HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2021, 11:53 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,635
The Suburban Apartment Complex: defeating the whole point of multi-family housing

i had to head out to the burbs yesterday to do some field work at a suburban apartment complex that recently had a fire in one of the buildings.

it was one of those classic (in a bad way) suburban apartment complexes from the 70s, right down to the the 3 story brown brick veneer structures with mansard roofs, with about 300 units on 12 acres (25 units/acre).

on the surface of it, that's a decent enough unit density for the burbs, but then when you look at the context, it all falls apart.

all of the multi-family housing in the area is cordoned of into its own special little zone, complete with it own separate street system, and then surrounded by a sea of bog-standard suburban SFHs.



so in the above community, you either make enough money to buy a SFH and live among the middle class, or you're stuck renting at the apartment complex, designed to physically and psychologically separate you from the community around you. that's it, you get two choices: A or B. and they're not even really choices, just outcomes dependent on your household AGI.

so much of the above seems to defeat the actual benefit of multi-family housing (increased housing type diversity, leading to increased pop. density, leading to increased pedestrian orientation, etc.). contrast the above with my neighborhood below where SFHs, small multi-unit flats, and larger apartment buildings all coexist together cheek by jowl, mixed-up with each other, the way it's supposed to be.




as i walked around the complex in the first picture, i couldn't help but feel a bit depressed. how did we end up with this? we used to be able to build communities so much better.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Apr 14, 2021 at 8:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 12:34 AM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Smile

Steely, “field work”? You back in the work force? Congrats if that’s the case
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 12:36 AM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,991
Yeah but they probably have some nice, tree-derived name like The Willows or The Oaks.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 12:57 AM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
The suburbs are either the worst or best of both worlds, depending on your point of view. Either they offer the conveniences of the city but with more personal space, or the downsides of the city (traffic, etc) with none of the benefits of either the city or the countryside. I expect that Steely and I come down on the same side of that debate.

But an apartment complex in the middle of suburbia is obviously a losing proposition. Living in the suburbs and not even having square footage, a back yard or owning the dirt? What’s the fucking point?
__________________
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 1:22 AM
jd3189 jd3189 is offline
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 5,571
Hey, I live in one of these now.

In a place like California, Florida, and other Sunbelt post war areas, this type of apartment complex is one of the more affordable options around. Any type of housing in the city will be too expensive if not publicly subsidized and buying a house can also be out of reach for a lot of people.

And this is an example of these types of apartments where I live.

Sherita Apartments, South Beach, Miami Beach, FL by Warren LeMay, on Flickr
__________________
Working towards making American cities walkable again!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 2:29 AM
Omaharocks Omaharocks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 712
^ While I get what you're saying, I don't think a mid-century apt complex in South Beach is what Steely is alluding to here.

Thing is, most every city is still building this stuff (cheap apartments, mid-range density, not walkable to anything or near transit) it's just marketed a bit different, and the landscaping/orientation to the street has gradually gotten better.

In the cities with the burgeoning economies (Denver, Austin, Atlanta, etc) you see it all over the inner-old 70s-80s burbs, as well as the new burbs. Most midwestern cities though seem to mainly be getting the new apts either in older pre-war walkable areas, or new suburbia.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 2:38 AM
SFBruin SFBruin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
But an apartment complex in the middle of suburbia is obviously a losing proposition. Living in the suburbs and not even having square footage, a back yard or owning the dirt? What’s the fucking point?
I don't think that it is the worst idea. It has a niche market, though: people without kids who don't want to live in the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 6:09 AM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFBruin View Post
I don't think that it is the worst idea. It has a niche market, though: people without kids who don't want to live in the city.
The only possible argument in favour of this is that it’s cheaper. Which is obviously a consideration, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t suck.

Otherwise, even without kids, if you’re not in the city just buy a house.
__________________
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 6:33 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
If they keep the place rented, there’s demand for it. People here need to stop demanding everyone choose their preferred lifestyle. These kinds of apartments are the cheapest kind of market rate housing in most metros. They are built on land that’s less costly than downtown, use inexpensive construction methods and house many of the working class. Nothing wrong with that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 7:03 AM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
If they keep the place rented, there’s demand for it. People here need to stop demanding everyone choose their preferred lifestyle.
What evidence do you have that people are choosing this kind of environment and housing? As you say:

Quote:
These kinds of apartments are the cheapest kind of market rate housing in most metros.
Poor people often lack the choice in where they live, work, and such due to the economic system working against them. For many people, they're living not by choice, but because it is the only affordable option, particularly in expensive metros. What alternatives exist? Old, walkable neighbourhoods that haven't been completely gutted are in high demand and many people end up priced out.

Further, there is something to be said about how suburbia and car culture has been manufactured at the state and corporate level, which necessarily influences how people view things based on the ideology of American society and what they're brought up to believe in (the fancy car, "nice" suburban home trope).

Quote:
They are built on land that’s less costly than downtown,
Sure.. not everybody wants or needs to live downtown. But why do suburbs have to look like the first satellite image in the OP? Why can't they resemble the second? We could absolutely be building suburbs like the older parts of Evanston, Des Plaines, Elgin, and Forest Park if we shifted our priorities.

Quote:
use inexpensive construction methods
Which are environmentally harmful, famously flammable, and do not last.

Quote:
house many of the working class. Nothing wrong with that.
Affordable housing for the working class is good and cities need more of it. But it should not have to be the exclusive domain of lowest quality housing in the lowest quality neighbourhoods, as it tends to be. The kinds of communities that are in the first satellite image also further ingrain the need for a car by their design, which is far more expensive than public transit, walking, or cycling,
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 7:22 AM
SFBruin SFBruin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,189
Delete.

