Your city's ugliest suburb

[the urban politician]

I know I'll get flak for this, but here goes:

I love Woodfield Mall because it has one of the best kid play areas I've ever seen.

So when we are there my wife shops while the kids play, and then when it's her turn to watch them I go to Rainforest Cafe's bar to have some drinks.

Yes, I'm really a bad SkyscraperPage forumer....very anti-urban and shameful. Sorry everyone!

[sopas ej]

I have a question about Schaumburg...

Does it have a traditional downtown, or is it basically a post-war bedroom community, mostly single-family residential neighborhoods with culs-de-sac, and a huge shopping mall? Just curious.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I have a question about Schaumburg...

Does it have a traditional downtown, or is it basically a post-war bedroom community, mostly single-family residential neighborhoods with culs-de-sac, and a huge shopping mall? Just curious.

there is no traditional downtown or traditional urbansim of any kind left in schaumburg. it was mainly cornfields until the 1960s. there was apparently a very small rural town center of 19th century vintage, but it has been lost to history.

the closest traditional downtown to schaumburg would probably be downtown arlington heights which is about 3.5 miles NE of woodfield mall.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

there is no traditional downtown or traditional urbansim of any kind left in schaumburg. it was mainly cornfields until the 1960's. there was apparently a very small rural town center of 19th century vintage, but it has been lost to history.

the closest traditional downtown to schaumburg would probably be downtown arlington heights which is about 3.5 miles NW of woodfield mall.

Thanks for answering my question. I can think of some LA suburbs that are like that as well, that started out as mostly agricultural towns with maybe a small downtown or main street, but then after World War II with the population explosion, housing tracts and shopping centers were built, and the old town center/main street was obliterated due to "progress"---and that also sometimes meant the widening of a freeway, or converting a highway into a freeway, which obliterated the old historic town center.

And then of course there are the newer suburbs that were basically all vacant land or all agricultural land, which was then developed into a car-oriented "planned" community, with no traditional downtown/main street.

[the urban politician]

Schaumburg has a downtown. It's called "Streets of Woodfield"

[Kenmore]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I know I'll get flak for this, but here goes:

I love Woodfield Mall because it has one of the best kid play areas I've ever seen.

So when we are there my wife shops while the kids play, and then when it's her turn to watch them I go to Rainforest Cafe's bar to have some drinks.

Yes, I'm really a bad SkyscraperPage forumer....very anti-urban and shameful. Sorry everyone!

so suburban

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Schaumburg has a downtown. It's called "Streets of Woodfield"

yep.

it's the real deal:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0404...7i13312!8i6656



but for the love of god, DO NOT zoom out.

[JManc]

I've been to Schaumburg (interestingly before I ever even visited Chicago) and I've seen waaaay way worse suburbs than that. It's no Oak Park but it's also not Katy, TX either. I'll see your Woodfield Mall and raise you a Katy Mills mall.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by JManc

I've been to Schaumburg (interestingly before I ever even visited Chicago) and I've seen waaaay way worse suburbs than that. It's no Oak Park but it's also not Katy, TX either. I'll see your Woodfield Mall and raise you a Katy Mills mall.

katy mills looks a lot like gurnee mills in Gurnee, IL

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3873.../data=!3m1!1e3

and yeah, they're both probably worse than the woodfield area, but the woodfield area is still pretty damn offensive from an urbanism perspective. it's still a parking lot wasteland.

[sopas ej]

How funny; I guess a lot of "Mills" malls look a like, huh?

Here's Ontario Mills, in SoCal's Inland Empire (in the City of Ontario, San Bernardino County):

https://www.google.com/maps/place/On...!4d-117.551993

Funny; when you zoom out on all 3 Google map links for the 3 Mills malls, looking at Katy and Gurnee, there's lots of vacant land near the malls. Ontario looks all built out:

Katy, TX: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7748.../data=!3m1!1e3

Gurnee, IL: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3873.../data=!3m1!1e3

Ontario, CA: https://www.google.com/maps/place/On...7.551993?hl=en

[pip]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

yep.

it's the real deal:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0404...7i13312!8i6656



but for the love of god, DO NOT zoom out.

