Check out this link to an article that touts O'Fallon and St. Peters as top cities to live.
Link to article:
http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=207039
After reading and annotating the articles (excerpt from Suburban Nation and the article about O'Fallon and St. Peters being one of the top places in the United States to live) which article is closest to expressing your views?
In other words, are you persuaded that the suburban landscape is confining and restrictive? Or do you feel that it is a safe harbor for families, a great place to live? Did the excerpt from Suburban Nation, which criticizes your home town, offend you? Or did you agree?
ALL OPINIONS ARE VALID AS LONG AS YOU MAKE SURE YOU EXPLAIN WHY YOU THINK WHAT YOU THINK!
In order to get the full 25 points, you must use textual support from at least one article.
In order to get the full 25 points, you must use textual support from at least one article.
69 comments:
As a small child I was raised in a more urban setting. I have fond memories of being allowed to walk to the local mom and pop convenience store with my friends. When I moved to the suburbs around the age of ten, I was more secluded because I lived in a subdivision that had a pool so I tended to spend most of my time there instead of venturing out into communities outside my own. I was an adult before I ever even visited St. Louis city for more than the occasional Cardinals game. I agree with both articles . . . I enjoyed having a "suburban upbringing," but I do see how it limited my exposure to culture outside my own.
Even though I grew up in St. Charles County, I now live in the city of St. Louis, so, no, I do not think that O'Fallon and St. Peters are the optimum places to live. As a teenager in the '80's in suburbia, I felt bored and alienated. I agree with the authors of Suburban Nation, who state, "young people [get into] a lot of trouble [in suburbia] because they're bored. Driving around, driving drunk, drowning in frozen ponds. The suburbs can be a dangerous place at a certain age." This is an accurate description of what most of my classmates (including me) did on the weekends when we were in high school. We actually became safer when our parents finally let us drive to the Loop to walk around and to see independent films at the Tivoli and the Varsity Theatres. This experience was stimulating because we had something new to think about and to see--and we had a sense of accomplishment because we'd struck out on our own. I don't think it's coincidence that the first modern day school shooting happened in the '80's in a California suburb. Bob Geldof and the Boomtown Rats (an '80's band--yes!) sang about it in "I Don't Like Mondays." Their lyrics describe suburban ennui:
"The silicon chip inside her head
Gets switched to overload
And nobody’s gonna go to school today
She’s gonna make them stay at home
And daddy doesn’t understand it
He always said she was good as gold
And he can see no reasons
'Cos there are no reasons
What reason do you need to be show-ow-ow-ow-own?"
The shooter, Brenda Ann Spencer, opened fired on a playground of elementary school children. When the police asked her why, she answered in a bored tone of voice, "I don't like Mondays."
Personally, I agree with "O'Fallon, St. Peters Missouri amoung best places to live." O'Fallon is easy-going, and is a clean place in general. The crime rate is low, the community is fairly decent, and I feel it is very low key and quiet. Nothing about this article made me feel defensive. I like O'Fallon, and feel it is a good place to live. However, it is a bit boring, but I would rather have a quiet area to live, opposed to a hectic city.
mmmmmmm
I really don't agree 100% with the two readings, because I dont think that O'Fallon is the greatest place to live, I do agree that it has a lot of things that the victims of sprawl says don't exist. Like they said that there kids weren't able to go outside there yard. O'Fallon has enought stuff todo without crossing to many big streets. Now in days most parents work late so there kids are forced to grow-up, and learn to do stuff on there own. One reason I don't agree with O'Fallon being the best place to live is because there are other places that are just as nice to live, like Lake St. Louis is a nice place to live and they have all the same things that O'Fallon has. One thing that makes O'Fallon a good place to live is a lot of jobs. Like the big MasterCard place that is here in O'Fallon. I understand what both readings are saying and I take pride in were I live because it is a nice place to live with low crime and lots of houses!
nnnn
hi
I agree with the article, cause everything cost wise is increasing but jobs aren't.
