Why some people hate the suburbs

[kylejack]

"Suburb" describes land use. It describes how people live. Where they live influences how they live, but it isn't the sole factor.

How would you categorize the neighborhood shown in my pictures? Urban, suburban or exurban?

I would not categorize based on build style. Since you do, however, how would you categorize the Montrose if I were to provide you with 8 photos similar to yours?

[memebag]

I would not categorize based on build style. Since you do, however, how would you categorize the Montrose if I were to provide you with 8 photos similar to yours?

I used to live there, so I know it has a mix of single family houses with yards, duplexes, fourplexes, townhouses, apartments & commercial. I'd categorize it as urban.

Why won't you answer my question? Have you been to The Westbury?

[KatieDidIt]

I think there are Houston Neighborhoods and suburbs. The suburbs keep getting pushed farther and farther out as the city grows. What once was suburbia in the 60's, outside the loop, is now very much urban neighborhood. What was once suburban in the late 70's and 80's, at the Beltway, are now just Houston neighborhoods as well.

Both places fill certain needs. I've now lived in both,granted my suburban experience was only 2 years. And you know what's funny? The reason I dislike the suburbs so much now are some of the very reason we moved there. Oh well, live and learn right? But you know what? You can raise really great kids and have a great education in both places. Life experiences and racial-economic tolerance are certainly gained more in the city though.

PS- Westbury is a urban-suburban neighborhood in my opinion.

Edited January 9, 2009 by KatieDidIt

[memebag]

PS- Westbury is a urban-suburban neighborhood in my opinion.

So "urban" is purely a geographic distinction, and isn't a useful indicator of land use or lifestyle?

[KatieDidIt]

So "urban" is purely a geographic distinction, and isn't a useful indicator of land use or lifestyle?

In my opinion yes. Suburban is lifestyle and use, but can be used to refer to location. Thus, most neighborhoods inside the Beltway are urban in location but suburban in layout, due to the single family homes and grided streets. This is why I say urban-suburban

When someones says suburban, I think outside the Beltway in most directions.

[kylejack]

I used to live there, so I know it has a mix of single family houses with yards, duplexes, fourplexes, townhouses, apartments & commercial. I'd categorize it as urban.

Why won't you answer my question? Have you been to The Westbury?

I won't answer your question because I do not classify whether or not something is a suburb based on the build style of some homes in the area. I don't even accept that as a valid way to determine if something is a suburb or not, so your question is unanswerable. Yes, I have been to Westbury. Since Westbury is inside the city limits, it is not a suburb of that same city.

I once saw a Chevy Suburban driving in Westbury, therefore it is a suburb.

[Jeebus]

Kate, I think you're hitting the nail on the head. Houston is a monstrous double-standard of urban vs. suburban living.

"Suburb" describes land use. It describes how people live. Where they live influences how they live, but it isn't the sole factor.

By that definition, then anyone not living with in about 1 square mile of downtown, on the inner-cusp of the Wards, is living in the suburbs. River Oaks, Montrose, Rice Village, Eastwood, Lindale Park, Denver Harbor, the Heights, etc, etc, - all still suburbs.

Meme, to answer your question (again)..

Your home, and most of the single family dwellings in ALL of the Houston metro, and outside the colonial northeast for that matter, are suburban in design. The construction type of home is helpful in identifying a suburb, but is not absolute.

I will contend that Westbury was a suburb once. You would leave Westbury and travel into the city for your needs. Now however, the city has grown (or annexed as you refer to) around Westbury. So its physically impossible for you to live in the suburbs.

Perhaps if Westbury and/or adjoining neighborhoods had incorporated, then indeed you could say that you live in the suburbs, and more specifically a suburb of Houston.

For now however, you simply live in the city of Houston, in a neighborhood called Westbury.

Edited January 9, 2009 by Jeebus

[InTheLoop]

Sorry, Montrose was and is, a SUBURB. I, too, lived there (for 6 yrs., 2000-2006)

I believe that once a suburb, always a suburb, unless the original intent, i.e., homes on platted lots, is destroyed. Not so in Montrose, an overwhelmingly RESIDENTIAL suburb of downtown Houston. If they had built the 69th Street Sludge Plant on Montrose Blvd. in 1985 and tore

down 90% of the housing stock (and did NOT replace with more housing), then some of you may have an argument. It was designed, platted and

laid out as a suburb, and it remains so today. A freaky, cool, slightly dirty suburb, BUT A SUBURB.

