Tag Archives: suburbs

Writing the best suburban stories and acknowledging real suburban life

Posted on by

What makes for a good suburban story? A review of one suburban memoir makes an argument of what needs to be present:

Photo by Kindel Media on Pexels.com

The best suburban stories, on the page or on-screen, are deceptively complex, affixing irony or self-knowledge to what may initially appear to be mere scathing social criticism. Take Revolutionary Road, the searing 1961 Richard Yates novel adapted to the big screen by Sam Mendes in 2008. This is the tragedy of Frank and April Wheeler (played in the film by Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet), average New Yorkers in the ’50s who move to a tree-lined Connecticut suburb to start a family and watch their dreams die. Frank commutes to the city for a sales job he loathes. April whiles away her days with the kids, forgoing whatever ambitions she might otherwise have had.

Here’s the catch: As April and Frank plan a move to Paris—where Frank will do an unspecified creative something—then retreat back into a domestic existence both tortured and predictable, it becomes clear that they would live quotidian lives no matter where they laid their heads. Paris. Connecticut. New York. The suburbs just happen to be the perfect venue for their smallness, the place where their silent scream can disappear between the hedges. In this sense, Yates’s suburban critique carries a strong whiff of irony. After all, it’s hard to blame the perfect lawns and fake smiles when you carry your misery the way a turtle carries its shell.

The only truly honest person in these suburbs is John, the adult son of the community’s busybody real estate agent. John is a mathematician who has undergone extensive shock treatment for his mental illness, a spirit stifled by his family’s shame and hyperconformity. (Michael Shannon plays him in the film and walks away with the whole thing.) John might actually be happier in Waldie’s Lakewood, where strange behavior, including obsessive hoarding, arguably becomes part of the town’s beautiful fabric, the answer to any easy assumptions of conformity…

The naked reality Waldie depicts subverts any impulse to indulge dystopian visions or Twilight Zone–like allegories. (The suburbs, incidentally, provided a feast for The Twilight Zone. Take 1960’s “The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street,” in which a bland collection of suburban neighbors, walled off from the rest of the world, become a self-immolating mob when they suspect an alien invasion.) Waldie doesn’t need such devices to conjure his uncanny suburbia. He accentuates minute details of housing and neighborhood construction—drywall, crape myrtle, layers of stucco—with philosophical musings and remembrances that sometimes cross over into the macabre. “In the suburbs,” he writes, “a manageable life depends on a compact among neighbors. The unspoken agreement is an honest hypocrisy.”

Is the suggestion here that the problems people face in the suburbs are the same sorts of problems they would face in other settings? Or that people in the suburbs are idiosyncratic just as they are elsewhere?

I wonder if the difference is that the American Dream placed a large burden on suburbs: life had to be good, not just normal. The sparkle of the new home and suburban lifestyle were not just to be settled into and lived in; it had to be the apex of American, and perhaps global, life.

On the whole, the standard of living in American suburbs is pretty high compared to historic and global settings. But, could any place easily be the promised land? It is probably not a coincidence that this book is titled Holy Land.

What will nearby suburban residents accept for redeveloped office parks?

Posted on by

Suburban residents often do not like the idea that a nearby office park will soon be a warehouse or logistics center. But, what will they accept?

Photo by Egor Komarov on Pexels.com

If I had to guess, I would go with open space or park space. Suburbanites would like this for multiple reasons: little noise and traffic, increased recreational opportunities, this limits future development on the location, and improved property values. Suburban homeowners do not want properties next to them to have more intensive land uses; they would prefer less activity.

At the same time, this puts communities and these suburbanites in a predicament. These office parks served particular purposes. They brought in tax revenues. They provided jobs. They provided status (particular if a big name company occupied the offices). Empty buildings are an eyesore and wasted opportunity. Warehouse and logistic parks would bring in money and jobs. Parks and open space do not generate their own revenues.

Before resisting everything that could replace suburban office parks, the suburban neighbors might want to consider what they would be willing to accept. Are there land uses that could aid the community and preserve some semblance of residential suburban life? Is there any room for compromise?

Studying both individual communities and patterns across communities

Posted on by

In considering places in the United States, is it better to study a community in-depth and get at its uniqueness? Or, is it better to look for patterns across places, focusing more on what joins types of communities compared to other types?

Photo by Nataliya Vaitkevich on Pexels.com

The last two posts have introduced this question through an unusual place in western Pennsylvania and all the histories communities across the United States have. And this is a common issue in urban sociology and among others who study cities and places: should we seek to adopt model places that help us understand sets of places – think of the odd quote that “There are only three great cities in the US and everywhere else is just Cleveland” – or focus on all of the particularities of a particular place or region?