I don't agree with either article 100%. I think that O'Fallon is a very nice and safe place to live. But growing up in a small town in North Dakota I do feel like living in O'Fallon is a little restricting like "The Victims of Sprawl" says. "The Victims of Sprawl" says that "in this environment where all activities are segregated and distances are measured on the odometer..." is not only true for living in the suburbs, but also living on the country roads where your neighbors are often 5-10 miles away. I think there are positives and negatives to each, living in the country, or living in the suburbs.
I think O'Fallon has become a more modernized area to live, from what I have seen and what my mom has told me. Where I live I feel completely safe. I like the low amount of crime rate, the different kind of stores to go and places to eat. So in other words I would agree that O'Fallon is one of the top 100 places to live.
I do like living in O'Fallon. However i do feel that there could be more things do do and better ways to spend your time. They should put something fun in so that there are fun activities to do. In "The Victims of Sprawl" the letter that the woman wrote says that she can not even walk to where she wants to go. I think that is a little rediculous becasue around here there are side walks everywhere. There is no reason for people to not be able to walk somewhere if they want. There are bust roads but if you want to walk then walk around the neighborhoods. Most of them have side walks. It also talks about how the kids can not even do to the store and get a toy but if they are young children they shouldnt even be going to the store by themselves anyway. So there are pros and cons to living in O'Fallon.
i think ofallon would be a good place to grow up if i was still like 8 years old but there isnt anything fun to do for older fellows!!!!
Yes i agree with the article, but im not saying i enjoy living in O'Fallon. Its a safe place to live and good for familys, but its boring and no fun.
i completely disagree with the first article we read in class! There is nothing wrong with living in the suburbs. Just like the second atricle clearly stated, ofallon is the safest place to live unlike st louis city which is just CRAWLING with crime. In the article that attacked living in the suburbs someone sent in a lettter saying that they missed walking and all she wanted to do was go out and walk, and its like helllloooooo... then go out anad walk around your neighborhood! living in the suburbs is NOT an excuse to sit at home on your couch writing letters to newspapers complaining about your laziness! you could even walk up and down your stairs.
I disagree with the article "the victims of sprawl" There is nothing wrong with living in the suburbs. This whole article sounds like someone was just blabbing their mouth trying to sound smart about something. This article has no "real" facts just opinons.
I have my opinion leaned more toward the KSDK article more acurate then Andres Duany's article. Andres talks about the negatives of living in the suburbs, but seems more based on opinion then fact.
i agree that ofallon is a good place to live but i think that it gets old after a while and to me it seems that there are much better place to live than otown, id much rather live in a city with more things to do.
O'Fallon might be a safe place to live, but it is not entertaining to teenagers in the area. There aren're really any places to go, and if there are places to go then it costs money. Most teenagers don't want to spend money all the time. If there were more free activities to do, O'Fallon would be a better place.
I don't agree with eitheqr articles 100 %. I used to live in Illinois, and O'Fallon compared to Illinios is definitley better.
There is also not much to do in O'Fallon! I like O'Fallon it is a great place ti live but it isn't the best. So I don't agree with both fully but I agree with some charactristics of each.
yeah
ofallon is a safe and clean place to live. although it is boring to teenagers, youngsters have a blast.
I do not agree with the article "The Victims of Sprawl" because it makes the suburbs look so bad. Living in the suburbs actually has a lot of advantages and is very safe and convienant. Teens will get bored but so does every other teenager in America. I feel like I have a lot of freedom in O'Fallon and i like it here. I would like to move somewhere else later on and it would defenitly be in a suburb as well.
i think that the Andres Duany's article only talks about the negatives of living in suburbs. i think its a great upbringing for young children but when they get around to their teenage years it gets rather dull and boring to live in O'fallon
Congradulations...
said...