It may be a suburb in an urban area, but I'm uncomfortable with the term urban suburb...almost a contradiction in terms, and an obfuscation.

Again, Montrose is a suburb, regardless of what impression it leaves on exurbanites using it as a cut-through or dining destination !

Westbury is, and remains a LARGE (not small) suburb - thousands of homes. Tanglewilde, Tanglewood, Maplewood North/South, Ayrshire,

Oak Forest, The Heights and many, many others - suburbs. In fact there a couple dozen legit SUBURBS well inside the Beltway - at least.

Further, I'll note that some on this thread seem to think being a stickler for accuracy represents an inner loop bias, and implies we are snobs

because some newer developments, which developers want to label as suburbs - misleadingly - are in fact EXURBS, being miles and miles (and miles)

from the Houston suburban ring, much less the core. The word exurb was coined specifically to label this follow-up/continuing pattern of growth. Exurbs are not intrinsically evil unless they are developed without transportation in mind (especially transport to/from the core). However, labelling them inaccurately is unfair to the folks living in Houston's suburbs, who regardless of SF, $, or "amenities" enjoy the benefits of the "first rule of real estate" - location, location, location (i.e., proximity to all the city has to offer).

If your goal is a master-planned community (golf courses, enormous commuity pools, greenbelts) or a distant less-expensive home, there's nothing in the world wrong with that: just know and acknowledge that the suburbs are between you and downtown, because, with few exceptions, you are enjoying the EXURBS ! Developers, of course, want to label it a suburb because they want to de-emphasize the great distance to the core. That is understandable, but nevertheless disingenuous and I think, a little dishonest. Mischer, Kickerillo, et al don't get to rewrite the dictionary just because it's in their financial interest!!!

I guess renaming the exurbs the "sub-suburbs" is out of the question

[memebag]

Yes, I have been to Westbury. Since Westbury is inside the city limits, it is not a suburb of that same city.

So if Houston couldn't annex property as easily as it has, and Westbury was outside the city limits, then it would be suburban. That renders the distinction useless when discussing suburbs in different locations. We can't use city limits in the definition because of differences in local laws.

By that definition, then anyone not living with in about 1 square mile of downtown, on the inner-cusp of the Wards, is living in the suburbs. River Oaks, Montrose, Rice Village, Eastwood, Lindale Park, Denver Harbor, the Heights, etc, etc, - all still suburbs.

That's what I've been saying all along.

Meme, to answer your question (again)..

Your home, and most of the single family dwellings in ALL of the Houston metro, and outside the colonial northeast for that matter, are suburban in design. The construction type of home is helpful in identifying a suburb, but is not absolute.

I will contend that Westbury was a suburb once. You would leave Westbury and travel into the city for your needs. Now however, the city has grown (or annexed as you refer to) around Westbury. So its physically impossible for you to live in the suburbs.

Perhaps if Westbury and/or adjoining neighborhoods had incorporated, then indeed you could say that you live in the suburbs, and more specifically a suburb of Houston.

For now however, you simply live in the city of Houston, in a neighborhood called Westbury.

And that neighborhood is suburban, based on population density and land use.

When I was a kid, I lived outside what would become the beltway. Houston had just annexed part of our subdivision. My back fence was the city limit. Our street was inside Houston; the next street was outside. Land use, population density, home style, etc., was identical. If you're going to call the last street inside Houston "urban" and the first street outside Houston "suburban" then the terms are useless.

[KatieDidIt]

I agree with the exurban v. suburban statement. However, exurbanites will get totally bent out of shape at the term. Pitch a fit even, and claim they are totally self-sustaining, and we live in this horrible dirty place and our kids are gangstas.

Just as someone who lives in Tanglewood, West U, Memorial etc., will crinkle their nose when you catogorize them in the same "suburban" category as The Woodlands or Sugarland. While suburban has everything to do with layout and land use, it has become a definition of location in most people minds.

I just say I live in (fill in the blank subdivision) and leave it at that. Most people that live within Houston know where I'm talking about without putting it in any category.

