Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am now, but that's what I like to call a Sun-Belt type of growth.
Umm, no; these features of modern urban revitalization cut across regions as you see those same elements from the Rustbelt to the Sunbelt; here's a good article on urban revitalization in DC's urban core for example. Furthermore, I specifically mentioned Greenville and Chattanooga because their revitalization efforts centered on repurposing historic buildings just as much as new construction.
Umm, no; these features of modern urban revitalization cut across regions as you see those same elements in the Rustbelt as well as the Sunbelt; here's a good article on urban revitalization in DC's urban core for example. Furthermore, I specifically mentioned Greenville and Chattanooga because their revitalization efforts centered on repurposing historic buildings just as much as new construction.
Not only is DC not a Rustbelt city, but it's Urban Environments are FAR more developed than any Southern city, and due to some posters beliefs, then DC is also the most Urban Southern city. There is no need to implement such projects you see across the Sunbelt in DC, because those type of developments are already in place. Same could be said for most Rustbelt cities.
Jacksonville, Tampa, Orlando, Charlotte, Memphis, Raleigh, Austin, Nashville, Houston, and San Antonio. are a bit behind in Dense Compactness, urban environments, and etc. especially compared to Rust Belt cities, or even the likes of DC.
---
its - possession
it's - contraction of it is
your - possession
you're - contraction of you are
their - possession
they're - contraction of they are
there - referring to a place
loose - opposite of tight
lose - opposite of win
who's - contraction of who is
whose - possession
alot - NOT A WORD
Let's see if the third time really is the charm...
Quote:
Originally Posted by _OT
Not only is DC not a Rustbelt city, but it's Urban Environments are FAR more developed than any Southern city, and due to some posters beliefs, then DC is also the most Urban Southern city. There is no need to implement such projects you see across the Sunbelt in DC, because those type of developments are already in place. Same could be said for most Rustbelt cities.
Jacksonville, Tampa, Orlando, Charlotte, Memphis, Raleigh, Austin, Nashville, Houston, and San Antonio. are a bit behind in Dense Compactness, urban environments, and etc. especially compared to Rust Belt cities, or even the likes of DC.
Never said DC was Rustbelt; I said these features of modern urban revitalization cut across all regions.
One thing that I've noticed is that many urban revitalization efforts in cities across the country have centered on water features. New greenspace, residential, museums, etc. are fixtures along Milwaukee's lakefront and Richmond's riverfront and I think Birmingham's lack of a water feature probably has something to do with the fact that it has lagged behind other cities in these sorts of efforts. These types of developments weren't always present in these cities; the 80's and 90's were cruel to urban areas with the drug and crime epidemic and many urban cores experienced a rebirth after that sordid era, including Milwaukee and Richmond.
There is NO WAY...I repeat, NO WAY Richmond has anywhere with tracks 200,000 people per square mile! That is obviously an error. Do you honestly believe that? So one square mile contains the entire city limits population of Richmond?
I refuse to believe they have anywhere with even 20,000 people per square mile.
And I know Richmond very well. There is not a single square mile in that city lined with 10+ story residential towers for an entire square mile. The only city that really has that is NYC and Chicago.
Sure Richmond has dozens of 5-10+ story residential buildings but so does every city over 1 million. That is certainly nothing special.
There is NO WAY...I repeat, NO WAY Richmond has anywhere with tracks 200,000 people per square mile! That is obviously an error. Do you honestly believe that? So one square mile contains the entire city limits population of Richmond?
I refuse to believe they have anywhere with even 20,000 people per square mile.
And I know Richmond very well. There is not a single square mile in that city lined with 10+ story residential towers for an entire square mile. The only city that really has that is NYC and Chicago.
Sure Richmond has dozens of 5-10+ story residential buildings but so does every city over 1 million. That is certainly nothing special.
Always moving the goalposts...
So, you are unaware that there are a handful of Richmond neighborhoods hovering at or near 20,000 ppsm, but you can't factually disprove it, so you choose to ignore it...
You ask for proof about Census tracts that Richmond has tracts above 20,000. The link shows that yellow blocks are designated Census tracts of 10-15,000, and anything above is higher. So clearly Richmond has plenty if blocks at 20,000 and beyond, but because you can't factually disprove it, you're ignorantly disputing it?
The orange-red blocks clearly signify density between 75-200,00, not strictly 200,000. But now I know you're just salty, because it's common knowledge that Richmond has pockets of urbanity (yes pockets, they aren't large areas) that are pretty much unrivaled in similarly-sized cities, and the urbanity of Richmond within its inner 60% is very high and comparable to any city that isn't one of the elite major urban centers of the country...
How well do you know Richmond? Do tell!
You're the only person whose claiming Richmomd has a full square mile of continuous high rises. I didn't say that, so here you are debating with that man in your head again...
Your arguments are falling apart, Peter! Stay focused. And actually, the map is pretty much neglecting the city center where a lot of high rise and mixed use housing is. So unless you can factually disprove this, I think it's obvious to anyone who is familiar with Richmond that it's inner city is very dense and urban...
Last edited by CaseyB; 07-08-2017 at 08:50 PM..
Reason: rude
There is NO WAY...I repeat, NO WAY Richmond has anywhere with tracks 200,000 people per square mile! That is obviously an error. Do you honestly believe that? So one square mile contains the entire city limits population of Richmond?
I refuse to believe they have anywhere with even 20,000 people per square mile.
And I know Richmond very well. There is not a single square mile in that city lined with 10+ story residential towers for an entire square mile. The only city that really has that is NYC and Chicago.
Sure Richmond has dozens of 5-10+ story residential buildings but so does every city over 1 million. That is certainly nothing special.
I agree. The times I have been there felt like a smaller city to me. It has an intimate feeling, with smaller streets and buildings. I suppose that is the charm of Richmond to some.
Milwaukee is underrated in its urban character and offerings. However, the high crime and racial tensions or perception of racial tensions, rather, has hurt its image. It is seeing some decent investment downtown like the link below.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
