More urban LA, SF, DC, Philly, and Boston? (skyline, compare, places)

[MDAllstar]

O yeah, by the way:

It's all under construction as we speak

SW D.C. Construction





NOMA Construction

[tmac9wr]

Right, but like I said this is about now, not the future. The projects in DC do look fantastic, no one's doubting that.

[killakoolaide]

DC though? Lets be forreal. They could build more buildings than Manhatten and still be country.

[killakoolaide]

leachin off tax money

[killakoolaide]

anyway, what took 'em so long

[5ive8ight5ive]

dude look at the dc pics and compare them to the ones i posted of boston..or any of the philly pics..or any of the SF pics....DC is certainly one of the most urban cities in america--but it's no where near bos/phila/sf/ny/chi...

[MDAllstar]

Originally Posted by 5ive8ight5ive

dude look at the dc pics and compare them to the ones i posted of boston..or any of the philly pics..or any of the SF pics....DC is certainly one of the most urban cities in america--but it's no where near bos/phila/sf/ny/chi...

Well you're right...these cities don't have skyskrapers. But the people who designed them kept them that way by law. One is in Europe and one is in America.

[DMV]

tmac9wr;Who exactly is hating on DC though? Just because people have different viewpoints as you doesn't mean they're trying to bring down the city.

You yourselves have admitted DC's city structure is very unique due to the huge Government presence. You're choosing to see this as 100% positive because it means the DC downtown is well-built and huge. Others are recognizing that, but also noticing the fact that DC's downtown is overwhelmingly office space with very little residential, retail, etc in comparison to other cities.

Look...... I get all of that, but for the last time weather a place has a certain amount of Office space or residential neighborhoods are beyond the point.... those things alone does not or can not alone define what it means to have an "URBAN AREA"..... A city can have 100 Blocks of pizza parlas, flower shops, and residential neighborhoods, but if for the next 100 blocks theirs absolutely nothing but green spaces and trees, then that place would be considered less Urban than a place that has blocks and blocks of office buildings with no spaces of green or trees in between.... why???? because the place with all of the offices buildings has little or no spaces in between which makes it more built up than the city with all of the retail stores and residential neighborhoods which by the way has more spaces in between...


Or lets even say that all cities are built up in the since that they all have very few green spaces and are very welll Developed.... then the only way to comare them at that point is to evaluate which one has more of it or which one is more Developed and again thats regardless of any kind of neighborhoods or fine retail stores that some of them may have, because its all about Development and Built upness

So, this brings us back to my point which is that DC's Downtown is a lot bigger, which also means that its more built up, out, and more Developed than Boston and Philly... is it not????... Now if you guys insist on talking about what city has more residential N.Hoods and Retail stores then that alone is a whole other Topic, but has nothing to do with what we're talking about here!!!

Why would people care whether or not DC was as or more urban than their city?

Apparently someone does or their wouldn't be a City vs City Thread going on here my friend ... but its just if we're going to compare them we have to do it the right way!!!

[DMV]

Originally Posted by killakoolaide

DC though? Lets be forreal. They could build more buildings than Manhatten and still be country.

Define Country?

[DMV]

Originally Posted by killakoolaide

leachin off tax money

its not out fault that we were the chosen ones