Edit:Because I'm city edumicated and can't spell good.

Edited January 9, 2009 by KatieDidIt

[kylejack]

Sorry, Montrose was and is, a SUBURB. I, too, lived there (for 6 yrs., 2000-2006)

I believe that once a suburb, always a suburb, unless the original intent, i.e., homes on platted lots, is destroyed. Not so in Montrose, an overwhelmingly RESIDENTIAL suburb of downtown Houston.

There's no such thing as a suburb of an area of a city, something is either a suburb of a city or it is not. That is to say, downtown does not have any suburbs, but Houston has many.

[memebag]

There's no such thing as a suburb of an area of a city, something is either a suburb of a city or it is not. That is to say, downtown does not have any suburbs, but Houston has many.

What value does that definition have? Why should suburbs be "of cities"?

[kylejack]

What value does that definition have? Why should suburbs be "of cities"?

Because that's what suburb means.

1 a: an outlying part of a city or town b: a smaller community adjacent to or within commuting distance of a city cplural : the residential area on the outskirts of a city or large town

Montrose is not on the outskirts of the city, nor is it adjacent to the city of Houston (because after all it is within the City of Houston).

Edited January 9, 2009 by kylejack

[Jeebus]

So if Houston couldn't annex property as easily as it has, and Westbury was outside the city limits, then it would be suburban. That renders the distinction useless when discussing suburbs in different locations. We can't use city limits in the definition because of differences in local laws.

I've told you three times now that I agree that WESTBURY IS SUBURBAN. My argument is that it WESTBURY IS NOT IN "THE SUBURBS".

What value does that definition have? Why should suburbs be "of cities"?

Because if they (suburbs) are not "of a city" then what in the hell are they a suburb of??? If you have one suburb in an area that is not serviced by another area that is more organized and centralized (i.e. town, city, four-way stop with a post office and lone gas station, whatever..) then its no longer a suburb - its the actual town/village/community/etc. - no matter what style of neighborhood layout it possesses!

So if Westbury could be built in a cow pasture in west texas, with not a single stitch of civilization for over 100 miles, as suburban in construction and layout as it is - it still would not be a suburb.

How are you not grasping that suburban and suburbs are as different as dogs and elephants???

[memebag]

Because that's what suburb means.

1 a: an outlying part of a city or town b: a smaller community adjacent to or within commuting distance of a city cplural : the residential area on the outskirts of a city or large town

Montrose is not on the outskirts of the city, nor is it adjacent to the city of Houston (because after all it is within the City of Houston).

That's just one definition. I'm asking why we here on The HAIF should use that definition. Have you read any research or analysis on land use, planning or demographics? The standard dictionary definition is rarely used in that context.

[kylejack]

That's just one definition. I'm asking why we here on The HAIF should use that definition. Have you read any research or analysis on land use, planning or demographics? The standard dictionary definition is rarely used in that context.

The dictionary definition is often used in that context, that's why its the dictionary definition. If it were a definition that has fallen into disuse it would be indicated by saying that the meaning is archaic. Merriam-Webster has a better handle on what a word means than a random poster on these internets.

[memebag]

I've told you three times now that I agree that WESTBURY IS SUBURBAN. My argument is that it WESTBURY IS NOT IN "THE SUBURBS".

Sorry, I missed that. You're saying that a neighborhood can be suburban, but not a suburb? Can a neighborhood be a suburb, but not suburban?

Because if they (suburbs) are not "of a city" then what in the hell are they a suburb of???

That's what I'm saying. Suburbs don't have to be suburbs "of" anything. It's common to speak of one area being a suburb of another area, but that relationship isn't required for suburban land use. See my previous post about suburbs that are equidistant between two urban areas.

So if Westbury could be built in a cow pasture in west texas, with not a single stitch of civilization for over 100 miles, as suburban in construction and layout as it is - it still would not be a suburb.

How are you not grasping that suburban and suburbs are as different as dogs and elephants???

Probably because "dog" and "elephant" are both nouns and refer to different kinds of animals, while "suburb" and "suburban" are a noun and an adjective, respectively, that refer to the same land use distinction. "Suburban" adds information to another noun (specifically, that the noun is a suburb). Doesn't it?