I believe that most who live in a suburban lifestyle chose that lifestyle. Kid's in a suburban neighborhood are safer than kids that live in the city. They might not learn how to be 'grown-up' as early as city kids do but they still learn it. They learn boundaries, rules and regulations. Depending on your parents isn't a bad thing. It's normal for children and with today's society kids are being forced to grow up too fast.
I agree more with the O'fallon and St.Peters article. They're right when they say our community is affordable and there are jobs available and crime is low along with good schools too. There aren't that many neighborhoods around where houses are extremely expensive. At times it can be boring especially when you've reached a high school age but it is also just being able to find something to do with your friends that you think is fun. We have to become a little more creative. I didn't really like the other article as much because I think they pushed some subjects too far and were just trying to blame it on something.
"O'Fallon, Mo. KSDK -- Two St. Charles County cities are among the best place to live in the country according to Money Magazine."
Personally, I love living in O'Fallon. I know a lot of people say that O'Fallon is a pretty boring place to live and has a lot of the worst drivers here, but I enjoy living here. O'Fallon really is a good area to live in due to the good schooling opportunities, good police force, and not a horrible community.
I haven't grown up here all my life, but I've been here long enough to know that I would rather live here than anywhere else just because the area is so familiar to me.
I think that I agree more with the article about O'fallon. There are a lot of job opportunities, good schooling, and it's affordable depending upon where you look.
"Statistics show our quality of life is very high, with many factors in the community contributing to our public safety," said O'Fallon Police Chief Roy Joachimstaler.
Even though O'fallon is basically the most boring place to live, it's good for new families who are just starting out.
I agree with Ofallon and St.Peters article, I believe that the one we read in class is totally wrong, when it said that kids basically commit suicide because they are bored it totally shocked me, I think that is totally inaccurate and not thought through enough. I think being in such a big area less kids would commit suicide because theres a bigger chance that there is someone you can relate to, i came from a small town and out there there wasnt many people that strayed off from the norm because then the whole school would attack you for being different. Also, i would rather live in O'Fallon than St.Louis because i think its way too overcrowded out there, theres too many people in one area and that makes life difficult, but in a less crowded area, such as O'Fallon or St.Peters i think that its definetly safer, and your still able to walk certian places, depending on where you live. I just think in the first article, the person wasnt wanting to live in a suburban area, but moved there anyways, and hates the design because they grew up in something totally different.
test post. Will this work/
I agree that O’Fallon is a safe place to live but I don’t think it is the greatest place ever to live either. I think that the suburban areas are very restricting and that it is almost too safe. because if you are sheltered your whole life you can never learn about how to deal with the real word. In victims of sprawl I agreed with most of the article like the bored teenager part because there really isn’t much to do and what there is to do can get expensive. Other parts I didn’t agree with when the lady was talking about how she felt trapped and couldn’t walk anywhere. I think that was really extreme because there are some places you can walk to.
I agree with the St. Peters and O'Fallon article because O' Fallon is a really nice city. We also have good schools and and there is not really any crime and there are things to do you just have to think outside the box. I disagreed with the other article because all it did was blame neighborhoods and suburban areas for everything that goes wrong and i don't really think that's true.
I've lived in suburbia all of my life and I have no complaints. We live in great city and it is a very nice place to grow up. People always talk about how boring it is here, but I disagree. O'Fallon is what you make it to be. On any given night you can make this city fun. We have all the normal attractions that you would find in a bigger city in the near distance. "Statistics show our quality of life is very high, with many factors in the community contributing to our public safety," said O'Fallon Police Chief Roy Joachimstaler. I agree with Mr. Joachimstaler because this is a very nice place and is very clean. Our crime rate is very low and makes going to bed at night much more peaceful. Although, I feel that we are strictly enforced in our boundaries and I do not agree with it. I'm glad my parents let us grow up a little at a time. I feel if I were to have to live on my own, I would be able to make it. We leave for college in less than a year and we aren't going to have our family there for us all the time.