You weren't joking. Wow.

[mhays]

Wow indeed. Even the freaking office buildings have surface parking. The largest mall doesn't even seem to be connected to the nearby sidewalks. It doesn't get much crappier than that. This is what happens when land is dirt cheap and in endless supply, and nobody gives a crap at the planner/politician level.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

yep.

it's the real deal:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0404...7i13312!8i6656



but for the love of god, DO NOT zoom out.

I zoomed out -- whoops. I noticed there's an IKEA, CostCo, HomeDepot big box retail there. Woodfield Mall is about 28 miles outside of downtown Chicago.

Here's an area outside of Seattle - 14 miles south of Downtown Seattle:
https://www.google.com/maps/search/i.../data=!3m1!1e3
*You might have to adjust the zoom and pan a tad to see the Walmart super center and the SouthCenter area and the Westfield SouthCenter mall.


Similar land use, with an similar big box retail - IKEA, Home Depot, CostCo, Best Buy and so on - surrounded by similar suburban sprawl.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by mhays

Wow indeed. Even the freaking office buildings have surface parking. The largest mall doesn't even seem to be connected to the nearby sidewalks. It doesn't get much crappier than that. This is what happens when land is dirt cheap and in endless supply, and nobody gives a crap at the planner/politician level.

Ya. That sort of thing very common in suburban office parks out here, square miles of surface lots, maybe a garage or two surrounding a bleh water fountain. Hated working in them. No where to escape during lunch or breaks.

[Doady]

What caught my attention from cursory glance at Street View in or around Schaumburg is the strange layout of the sidewalks, like this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0515...7i13312!8i6656

Originally Posted by mhays

Wow indeed. Even the freaking office buildings have surface parking. The largest mall doesn't even seem to be connected to the nearby sidewalks. It doesn't get much crappier than that. This is what happens when land is dirt cheap and in endless supply, and nobody gives a crap at the planner/politician level.

Even in places with decent public transit, I still see underground parking not able to fulfill all the demand for office parking. Even downtown Chicago has surface parking lots. The public transit ridership probably has to be extremely high to remove all surface parking.

[Doady]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Well, there's Eastern Europe. Toronto has a ton, but suburban Prague is like 80% commieblocks.

But Prague is much older, so less suburban to begin with. Toronto is new even by North America standards, mostly grew in the post-war era. North York, Scarborough, Etobicoke, Mississauga, that's already over 2 million people right there. There are thousands of these buildings in the GTA.

North York:

Argento by Marcanadian, on Flickr

I don't actually mind these 50s/60s/70s subdivisions, but I know some people will hate them.

[The North One]

I think it's safe to say that commieblock, tower-in-park-sprawl is much worse than regular detached home sprawl.

[mousquet]

^ Not sure, though.

It's been discussed hundreds of times, but I like to repeat.
The sad things about so-called "commieblocks" are:

1. They all look the same, which is boring and disturbing like fascism or mere conformism.

2. They're very poorly laid out, and surrounded by surface parking lots cause burying them costs more money.

But they're still real urban objects in that they keep density to a decent level.
They can also be restructured when it's relevant. Facades can be modernized in diverse fashions in particular.
So I wouldn't judge them so harshly.

Single-family home sprawl obviously consumes much more space.
it does really sprawl, which causes bad problems too.

[deja vu]

In terms of low-rise sprawl, Sun City, Sun City West, and surrounding environs are pretty bad. These are popular retirement communities, but freaky to drive through. At the center of each 'ring' are one or two churches of various denominations.


Source: Google Maps

Houston's 'The Woodlands', while not 'ugly' freaks me out as well.

[ThePhun1]

The Woodlands is considered an anchor city of the MSA, which is just absurd. It'd be like Hempstead being considered an anchor city of NYC or Glendale for LA.