I have tried in my own work to do some of both when studying places and buildings. Two examples come to mind. In 2013, I published an article titled “Not All Suburbs are the Same: The Role of Character in in Shaping Growth and Development in Three Chicago Suburbs.” I built off in-depth research on three suburbs to compare how internal understandings of character affected how they responded differently to changes in the Chicago region and changes to suburbs more broadly. On one hand, these suburbs that shared important similarities have different character and on the other hand they still fit within the category of suburbs that sets them apart from different kinds of places.

As a second example, take the book Building Faith I co-authored with Robert Brenneman. We provide case studies of particular religious congregations as they navigate constructing and altering buildings as those physical structures shape their worship and community. These case studies among different religious traditions and in different locations highlight unique patterns in these congregations and places. Yet, we also look across places, considering patterns of religious buildings in suburbs, in Guatemala, and a few other places.

In both works, knowing the particulars and examining the broader patterns are helpful. Different researchers might go other routes; why not investigate even further in these particular cases? What else is there in archives, interviews, ethnographic observation, etc. that could reveal even more details? Or, go the other direction: look at patterns in hundreds or thousands of places to find commonalities and differences across more settings.

But, I find that the particularities of a certain place make more sense in light of broader patterns and those broader patterns make more sense knowing some local or micro patterns. Having a sufficient number of cases or a varied enough set of cases to make these links can be tricky. Yet, I enjoy approaching places this way: digging into both the histories of particular communities and seeking broader patterns that hold across communities.

How many communities in the United States have histories we should know?

Posted on by

After seeing SNPJ, Pennsylvania on the map and recently reading Radical Suburbs by Amanda Kolson Hurley (recommended), I thought about this question: how many more histories of communities in the United States should we know? SNPJ appears to have a unique background and purpose and Hurley considers multiple suburbs with different visions of what a suburban community could be. But, there are thousands of communities in the United States – are they all unique enough to pay attention to?

Photo by Engin Akyurt on Pexels.com

One way to consider this is to think about patterns in we might pay attention to some communities and not others. In the United States, population size and growth is often emphasized. Bigger places often receive more attention and their unique histories and features are more known. At the same time, it takes efforts by numerous actors for history to become known and narrated over time. Discrimination, a lack of power, and limited resources mean some histories are not as known.

There is certainly value for people living in a community to know their own local history. I have written about seven steps for knowing your suburb and how to take additional steps. This local knowledge can help longstanding members of a community, new residents, and visitors. It can take some digging to hear multiple voices, see what is told and not told, and think about how a community came to be.

In the next post, I will explain why I see value in both larger categories – such as examining suburbs as distinct places compared to cities and rural areas – and looking at specific histories and characters of communities. In my own work, I found linking these two levels can provide further insights into places and experiences within them.

Hub-and-spoke railroad systems, buses, and migrants getting to Chicago

Posted on by

If Chicago makes it harder for bus companies to bring migrants to the city, where else can they drop them off? In suburbs with train connections to Chicago:

Photo by Chris Duan on Pexels.com

Naperville is one of a growing list of suburban cities that have seen buses ferry migrants to their communities — unannounced — over the past few weeks. The spread of migrant-carrying buses to collar communities comes in the wake of more stringent rules for migrant drop-offs adopted by the city of Chicago earlier this year…

In an effort to hold bus owners accountable to the November policy, Chicago aldermen on Dec. 13 approved tougher penalties for rogue arrivals. Essentially, buses face seizure, impoundment and fines for unloading passengers without a permit or outside of approved hours and locations…

Instead of more coordination, Chicago officials have said that bus drivers, in direct correlation with tighter drop-off rules, have started to unload migrants in unauthorized places — including suburban train stations — to work around penalties…

Migrants reportedly have been left in Lockport, Kankakee, Fox River Grove and Elmhurst.

Last week, five buses stopped at Aurora’s Transportation Center. In response, the Aurora City Council Friday passed an ordinance regulating buses coming to the city to drop off migrants who are en route to Chicago.

Chicago has long had a hub-and-spoke railroad system where lines radiating out from the city bring passengers downtown. This system has been around for over a century as lines coming out of Chicago connected surrounding counties to the growing city.

This same system that enable commuting to the Loop makes it possible for migrants to get to Chicago without having buses dropping them in the city proper. There are numerous trains stations spread throughout the suburbs that could serve as points where people can board trains for Chicago.