[sevfiv]

Webster also lists:

2 plural : the near vicinity : environs (adjoining region, etc).

Imo, Houston is so bloated that it fails to adhere a lot of standard definitions and it is based more on interpretation...

[memebag]

Webster also lists:

2 plural : the near vicinity : environs (adjoining region, etc).

Imo, Houston is so bloated that it fails to adhere a lot of standard definitions and it is based more on interpretation...

Precisely. Hence the need to use population density and land use to provide a useful definition for the term. That lets us meaningfully compare how land is used in this area with how land is used anywhere else on the globe, at any time in history.

[kylejack]

Webster also lists:

2 plural : the near vicinity : environs (adjoining region, etc).

Imo, Houston is so bloated that it fails to adhere a lot of standard definitions and it is based more on interpretation...

That's only a definition for "suburbs" not suburb.

[sevfiv]

Sure, and people will argue all day long whether someone lives in 'the suburbs' or 'a suburb' using all sorts of reasons for the answer that lies in an extremely grey area

For the record, I never considered Westbury, Bellaire, and especially Montrose to be suburbs now even though they most definitely were (or exurban, even) back when they were established.

This thread has, though, made me think about it a lot more - I still don't have a 100% opinion either way

[rsb320]

I'm getting a headache on this one.

Here's what I consider suburbs OF Houston: Clear Lake, Friendswood, Pearland, Stafford, Sugar Land, Alief, Katy, Tomball, Copperfield, Champions, The Woodlands, Conroe, Humble, Channelview, Baytown and many others.

I just moved back to Montrose after 25 years in other parts of the city and it ain't no suburb.

[Jeebus]

Sorry, I missed that. You're saying that a neighborhood can be suburban, but not a suburb? Can a neighborhood be a suburb, but not suburban?

Yes, and yes. I'm sure there are suburbs in the northeast and in other countries that rival if not exceed our own downtown's bordering neighborhoods in terms in urban density.

Westbury is not a suburb.

[kylejack]

Yes, and yes. I'm sure there are suburbs in the northeast and in other countries that rival if not exceed our own downtown's bordering neighborhoods in terms in urban density.

Especially East End where I live There's just miles and miles of abandoned warehouses surrounding me.

[memebag]

Yes, and yes. I'm sure there are suburbs in the northeast and in other countries that rival if not exceed our own downtown's bordering neighborhoods in terms in urban density.

Westbury is not a suburb.

OK, just to make sure I have it straight now: The Westbury is a suburban non-suburb.

Is it an urb?

[LTAWACS]

I have no idea why anyone would live outside the loop. Ugh.

[BryanS]

I have no idea why anyone would live outside the loop. Ugh.

Because its close to work?

[memebag]

I have no idea why anyone would live outside the loop. Ugh.

Yeah, nothing happens in Tokyo or San Francisco. Everything important is inside the loop.

[Jeebus]

OK, just to make sure I have it straight now: The Westbury is a suburban non-suburb.

Is it an urb?

Now you're just messing with me..

I have no idea why anyone would live outside the loop. Ugh.

Well, at first I did it to get a bigger home in a quieter/safer neighborhood in a better school district.. But now I'm realizing I just did it to avoid ILS.

Inner-Loop Snobbery. Not to be confused with IBS, however similar the symptoms are.

[memebag]

Now you're just messing with me..

Ya think?

No, really. I need to know. I used to think I lived in "a suburb", but now I might live in "an urb".

[CoolBuddy06]

I have no idea why anyone would live outside the loop. Ugh.

Because their kids have 70% less chance of getting shot?

[memebag]

Because their kids have 70% less chance of getting shot?

You're kidding, right?

[CoolBuddy06]

You're kidding, right?

Nope. Look at Houston crime map and similar maps for Houston suburbs.

[memebag]

Nope. Look at Houston crime map and similar maps for Houston suburbs.

Looking at houstoncrimemaps.com is what made me think you were kidding. Outside the loop has more homicides than inside the loop. Especially Sharpstown.

[musicman]

i was on the net earlier and if the definite article "the" was used....then you were in the suburbs.

the woodlands

the heights

the etc

[VicMan]

Because its close to work?

