to the rest of the neighborhood of 30's era cottages and dutch colonials was almost awe-inspiring.

[wahday]

Dan,

Those pics are a dead ringer for Swarthmore, PA - right down to the quaint little shopping district. I grew up in the town next door.

[Howard Roark]

Originally posted by AMcCL

Ah, interesting. I can identify with both attractions. The run-down utilitarian pockets can be just as satisfying as the ultra-manicured residential areas. I haven't encountered much respect for brand new housing developments, that seems to be an unusual view.
I suspect a lot of it has to do with tourism-- since my neighborhood isn't particularly upscale or bad, both types are a treat to move through. The rich neighborhoods I prefer at night, though. And as you mention, Roark, if you lived in one of the places you like, it would get old.
Is there any sort of nostalgia factor in these preferences, for either of you?

Interesting that you mention nostalgia, we moved to a new neighborhood from a mid century modern neighborhood in 1980. The difference between the two areas was profound.

New trees, nothing overgrown

Clean white paving free from repair tar or pot hole fixes

New street lighting V no street lighting at all

Larger houses, bigger set backs, more lawns

Other children, the old neighborhood had almost 0 kids in it (mostly original residents whose kids had left home)

Keen late 70’s design V 1950’s MCM, which looked very dated by 1980

Brand new mall down the street V the decaying (and dirty) transition shopping district (by transition I mean it was it that nether region spanning pedestrian oriented development that was trying to cater to the automobile, picture a 30’ set back from the street that turned into a dangerous parking strip)

Chain stores V the older established mom and pops that resided in those retail strips

At 12 I thought those things meant quite a bit to me, as I got older I saw that neighborhood get old, once the glean was off of it lost some of its appeal , though I have visited the original MCM neighborhood and I see things there now that make me appreciate it much more. Some fans of MCM have bought up a few of the houses, Eames chairs and Scandinavian touches now grace some of those that were spared “builder colonial-zing” in the 80’s and 90’s. The little transitional retail strips have figured out ways to deal with the automobile and now house independents (coffee houses, etc…) that I wanted no part of as a preteen.

I am sure that the reason I like those brand new suburbs is the nostalgia for that new subdivision in 1980, which by the way… looks pretty banal to me today