"Statistics show our quality of life is very high, with many factors in the community contributing to our public safety," said O'Fallon Police Chief Roy Joachimstaler. I would rather live in O'Fallon than anywhere else because of what Cheif Roy Joachimstaler said. I feel like my safty is very important and i feel more free knowing that i can walk the streets or to the park without being mugged or harrassed. Not saying that wont ever happen here but there is a very slim chance that it will. I am a city girl in many ways but i wont move there untill im older and till i know that i can handle my self in dangerous situations that O'Fallon has taught me. O'Fallon is also near by many attractions. It is not a long drive to forest park where the zoo, art museum, science center anfd the magic house. I have had great childhood memories here and whenever i start a family of my own i might just come back here so that my children can have the same experience has i did.
I agree with this article because yes, it might be a boring place to live but it is safe and there is some stuff to do, its not the most boring place in the world, just not as fun as other places. with the crime rate low in O'Fallon, i do beliave it is a very nice place to raise a family or start a life, there are many job opportunities even with the bad economy and if you really try, you can make a living in O'Fallon.
so yes i do agree with this article and if all else fails, i honestly wouldnt mind starting a life here in the great city of O'Fallon.
I think ofallon is a nice place to raise a family since its a safer area, and the homes are all for the most part really nice. Personally i think the area isnt for highschoolers since theres not much for you to do in terms of activities. The only thing to do around here is bowl or watch movies.
I agree with the excerpt saying that O’Fallon and St. Peters are two very safe areas to live in the U.S. O’Fallon may not be the most enjoyable place to live for a lot of people, especially teens, but it is a very safe place to live for raising a family. But from what I’ve seen around here, the only thing that most teenagers are able to do here is go to the movies. It may not be the most enjoyable place to live here as a teen, but it is definitely safe. When today’s teens grow up, they can choose wherever they want to live as an adult and make their own choices.
Just recently I moved out to the O’Fallon area. This isn't the first time I've lived in the city, as most of my childhood I lived in St. Charles. At the beginning of 7th grade I moved to Pacific, Missouri, so you could say I’ve experienced living in the suburbs as well as the city. I agree with the O’Fallon and St. Peters post. In my opinion the O’Fallon area is better to live in. “O'Fallon ranked high for its low crime rate” is something I’ve noticed a difference in personally from where I use to live.
"The Victims of Sprawl" seems more like an opinion piece to me. The only part that seemed factual to me was the driving statistics presented towards the end. As for the lady's opinion with the walking not being possible, why not form a petition to get sidewalks installed? Why not take action? Why is her town so inhabitable?
Coming from a lot smaller town, O'Fallon is a change. Would it be my first choice? No. Yes, there are plenty of conveniences to being so close to things, but I grew up having large yards and land. Your neighbor's house wasn't a stones toss apart. Boredom was solved with good friends and fun times. It's not a victimizing living somewhere rural as some may imply.
I agree with O’Fallon and St. Peters being in the top 100 because they are both nice places to live you can do a lot of things in both of the cities. I go to the rec plex every day and swim. It is a clean and there is a lot thing to do. They have slides there and they have diving boards. Also there is a cafe and an ice skating ring. . I live in O’Fallon. I go to bowling and i go to the movies during the weekends. “They cannot bicycle to the toy store and spend their money". In O'Fallon you can bike were every you like see people every day biking.
I agree more with the KSDK article than the one we read in class. I enjoy living in O'Fallon for the most part. KSDK's comment about O'Fallon's safety is accurate, and there are a lot of opportunities here job wise. However, no place is perfect. At times, it can seem like there isn't enough to do, and the driving could be better. But, you have to take the good with the bad when it comes to many things. Overall, I think living in O'Fallon has more pros than cons.
I agree with most people who said that our community is a great place for kids. Since it is good for them it is a good thing that we are a safe city and get that sense of security. But we are all getting older and need to start learning to take care of ourselves but I think we are being deprived of that. You really need to get out of the suburbs to see what happens when you don’t have people constantly watching your every move!