BryanS is right - A lot of times work is outside of the loop - The business districts of Westchase, Uptown, and Greenspoint are outside the loop. In fact Greenspoint is both inside and outside of the Beltway. Also most of Houston's foriegn consulates are outside the loop.

EDIT: Westchase also straddles the Beltway, so...

Edited January 10, 2009 by VicMan

[CoolBuddy06]

Looking at houstoncrimemaps.com is what made me think you were kidding. Outside the loop has more homicides than inside the loop. Especially Sharpstown.

Outside the loop is not a suburb to me, Sugar Land, Pearland, the Woodlands, Katy etc. is.

[memebag]

Outside the loop is not a suburb to me, Sugar Land, Pearland, the Woodlands, Katy etc. is.

But LTAWACS said "outside the loop", not "in the suburbs."

And I live in "The Westbury" (look under my name), therefore, I live in a suburb.

[CoolBuddy06]

But LTAWACS said "outside the loop", not "in the suburbs."

He has no idea why anyone will live outside the loop, as opposed to inside the loop. In other words, he prefers inside the loop.

And I live in "The Westbury" (look under my name), therefore, I live in a suburb.

Sing that to musicman.

[musicman]

And I live in "The Westbury" (look under my name), therefore, I live in a suburb.

you're the only person that i know that calls it "the westbury" btw however i do agree you're in a burb.

Edited January 10, 2009 by musicman

[20thStDad]

i was on the net earlier and if the definite article "the" was used....then you were in the suburbs.

the woodlands

the heights

the etc

Officially Heights doesn't have "the". Houston Heights, Woodland Heights, Norhill Heights, Sunset Heights, etc...

Does any other place have a "The" officially except The Woodlands? The Ohio State University? Yuck.

[mr. city]

Does any other place have a "The" officially except The Woodlands? The Ohio State University? Yuck.

As I understand it, place names that begin with "the" general go with names that are descriptive, usually of multiple smaller parts. The Heights refers to all of those neighborhoods with Heights in their name. The Netherlands refers to all of those netherlands.

I think that the most famous one of these is The Bronx, which I believe is derived from a description that sounds like a plural, "Bronck's Land".

Countries get this too, particularly those whose name describes the political structure with which the parts are held together: The People's Republic of China, The Democratic Republic of the Congo, The USSR, etc.

You would never say: The Japan, The Germany, The Brazil, The Britain (although you would say The United Kingdom).

It seems like it is just the same grammatical rule that you use for band names.

[InTheLoop]

I'm calling a TKO for memebag!

Westbury, River Oaks, Heights (the), Tanglewood, Montrose - all Houston suburbs. They were at birth, and they are today.

Just because somebody threw up homes in distant rice fields, swamps, and former prison lands doesn't give those folks

(or anyone else) the right to mislabel Houston's original SUBURBS. What are they suburbs of, you ask? They are suburbs

of the city of Houston, which began downtown. The question of whether they are "suburban" vs. "in suburbs" is silly in this case:

they are BOTH! A suburb, by definition, is suburban - duh. On the other hand, a house may look "suburban" but not be in the

suburbs - look at Heritage Park in the middle of downtown (extreme example!)! Or, more to the point: Look at every single home in The Woodlands and greater Sugarland; they are suburban homes located in the exurbs!

If this is snobbery, so be it. The alternative view seems to feel that, e.g., 75 years as suburb, with no meaningful change in character, qualifies

a neighborhood for the disparaging "inner city" label, applied only because of what haphazardly followed. Not a chance, in my book. Exurbs are

the relative latecomers, and their developers/homeowners don't get to grab the label just because "suburb" sounds more appealing to most

than "exurb". The only possible fair alternative is to call exurbs "the distant suburbs" while waiting for more exurbs to be built. I could live with that. Houston's suburbs will remain...fewer foreclosures, for the most part, and less hampered by things like national recessions, as property values adhere to that boring, fundamental first rule of real estate: Location, location, etc.

Come on, does anyone really deny that River Oaks is a suburb?

[liammclaren]

I'm calling a TKO for memebag!

Westbury, River Oaks, Heights (the), Tanglewood, Montrose - all Houston suburbs. They were at birth, and they are today.