How many suburbs will end up restricting buses from dropping migrants off at suburban train stations? Some have already moved to limit migrants. Few seem interested in joining the efforts of Oak Park.

Barbie could only live in the Los Angeles region

Posted on by

Barbie is one of the most famous toys and she resides near Los Angeles. Could she live anywhere else? I pondered this when seeing Barbie:

This scene, along with others in the movie, firmly place Barbie in and around Los Angeles. There are palm trees. Beach scenes along the ocean and boardwalk. The mountains looming in the background. A replacement for the “Hollywood” sign. Her dreamhouse is in Malibu.

Could Barbie live in other locations? How about Manhattan Barbie? Atlanta Barbie? Omaha Barbie? These are harder to imagine. Barbie has a lifestyle tied to a postwar vision of the American Dream exemplified by life in Los Angeles. She was not alone; TV shows endlessly showed life in southern California, Disneyland first opened there, and sprawling suburbia became a model.

A new city and/or region could become the marker of a new era and new toys. Perhaps Houston? A different city that will grow rapidly and look different or exhibit different patterns of life and development?

Another technique to limit migrants coming to suburbs: fine bus companies

Posted on by

As several Chicago suburbs consider the possibility that migrants might arrive in their community, they have another technique for limiting their presence: fining bus companies who bring migrants.

Photo by Jakob Scholz on Pexels.com

Rosemont could cite and fine bus companies from Texas, impound their vehicles, and arrest drivers for dropping off migrants in town, under an ordinance approved Monday.

The new rules — which are similar to ones in Cicero and tighter penalties being considered by the Chicago City Council this week — come after about a half dozen buses started bringing asylum-seekers to Rosemont last Wednesday.

Each bus had about 40 to 50 people, who were being let off in front of the Donald E. Stephens Convention Center, the Metra Rosemont station on Balmoral Avenue, and the Metra O’Hare transfer station on Zemke Boulevard on airport property next to Rosemont.

“We’re not going to let them just drop people off and drive away,” Mayor Brad Stephens said Monday. “It’s inhumane dropping them off on a concrete sidewalk on a day like today.”

Add this to restrictions on housing migrants long-term.

Chicago has added similar penalties to buses:

Migrants are no longer being dropped off at the city’s landing zone on buses from the southern border, causing people to wander with no direction looking for shelter, according to an aide to Mayor Brandon Johnson.

Cristina Pacione-Zayas, Johnson’s deputy chief of staff, said the lack of communication is directly correlated with the city’s harsher penalties for bus owners whose vehicles violate rules to rein in chaotic bus arrivals from the southern border. She suspects bus companies are finding other ways to get migrants into the city. As of Saturday, more than 25,900 migrants had arrived in Chicago since August 2022, according to city records.

Under revised rules Wednesday, buses face “seizure and impoundment” for unloading passengers without a permit or outside of approved hours and locations. Violators will also be subject to $3,000 fines, plus towing and storage fees.

If this “works,” how many suburbs and cities will adopt similar approaches?

How many landmark buildings should a suburb have?

Posted on by

As Napervillians debate the fate of the Scott house, a 156-year-old home constructed by one of the community’s first families, the number of historic landmarks in the suburb stood out:

Photo by Tim Mossholder on Pexels.com

As things stand right now, there are no protections that would prevent future owners from altering or tearing down the house. Its location is just outside of the Naperville Historic District, where regulations dictate standards for exterior home improvements. It is part of a federal historic district, but their rules is not nearly as restrictive, according to the Illinois Historic Preservation Office.

Preservation is possible were it to be made a city landmark, a process open to any Naperville property over 50 years old, but that requires the recommendation of the Naperville Historic Preservation Commission and the approval of the Naperville City Council.

There are only four historic landmarks in Naperville.

Heap said he and his fellow co-owners are keeping options open but acknowledges the house’s future will hinge on who it’s sold to. That also goes for whether Heap’s law practice stays on as tenants.

This is not a new debate in Naperville. As the article notes, the suburb has a historic district that developed over time and through much discussion. Naperville has lots of teardowns where public debate could pit the property rights of the owners against the interests of neighbors or the community.

Is four historic landmarks, then, good or enough? The current four include two houses, one former church, and a former library building. One way to figure this out would be to do some comparing to other suburbs. I do not know these figures but someone or an organization might have them. Another way to think about it is that Naperville has a track record of preserving its past and telling its own story, such as through Naper Settlement and other actors. A third option would be to have some sense of what leaders and residents want concerning landmarks; do they want to save particular structures or have guidelines for more buildings and properties?

