"Suburban" style cities like L.A., SD, Seattle, Atlanta vs. "urban" like Miami, NYC, SF..which one do u prefer????? (credit, neighborhood)

[Hoarfrost]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

I am so over hearing the word 'density' thrown out as the new end-all and be-all of the perfect city. It is replacing 'diversity' as the most annoying word on the forum.

Density, more often than not, correlates with walkability. It's a lifestyle thing, it doesn't bother me that people want move to less dense cities for "living space".

[ainulinale]

Originally Posted by atlantaATL

YEs its is. i Agree. All this my city is better because its diverse or its more dense so there is more to do its sickening.

I find it interesting that people are so offended. If someone says my city has better amenities therefore I like it better, no one complains. I find density aesthetically pleasing and is one of my primary interests in cities. Thus, if I think a city is better because it is more dense, then I don't see anything wrong with that and I don't why you should either.

[crisp444]

Originally Posted by Hoarfrost

Density, more often than not, correlates with walkability.

Bingo. Denser places have the potential to be walkable but unfortunately not all dense places are walkable. In most cases, non-dense places don't even have the potential to be navigated without one having to rely on a vehicle. Many parts of suburban Atlanta are built to be so low-density that walkability / navigation without a car will NEVER be achieved until the built landscape is drastically altered. Much of suburban Miami, however, has the density to support walkability but is nonetheless un-walkable due to poor public transit and design of streets.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by crisp444

Bingo. Denser places have the potential to be walkable but unfortunately not all dense places are walkable. In most cases, non-dense places don't even have the potential to be navigated without one having to rely on a vehicle. Many parts of suburban Atlanta is built to be so low-density that walkability / navigation without a car will NEVER be achieved until the built landscape is drastically altered. Much of suburban Miami, however, has the density to support walkability but is nonetheless un-walkable due to poor public transit and design of streets.

I agree, that is how I feel about much of the LA/OC metropolitan area. It is the densest metropolitan area in the nation but it's not very walkable in many parts b/c of the design of the streets, buildings, and poor public transit. Parts of San Diego are the same way, they have densities that rival many walkable, urban areas but are clearly built for the automobile rather than pedestrians and public transit.

[crisp444]

Orange County amazes me. It is very, very dense compared to most places in this country... but the built environment is for CARS and not human beings... it's a tragedy that somewhere with such a beautiful natural setting and climate was built with something other than the human in mind. There are islands of walkability in that area (Laguna Beach, downtown Orange, downtown Santa Ana, San Clemente, downtown Huntington Beach, parts of Newport Beach) but they are surrounding by a sea of suburban sprawl, much of which is made up of gated communities that are even more pedestrian-hostile. As much as I love Southern California in theory, it makes me sad that a place with so much potential (it has the density!) has to revolve around the automobile.

[sav858]

^I feel the same way, given its climate and natural scenery this place should have been built with people and not cars in mind. It is probably the best climate to be outside year round walking and strolling about yet it amazes me how many typical suburban style indoor malls there are in the LA/OC region given its near perfect climate. Almost all the malls in San Diego are outdoor, open air malls and I don't get why LA/OC have so many more indoor ones. I understand parts get hot in summer but its not sticky hot and the vast majority of the year its near perfect. They even had an indoor mall, Santa Monica Place, literally a block away from the ocean where it rarely goes above 80 or below 50, luckily that was torn down and is being replaced with an outdoor one. Beverly Center right next to Beverly Hills is another example of a place with very mild temps but its an indoor mall, a complete waste imo.

Developers completely screwed up SoCal by importing the standard suburban model used for other parts of the country with much different climates to Southern CA. I'm hoping as SoCal gets even denser parts will become more walkable through redevelopment.

[radiodude84]

I agree - I'm coining the term "densitytard" for people who think their city is so much better than another because it's more dense. Lol.

[vdy1985]

Originally Posted by radiodude84

I agree - I'm coining the term "densitytard" for people who think their city is so much better than another because it's more dense. Lol.

Who said that more density is better? I was merely pointing out the fact that Houston does not have much density. A previous poster was trying to characterize cities as urban, semi-urban, suburban style ect.

[vdy1985]

Also, I think Houston is cool because you can actually have a yard and single family home just minutes from Downtown at a reasonable price. That cannot be said of most large metros.

[garmin239]

Whats wrong with liking density? More that not, densitiy lead to walkability and a vibrant atmosphere (with a few exceptions). Whats wrong with that?