Just because somebody threw up homes in distant rice fields, swamps, and former prison lands doesn't give those folks

(or anyone else) the right to mislabel Houston's original SUBURBS. What are they suburbs of, you ask? They are suburbs

of the city of Houston, which began downtown. The question of whether they are "suburban" vs. "in suburbs" is silly in this case:

they are BOTH! A suburb, by definition, is suburban - duh. On the other hand, a house may look "suburban" but not be in the

suburbs - look at Heritage Park in the middle of downtown (extreme example!)! Or, more to the point: Look at every single home in The Woodlands and greater Sugarland; they are suburban homes located in the exurbs!

If this is snobbery, so be it. The alternative view seems to feel that, e.g., 75 years as suburb, with no meaningful change in character, qualifies

a neighborhood for the disparaging "inner city" label, applied only because of what haphazardly followed. Not a chance, in my book. Exurbs are

the relative latecomers, and their developers/homeowners don't get to grab the label just because "suburb" sounds more appealing to most

than "exurb". The only possible fair alternative is to call exurbs "the distant suburbs" while waiting for more exurbs to be built. I could live with that. Houston's suburbs will remain...fewer foreclosures, for the most part, and less hampered by things like national recessions, as property values adhere to that boring, fundamental first rule of real estate: Location, location, etc.

Come on, does anyone really deny that River Oaks is a suburb?

Ok denotatively, yes River Oaks is a suburb, as it was when it was created. But imagine this conversation:

"Where do you live?"

"River Oaks"

"Oh ok, the suburbs"

"what?? "

[InTheLoop]

Liam - it is denotatively and connotatively a suburb!

I enjoyed the dialogue, but the final anticipated response from the RO resident "clangs" a bit...

I suspect the savvy RO resident says: "The suburbs, no. THE suburb, perhaps."

RO denotes suburb, RO also connotes suburb - just a super-rich one.

Edited January 12, 2009 by InTheLoop

[Jeebus]

I'm calling a TKO for memebag!

Westbury, River Oaks, Heights (the), Tanglewood, Montrose - all Houston suburbs. They were at birth, and they are today.

Just because somebody threw up homes in distant rice fields, swamps, and former prison lands doesn't give those folks

(or anyone else) the right to mislabel Houston's original SUBURBS. What are they suburbs of, you ask? They are suburbs

of the city of Houston, which began downtown. The question of whether they are "suburban" vs. "in suburbs" is silly in this case:

they are BOTH! A suburb, by definition, is suburban - duh. On the other hand, a house may look "suburban" but not be in the

suburbs - look at Heritage Park in the middle of downtown (extreme example!)! Or, more to the point: Look at every single home in The Woodlands and greater Sugarland; they are suburban homes located in the exurbs!

If this is snobbery, so be it. The alternative view seems to feel that, e.g., 75 years as suburb, with no meaningful change in character, qualifies

a neighborhood for the disparaging "inner city" label, applied only because of what haphazardly followed. Not a chance, in my book. Exurbs are

the relative latecomers, and their developers/homeowners don't get to grab the label just because "suburb" sounds more appealing to most

than "exurb". The only possible fair alternative is to call exurbs "the distant suburbs" while waiting for more exurbs to be built. I could live with that. Houston's suburbs will remain...fewer foreclosures, for the most part, and less hampered by things like national recessions, as property values adhere to that boring, fundamental first rule of real estate: Location, location, etc.

Come on, does anyone really deny that River Oaks is a suburb?

I do - and I do it easily. All these neighborhoods inside the loop west of downtown are sandwiched in between multiple high density commercial districts. Areas like Downtown, Greenway Plaza, Uptown, and the Medical Center come to mind. If River Oaks is a suburb, then what are these areas? Whether you like it or not, River Oaks and its residential neighbors are inner-city neighborhoods. Some people here just need to grasp that things have change post WW2, especially in cities that grew and prospered around the availability of land and the automobile - like Houston did here in the south.

TKO revoked.

Edited January 12, 2009 by Jeebus

[kylejack]

I'm calling a TKO for memebag!

Westbury, River Oaks, Heights (the), Tanglewood, Montrose - all Houston suburbs. They were at birth, and they are today.