The matter of preserving buildings in the suburbs is an ongoing conversation as buildings from a prior era come up against changing conditions and styles. This includes homes (even McMansions eventually?) but also civic buildings and business structures. The American suburbs have had a particular look for decades but there is no guarantee that much or all of that remain in the future unless there are dedicated efforts to the contrary.

Trump on building “freedom cities”

Posted on by

Donald Trump recently said he wants to construct “freedom cities” if elected again. He has had this idea for a while; a story from March 2023 provides more details:

Photo by Brett Sayles on Pexels.com

Former President Donald Trump on Friday proposed building up to 10 futuristic “freedom cities” on federal land, part of a plan that the 2024 presidential contender said would “create a new American future” in a country that has “lost its boldness.”…

He said he would launch a contest to charter up to 10 “freedom cities” roughly the size of Washington, DC, on undeveloped federal land.

“We’ll actually build new cities in our country again,” Trump said in the video. “These freedom cities will reopen the frontier, reignite American imagination, and give hundreds of thousands of young people and other people, all hardworking families, a new shot at home ownership and in fact, the American dream.”

These cities are tied to a bigger project:

Trump’s plan, shared in advance with POLITICO, calls for holding a contest to design and create up to ten new “Freedom Cities,” built from the ground up on federal land. It proposes an investment in the development of vertical-takeoff-and-landing vehicles; the creation of “hives of industry” sparked by cutting off imports from China; and a population surge sparked by “baby bonuses” to encourage would-be-parents to get on with procreation. It is all, his team says, part of a larger nationwide beautification campaign meant to inspire forward-looking visions of America’s future.

When I saw that Trump mentioned this again, I immediately thought about free market cities that some have proposed for different parts of the world. But, that does not seem to be the goal here. Trump wants to build new cities that fit a new vision of American innovation. Freedom = innovation. One implication is that current cities are not free.

For such an idea, multiple practical obstacles exist:

  1. Where would these be located? Which federal lands?
  2. It is hard to build a new city. What is the timeline for this? How many resources will be involved? Will it be all private actors and developers doing the construction?
  3. What will be the guiding mission of these cities? If the goal is innovation, what will be different about these cities compared to existing cities?
  4. What will be the politics of these cities?

All that said, the likelihood of these being built is very low. And I thought Trump was was trying to save suburbia, not necessarily build cities?

Chicago area suburbs passing ordinances to not allow long-term stays by migrants

Posted on by

The Chicago suburb of Oak Park is devoting resources to helping migrants while other suburbs are trying to keep migrants from having long-term stays in their community:

Photo by Binyamin Mellish on Pexels.com

Unlike their counterparts in Schaumburg and Rosemont, Elk Grove Village officials aren’t yet taxing long-term hotel stays, but have crafted a local ordinance of their own to prevent migrants from coming back to town.

The new village rules bar hotel and motel owners from providing a room to anyone without certified medical documentation verifying that the individual is free of contagious diseases, such as malaria or tuberculosis, over the last 60 days. That certification can only come from a board-certified infectious disease physician, according to the ordinance. The requirement doesn’t apply to anyone who has been living in the United States for at least a year.

The ordinance also aims to prevent warehouse owners in Elk Grove Village’s sprawling industrial park, or the owners of vacant shopping centers, from turning their buildings into temporary housing. Property owners would have to get a village license and meet certain zoning and health and safety requirements, such as providing a complete bathroom including flush toilet, sink, bath or shower in each sleeping unit…

The former La Quinta Inn at 1900 Oakton St. in Elk Grove Village — since purchased and demolished by the village — was among the first suburban locations to host migrants in September 2022.

Elk Grove’s board was set to consider the new regulations Thursday, but moved up approval to a Nov. 20 special meeting once officials received a spreadsheet purporting to show suburban hotel locations being eyed to host new migrant arrivals. The list came from a restaurateur who was asked to provide meals for migrants, Johnson said.

The idea seems to be that by limiting sites where migrants can stay, a suburb can keep migrants out and/or discourage other actors from making arrangements for migrants to stay in a suburb.

It would be interesting to compare these suburban efforts to those that might be taking place in other suburbs in the Chicago region and in other metropolitan regions. Some suburbs have hotels or industrial properties while others do not. These conditions are the result of decades of planning and zoning decisions.

Furthermore, do suburban residents as a whole feel migrants should be temporarily housed in their communities and do their opinions differ from city or rural residents? One reason Americans like suburbs is the accessible local government and I would guess the ordinances in the suburbs mentioned above came, at least in part, do to input from local residents and business owners.