You've heard plenty of criticisms of American suburbia over the years. This has been going on for quite a while.

During the "Mad Men" era a half-century ago, new suburbs were routinely skewered by opinion leaders as insufferably dull, populated by conformist dads in gray flannel suits and stay-at-home moms filling listless days with coffee klatches.

Such stereotyping seems pretty amusing today -- you know what I mean if you live in the suburbs. But it had a lasting effect. Even now it seems as if suburbia somehow has to justify itself.

As suburbia expanded coast to coast over the past decades, criticisms only increased. Suburban subdivisions are not "walkable," so people have to drive everywhere. Suburban traffic is terrible.

Large lots are environmentally wasteful; shopping malls are lightweight chain-store knockoffs of downtown retail; there is no culture in suburbs, and, worst of all, the suburbs are placeless.

Eventually an all-purpose epithet -- sprawl -- was attached to American suburbs. Critics appreciated this label as the ultimate disapproval. No need to bother with details!

Funny thing, though -- suburbia continues to grow, and by now is home to well more than half of all Americans. How can the majority of us be so wrong?

Critics have answers: We suburbanites just don't understand how bad suburban living is.

Or: Unenlightened zoning codes are forcing us to live in ways that are not good for us.

As an antidote, suburban neighborhoods should be made as citylike as possible, with very small lots resulting in much higher densities, emphasizing increased walking, bicycling and reliance on public transit.

Ideally, we should do away with our own autos altogether and rent a car by the hour if and when one is really needed.

In the real world that is highly unlikely to happen. Suburban life is attractive to many Americans.

It's not just about housing densities, which, by the way, have been sharply increasing as a market response in growing American suburbs.

Nor is it a matter of walking more: People walk, jog and bicycle in suburbs. They just don't walk or bike to work very much.

Suburban living is a matter of choice. Among many choices, really, since there are numerous distinct urban and suburban residential environments in every American metropolitan area.

Naturally there are tradeoffs no matter where we decide to live. A young family might buy on the exurban fringe because of lower housing prices.

The extra costs of driving can be spread out in less-painful ways than coming up with a larger down payment for a home in a more costly, closer-in location.

From some suburban perspectives, big-city life seems expensive, complicated and perhaps even a little scary. Yet urbanites gladly overlook such downsides in return for urban attractions that they value.

Over the years, my neighbors on our pleasant but visually nondescript suburban block have included university professors, a surgeon, business and finance executives, lawyers, a software developer, two principals in the Minnesota Orchestra, and a writer for "Laverne and Shirley."

All of them are quite capable of deciding the best place for them to live without guidance from critics of any stripe.

So let's set aside any notion that a single type of residential setting, whether urban or suburban, is best for all Americans. Locales from Back Bay in Boston to the far suburbs of San Diego each offer particular attractions and face their own mix of problems.

Every neighborhood, like every person, is ultimately unique. That is why community is always a custom creation. Our national goal should be that all communities achieve their highest potentials for the benefit of their residents.

Functional transportation is essential to all communities. Suburban traffic is indeed terrible in many metropolitan areas. But traffic congestion is endemic in walkable New York City as well.

A specific mix of programs for a city in suburban Washington may not be useful in, say, Macon, Ga.. No two community situations are completely alike.

In comparing urban districts to developing suburbs, we also need to appreciate that it takes time for communities to mature. Our major U.S. cities looked awfully bleak for decades when they were young and growing.

So you don't need to invest a lot of concern about suburban placelessness. This is an inevitable early stage in community and regional development.

Wherever you decide to live should be exactly right for you. That is the test, period. Pick the heart of a big city. Or any of many kinds of suburbs. Or a small town, or out in the country.

America is a banquet of choices.

* * *

Tom Martinson, a director of Two Worlds Community Foundation, is a city-planning consultant based in Minneapolis. He wrote this for article the Free Lance-Star in Fredericksburg, Va., and it was distributed by MCT Information Services.