Just because somebody threw up homes in distant rice fields, swamps, and former prison lands doesn't give those folks

(or anyone else) the right to mislabel Houston's original SUBURBS. What are they suburbs of, you ask? They are suburbs

of the city of Houston, which began downtown. The question of whether they are "suburban" vs. "in suburbs" is silly in this case:

they are BOTH! A suburb, by definition, is suburban - duh. On the other hand, a house may look "suburban" but not be in the

suburbs - look at Heritage Park in the middle of downtown (extreme example!)! Or, more to the point: Look at every single home in The Woodlands and greater Sugarland; they are suburban homes located in the exurbs!

If this is snobbery, so be it. The alternative view seems to feel that, e.g., 75 years as suburb, with no meaningful change in character, qualifies

a neighborhood for the disparaging "inner city" label, applied only because of what haphazardly followed. Not a chance, in my book. Exurbs are

the relative latecomers, and their developers/homeowners don't get to grab the label just because "suburb" sounds more appealing to most

than "exurb". The only possible fair alternative is to call exurbs "the distant suburbs" while waiting for more exurbs to be built. I could live with that. Houston's suburbs will remain...fewer foreclosures, for the most part, and less hampered by things like national recessions, as property values adhere to that boring, fundamental first rule of real estate: Location, location, etc.

Come on, does anyone really deny that River Oaks is a suburb?

I disagree.

[liammclaren]

Liam - it is denotatively and connotatively a suburb!

I enjoyed the dialogue, but the final anticipated response from the RO resident "clangs" a bit...

I suspect the savvy RO resident says: "The suburbs, no. THE suburb, perhaps."

RO denotes suburb, RO also connotes suburb - just a super-rich one.

You're right, I'm just saying calling River Oaks a suburb would strike the average person as a little strange, right or wrong...

[memebag]

You're right, I'm just saying calling River Oaks a suburb would strike the average person as a little strange, right or wrong...

But if we want to categorize neighborhoods by how the land is used and how the people live, then we have to call River Oaks a suburb. Population density has remained flat since it was constructed. It hasn't gentrified or urbanized. Some suburbs change, becoming urban or exurban, but others do not. We have to recognize those that are still used as suburbs, regardless of what more distant land is used for.

[LTAWACS]

I'm calling a TKO for memebag!

Westbury, River Oaks, Heights (the), Tanglewood, Montrose - all Houston suburbs. They were at birth, and they are today.

Just because somebody threw up homes in distant rice fields, swamps, and former prison lands doesn't give those folks

(or anyone else) the right to mislabel Houston's original SUBURBS. What are they suburbs of, you ask? They are suburbs

of the city of Houston, which began downtown. The question of whether they are "suburban" vs. "in suburbs" is silly in this case:

they are BOTH! A suburb, by definition, is suburban - duh. On the other hand, a house may look "suburban" but not be in the

suburbs - look at Heritage Park in the middle of downtown (extreme example!)! Or, more to the point: Look at every single home in The Woodlands and greater Sugarland; they are suburban homes located in the exurbs!

If this is snobbery, so be it. The alternative view seems to feel that, e.g., 75 years as suburb, with no meaningful change in character, qualifies

a neighborhood for the disparaging "inner city" label, applied only because of what haphazardly followed. Not a chance, in my book. Exurbs are

the relative latecomers, and their developers/homeowners don't get to grab the label just because "suburb" sounds more appealing to most

than "exurb". The only possible fair alternative is to call exurbs "the distant suburbs" while waiting for more exurbs to be built. I could live with that. Houston's suburbs will remain...fewer foreclosures, for the most part, and less hampered by things like national recessions, as property values adhere to that boring, fundamental first rule of real estate: Location, location, etc.

Come on, does anyone really deny that River Oaks is a suburb?

Dont make it so complicated. A suburb is a smaller "satellite" city of a larger one. Pasadena is a suburb of Houston. It has its own downtown and buildings. Sugarland is another suburb of Houston. Conroe, Katy, and many others are suburbs of Houston.

Liam - it is denotatively and connotatively a suburb!

I enjoyed the dialogue, but the final anticipated response from the RO resident "clangs" a bit...

I suspect the savvy RO resident says: "The suburbs, no. THE suburb, perhaps."

RO denotes suburb, RO also connotes suburb - just a super-rich one.

It's not a suburb if it's INSIDE Houston.