I agree somewhat with the articles, but I feel as if you have a choice on how your life is going to play out, you can’t blame suburbia. Take charge of your own life and responsibility of how it’s going. For example, in the article Victims of Sprawl and the section “soccer Moms” made me beyond livid. Instead of complaining to the city about everything you think is wrong with it, why don’t you just take charge and join the city council or just move. Moving is always an option, you are the one that chose to live there, so don’t be mad at the city; they didn’t tell you that you HAD to live there. Granted she did write a letter to the “architects” but all she did was complain, she could have taken a different route and gave the city some suggestion on how she thought the community could change these habits. Well this is all that I have to say now so…..yea. if you don’t like it, well to bad, it my opinion.
I agree with the Victims of Sprawl due to living my entire life here and knowing firsthand how difficult it is to get around as a kid with no way of getting to the stores or areas of the town without a car. Living here as a kid has taught me that despite the difficulties of getting around on one’s own, they need to do their best regardless of the difficulties. In the Victims of Sprawl article it stated that the kids are a burden to their families by asking for rides to go places, so their parents can’t wait to get them a car and out of the house to be left alone. In my life this has often been the case of being a nuisance to my Mom or Dad.
I agree with o’ Fallon and St. Peters article. Both places create an affordable place for many people to live. The schools are good and crime is very low. Living in the community will help many kids to enjoy their childhood. I agree, in some cases some kids don’t get to live their childhood if they grow up in the city. O’ Fallon and St. peters will become boring as we grow older. Mainly because we are still trying to figure out what to do with our life, wanting to go away from our parents but still trying to stay with our best friends. Living in this community gives you the opportunity to go walk to your favorite stores, and restaurants. As time goes on the streets will become more dangerous, especially crossing K.
I agree with both articles, but more so The "Victims of Sprawl". I agree with the St. Peters and O'Fallon article because it's factual but my opinion sways towards disliking O'Fallon. This city does definitely have very little crime, but I think this place is so boring. I don't have any exciting stories to tell people and sometimes I feel that, to create some fun memories in my youth, I have to be doing something bad. If I lived in the city it would be much different. I just want to be able to walk around and go outside late at night. My parents don't let me go out in the middle of the night or just drive around aimlessly. It's not my fault that I don't have anything to do, and that's what The Victims of Sprawl was saying. There are other cities that I could live in that are also safe and much more exciting.
I find O’Fallon to be completely boring. Maybe we are just boring people, maybe not. I do feel rather limited. If I ever want to “do something” I must drive atleast 20 minutes to reach my destination. I can’t walk to my friends’ houses, it would take almost an hour, maybe more. Also, it’s not considered normal to be walking around in this town. Walking down the side of the road, you’re sure to be yelled at from the windows of the passing cars.
I more so agree with the article “Victims of Sprawl.” As teenagers, it is not our choice to grow up in this suburbia. As kids, sure, it’s safe. As teenagers, we are consumed by boredom. We end up getting drunk in people’s basements, watching movies, or driving as far as the gas tank will allow us. I would give up this “security” and space for more art and cramped living places. The large homes and high-end cars don’t mean a thing to me.
I’m not hating on O’Fallon, though. Living here isn’t hell. It’s just this… never-ending cycle. I don’t feel like I’m getting anywhere. I fill all of my time at work, making money so I can leave this town and see things beyond. I just long for this life of travel; constantly moving. Not this town that’s at a standstill.
In my own Opinion I agree with Victims of Sprawl, I don’t think living in this bloody town has made anything better for me. I think the opposite is happening, I think that by living her I am losing a lot of things in my life that I could have by living in a city. Such as the exposer to the arts, like architecture and even painting and sculptures. By living in a suburbs you lose a lot the culture that you would just be exposed to everyday without having to go do something and making an event of it like I have to now by living here. Yes it may be safer my living here but that is not enough to make up for everything that I have lost by being put in a place that is “safer”. Yes being in this safer place is better for new families with young kids but once those kids grow up and want to be more independent they don’t have the capability to do so, because everything is too far for them to walk or ride and they are still too young to drive so their things to do revolve around their parents work. Then once they are able to drive they don’t really know what to do with that power because all their life they were limited to what their parents were willing to do and things for older kids are harder to find because it not as easy as going to a friend’s place and getting out the toys. To me living in a town like this is highly limiting on what I can do, and I feel like I am a Victim of Sprawl as well.