Last edited by SFBruin; Apr 14, 2021 at 7:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 7:52 AM
SFBruin SFBruin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,189
To answer OPs question: suburban housing can be closer to people's place of work, and sometimes suburbs have better city services than do central cities (e.g. better landscaping, street maintenance, etc.).

There are all reasons why someone might live in a suburban apartment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 10:30 AM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
The only possible argument in favour of this is that it’s cheaper. Which is obviously a consideration, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t suck.

Otherwise, even without kids, if you’re not in the city just buy a house.
Not everyone wants the hassle or the expense of a house. I live in a suburb and there are a few apartments complexes which seem to cater to people who don't want to live in Houston proper for a variety of reasons.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 10:37 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
What evidence do you have that people are choosing this kind of environment and housing? As you say:



Poor people often lack the choice in where they live, work, and such due to the economic system working against them. For many people, they're living not by choice, but because it is the only affordable option, particularly in expensive metros. What alternatives exist? Old, walkable neighbourhoods that haven't been completely gutted are in high demand and many people end up priced out.

Further, there is something to be said about how suburbia and car culture has been manufactured at the state and corporate level, which necessarily influences how people view things based on the ideology of American society and what they're brought up to believe in (the fancy car, "nice" suburban home trope).



Sure.. not everybody wants or needs to live downtown. But why do suburbs have to look like the first satellite image in the OP? Why can't they resemble the second? We could absolutely be building suburbs like the older parts of Evanston, Des Plaines, Elgin, and Forest Park if we shifted our priorities.



Which are environmentally harmful, famously flammable, and do not last.



Affordable housing for the working class is good and cities need more of it. But it should not have to be the exclusive domain of lowest quality housing in the lowest quality neighbourhoods, as it tends to be. The kinds of communities that are in the first satellite image also further ingrain the need for a car by their design, which is far more expensive than public transit, walking, or cycling,
Of course lowest-income people will be living in the lowest quality housing in the lowest quality communities.

Should it be the opposite, and how?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 11:34 AM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
These types of complexes are pretty much the new American slum. At the least, they're at the very bottom of the totem pole of relative desirability. So, yeah, they suck, and combine the worst of both worlds.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 11:55 AM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,182
One has to remember - if you're talking about suburban apartment complexes which were built during that period - that was pretty much the low point for urban living. The norm during that era if you were a young professional was to move to the suburbs immediately after college, not even waiting until you got married or had kids. Since you would not have been in the financial position to own a home at that time (or need the room) there was the need for these suburban "garden apartment" complexes.

These type of developments have gone considerably downscale with depreciation over the decades of course, and now mostly seem to house the suburban poor. Even in expensive suburbs, there is need for a local low-wage service class - people to work in day cares, be home health aides, and do landscaping - and if there isn't a nearby smaller economically depressed city for the servant class to live in, these are logical places for them to end up. I saw this a lot in my home state of Connecticut.

I do have to say that looking at relocation questions on other forums, there still are a fair amount of professional-class people without kids for whom the idea of city living doesn't even cross their mind. Like they end up asking about "apartment complexes within a 30-45 minute commute of the city which have access to nightlife." I presume a lot of these people come from areas where the "city proper" is still mostly for poor people.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 12:11 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
There are desirable suburban complexes, obviously. In-town locations, transit-oriented suburbs, wealthy school districts, new construction, etc.

But the postwar garden-style complexes, most of the time, are the cheapest, least desirable housing, epecially in metros with low barriers to entry and/or robust expansion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 12:55 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,182
It's also worth noting that the ancestor of "garden apartment" complexes was actually some of the earliest public housing built in the 1930s and 1940s. A lot of what eventually became "the projects" in many urban areas in particular was housing designed as domiciles for World War 2-era workers at defense plants. And the typology was identical - low-slung buildings with ample setbacks from the rights of way, heavy use of landscaping, and not close to anything in particular.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 12:59 PM
Nautica Nautica is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bay Area/Austin
Posts: 57
I know this may come as a shock to the urbanites on this forum but a lot of people do NOT want to live in a dense city with too many people, cars, traffic, limited shopping choices, etc. They actually prefer suburbs with large Targets, Home Depots and chain restaurants. Did you ever consider that a lot of new couples live in these apartment complexes because they are saving to purchase a SFH in that same suburb. Its true a lot of these complex dwellers also live there because its the most affordable. But how is that different from urbanites, who live in 20 story apartment complexes? Its affordable and most homes in the city are astronomical in cost. I say if suburban areas are too much of a blight to look at then just stay in the city, where its safe. Lol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2021, 2:18 PM
niwell's Avatar
niwell niwell is offline
sick transit, gloria
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Roncesvalles, Toronto
Posts: 11,025
I lived in something similar for much of my undergrad in the inner-suburbs of Ottawa. The complex wasn't great - poorly insulated and not in a great state of repair, plus it was a "high crime" area (as far as Ottawa goes). Amenities weren't exactly close but still within walking distance and you could catch a bus downtown fairly easily. The main reason we stayed so long is because it was CHEAP and you got a ton of space. A full 4 bedroom townhouse with an enclosed yard for $1200 Cdn, when a 1 bdrm in a better area at the time was going for around $700.

They suck, but serve a purpose and in my mind make more sense than the highrise shoebox condos going up in the suburbs here.
__________________
Check out my pics of Johannesburg
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:01 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.