A recent New York Times article made the case for why prospective suburbanites might choose to live in specific desirable communities in the region. Many suburbs have particular characters and ways they differentiate themselves from other suburbs.

Photo by Gustavo Fring on Pexels.com
Yet, this is an consumeristic approach to suburban communities. Does the typical suburbanite look at all the possible options and then select one that meets specific criteria? I doubt it. Here are a few of the factors that likely come into play:
1. Resources. How much money do they have for housing? This is a key sorting mechanism.
2. Information from social networks. What do people they know say about a community?
3. Quality of local schools and other local amenities and features (parks, crime, noise, density, family-friendly aspects, etc.).
4. Distance to work/commuting distance. The average commute is just under half an hour so staying within a particular radius and avoiding traffic congestion for held or potential jobs matters.
5. The status of the community. Which ones are known favorably (and not)? If you were moving to the New York City region and knew little about the suburban options, which communities would emerge?
6. Proximity to family if present in the area. Why move to Montclair if family members all live in New Canaan?
Even with all of these factors, it may take time of living in a suburb before a resident gets a sense of what is unique, different, and/or desirable.
Tomorrow, I will consider what this approach of searching for the best suburb could lead to.
Pingback: Treating suburban communities as another consumer good to choose among, Part Two | Legally Sociable