I don't particularly agree with this article or the other one. O'Fallon and Saint Peters are okay places to live if you have a steady job and have no kids and are over the age of 25. The kids though are quite sheltered to the hardship of being a individual, and rely strongly on their parents and if they can't rely on them they rely on someone else. But i don't think it completely takes out all the chance for independence. It only makes it increasingly difficult to attain a mature state. I don’t think that the suburban nation is right with their idea. The article was overly dramatized and exaggerated. The effects of urban sprawl are real but it isn't as bad as the article makes it out to be. The soccer mom subjected herself to that life, she didn't have to give up her career and carpool is always an option. The kid’s games and everything doesn't get in the way of work as much it sounds. And cul-de-sac kids find ways to do stuff to entertain them. They have friends and they walk to places that aren't exactly the most suitable but will do with what they have.
test post
i think that ofallon is a safe place to live and a good olace to raise your kids, but i would rather live out in the middle of no where where i can do whatever i want just about whenever i want to do it.
tst post
i think that o'fallon is a good place to live if you enjoy the peace of the rural cities without the drama of the big cities
tst post
testing post
I kinda agree with it but then i also dont.About the soccer moms, i think that parents are the ones that choose to sign their little kids up for sports so by doing so they are already commiting to takin them to games and practices and watever else they have to do. I also dont think that parents are giving up their jobs to do this because i dont kno any parent that is doing that. I know that familys are always busy wityh this kind of stuff and some days parents dont get to rest at all because they come straight home from work and have to take their child to practices. The part i do agree with though is that parents do drive their kids around all the time. but its their choice.
I agree with The Victims of Suburban Sprawl article. As a St. Louis city native, I've experienced both city and county life entirely. Exposure to culture is everywhere in an inner city environment, unlike suburban areas such as O’Fallon. I was exposed to adventure further than my own imagination could take me while living as a child in St. Louis city. Bored teenagers are everywhere. Not just in suburbia, but when bored in a city you can easily walk outside and find adventure. The quote "the cul-de-sac kid" I disagree with though. They define them as "the child who lives as a prisoner of a thoroughly safe and unchallenging environment." There are challenges everywhere along with danger. The only difference between suburbia and city life its cultural influence. Suburbia lacks that and primarily that.
I both agreed and disagreed with, “The Victim of Sprawl”. It was said, that suburban kids get bored easily. When they get bored they also get themselves into trouble. I do agree with this statement. However, I don’t agree with parents driving their kids around. Lots of kids have cars and jobs that I know. When I wasn’t old enough to drive I would ride my bike to friends’ houses and walk home from school every now. It was fun. Now some people might think that’s dangerous but it really wasn’t. That’s what brings me to my next subject. The authors say that the suburbs can be a dangerous place. It’s really not that dangerous. You just have to be smart. The city is far more dangerous. That’s why big cities are the most dangerous places in America. O’Fallon is nowhere near the top of that list.
:)
i think that this article is wrong on every level the thing about the soccer moms and the teens not getting out its wrong people get out all the time and have fun and keep their self’s occupied. This article over did their hole point and just attacked everyone that lives in cul-de-sac and that’s not fair to the people that have made a good life and they just spit in their face in my opion this article should not have been written
I think that ofallon may be a boring place but at the same time a very safe plcee to live. In my oppinion ofallon is a good place to grow up in. People who say they dont like the suberbs have usaly never lived there and they really dont know. For instence in the article it said that when we are bored teens drive around drunk witch is not true at all not. People do that anywhere else just as much as here.
Test post.
Post a Comment