Comment by pnathan | Hacker News Reader

Comment by pnathan | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> I enjoy the malls, the big box stores, and the clones. Why? I know that pretty much anywhere I go I can get a consistent experience. I can go the local mall and almost anything I can want or imagine is available, which is some level is fascinating. What's more, as cliche as all these places ares, there is a bit of a shared experience for almost everyone.

I don't understand this. That is not because you're not lucidly explaining it. It simply does not fit into my head how this is desirable. :) But that's ok. I think Different places should look and feel and act different. I think that making a consistent experience absolutely destroys the unique culture and history of places, replaced by "the style from headquarters", and "the history of Walgreenmartsafewayco". It really repels me.

For really getting away from people/cars, I believe that the forests are appropriate. Ideally, no paths, no trails, just.... away.

Anyway. My anti-suburb rant over for the day. :)

On the other hand, I don't really see the need for stores to be unique. I go to stores to buy things. If they have what I need, that works for me. I think it's easy to associate big box stores with the ones that people tend to dislike, but there are also high quality places like Wegmans that are still big box, suburb-y stores.

It seems that much of the suburb vs. city debate comes down to culture and personal preference.

> I think that making a consistent experience absolutely destroys the unique culture and history of places

To be fair, the unique culture of the place used to be "industrial farming corn field" is most cases. It's not like anyone is tearing down 100 year old neighborhoods to build big boxes to serve suburbs (actually, the suburbs are far more likely to save those places than destroy them).

> unique culture of the place used to be "industrial farming corn field" is most cases.

Ha, yes. But - thought experiment. What if, instead of another 'burb with winding streets, it started out by defining a downtown core kind of setup: 4-6 story buildings with retail storefronts and apartments above. Put the 'extra' space into a commons area, plus maybe a mini-park possibly with original area flora and fauna. So your 1/4 mile x 1/4 mile place gets a lot more dense and has a lot more to offer within an easy 10-minute walk. Bonus points if you figure out how to build a "tool shed" local workshop to replace the ubiquitous garages. :)

I would live in something like this happily, but for one thing: I have three large dogs. Without a yard, it's a lot of work, and I'd hate to think I couldn't keep a few dogs around.

Now that the suburbs people want to move to the city with all of their square footage, they're destroying my 100 year old neighborhood, bulldozing Victorian and Craftsman homes to build zero lot-line homes in their places.

It makes me want to throw up. Every time the council pushes for a Historic Overlay, it turns into a revolt with Tea Party style propaganda.

Most areas don't really have very interesting or unique character worth preserving. Suburbs aren't built in interesting areas for the most part. Unless some local industrial corn farm or poverty stricken country town who's claim to fame was being near a rail junction (no longer used) is unique or interesting or worth preservation.

One of the reasons for the economic dominance of big box stores over quaint mom and pop shops is simple economics. Small store usually don't offer the best prices or selection. It's only at the weird long end of the tail can they exist, selling stuff that's not of a big enough general interest for the big stores.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com