The Columbus Skyline (Cleveland, Cincinnati, Toledo: lofts, condo, neighborhoods)

[nickolaseposter]

Don't feel too bad about your skyline. Memphis is pretty much the same size as you and has a skyline about the size of Dayton or Toledo's. Your not the smallest. But San Fran is about the same size and it's skyline outdoes you by four times. Your just in the middle. You do need some more midrises, though! And then some different sized buildings. All of the heights look the same.

[nickw252]

Hah both cities are way better than Tucson, AZ. It is slightly smaller than Columbus and has a skyline somewhere well below Toledo and a little better than Lima!

Everyone in Tucson would rather drive everywhere and therefore sprawl, strip malls, and big box stores have taken over.

Phoenix is almost 3 times the size of Columbus and only has a slightly better skyline, I have a feeling Phoenix will be getting better in the next 20 years or so with the new light rail and the trend towards living in a more urban environment.

[nickw252]

I agree about San Francisco - beautiful skyline, very dense, numerous diverse neighborhoods and great public transportation.

[Clevelander17]

Originally Posted by nickw252

Hah both cities are way better than Tucson, AZ. It is slightly smaller than Columbus and has a skyline somewhere well below Toledo and a little better than Lima!

Everyone in Tucson would rather drive everywhere and therefore sprawl, strip malls, and big box stores have taken over.

Phoenix is almost 3 times the size of Columbus and only has a slightly better skyline, I have a feeling Phoenix will be getting better in the next 20 years or so with the new light rail and the trend towards living in a more urban environment.

The Phoenix rail is a waste--as soon as the novelty wears off it will be mostly useless. Much of the growth in Phoenix is still outward (think City North). I like Phoenix, but it's a city built on sprawl and it's not going to suddenly be able to go backwards.

[nickw252]

Originally Posted by Clevelander17

The Phoenix rail is a waste--as soon as the novelty wears off it will be mostly useless. Much of the growth in Phoenix is still outward (think City North). I like Phoenix, but it's a city built on sprawl and it's not going to suddenly be able to go backwards.

You couldn't be more wrong. In it's initial months the ridership was much higher than anticipated, when the hot summer came along people expected ridership to greatly fall but that never happened, and there are already plans and funding underway to expand it.

Phoenix does have way too much sprawl but it's downtown area along with other areas like Tempe are dense and have growing populations with numerous condo towers and lofts being built, AND Arizona State University just built a campus in downtown Phoenix along the Metro line and now has thousands of students there.

Additionally, there are many destinations along the rail that aren't going anywhere - the Suns' Arena, Diamondback's Stadium, the Airport, Arizona State University, and Arizona State University's Downtown Campus.

Lastly, the housing boom is over and gas prices aren't going any lower, the sprawl can't continue forever. Phoenix's METRO has a very bright future.

Cincinnati is getting on the trend of modern transit with Issue 9 (light rail & high speed rail) - I wish Columbus would get moving on that also - Mayor Coleman has already expressed interest, what's taking so long?

[Clevelander17]

Originally Posted by nickw252

You couldn't be more wrong. In it's initial months the ridership was much higher than anticipated, when the hot summer came along people expected ridership to greatly fall but that never happened, and there are already plans and funding underway to expand it.

The problem is for a metro area with as much sprawl as Phoenix has, it's difficult (and costly) to expand lines far enough to cover as much as needed to make sense (especially for a city as geographically gigantic as Phoenix). For instance the current line misses most of northeast Phoenix and the suburbs over there. My guess is that cuts out almost 1.5 million residents who have no real use for the light rail. Though realistically, I have an idea why they did that, as that area is the wealthier area of town.

I think you overestimate how useful rail can be in cities like Phoenix or Columbus that were built and experienced growth after the United States became reliant on the automobile. I've lived in Phoenix, and spend a lot of time in Columbus, and in both cases I just don't see either moving away from their car-dominant culture. I mean drastic changes would have to be made.

[Beavercreek33]

Originally Posted by Clevelander17

The problem is for a metro area with as much sprawl as Phoenix has, it's difficult (and costly) to expand lines far enough to cover as much as needed to make sense (especially for a city as geographically gigantic as Phoenix). For instance the current line misses most of northeast Phoenix and the suburbs over there. My guess is that cuts out almost 1.5 million residents who have no real use for the light rail. Though realistically, I have an idea why they did that, as that area is the wealthier area of town.

I think you overestimate how useful rail can be in cities like Phoenix or Columbus that were built and experienced growth after the United States became reliant on the automobile. I've lived in Phoenix, and spend a lot of time in Columbus, and in both cases I just don't see either moving away from their car-dominant culture. I mean drastic changes would have to be made.

I agree, but I could see Columbus much more than Phoenix. Columbus has a lot of diverse and intergrated neighborhoods in the city. Phoenix.... not so much.

Also, about the skyline. Phoenix is much larger than Columbus, and I still feel Columbus has a much better skyline. Cbus just needs some more density. Columbus actually has some diversity in its skyline, unlike Phoenix which is pretty much boxes.

[nickw252]

Originally Posted by Beavercreek33

Columbus actually has some diversity in its skyline, unlike Phoenix which is pretty much boxes.

That is a common complaint about Phoenix architecture - all the buildings look alike.

Also I agree with you about rail being more useful in Columbus because of it's density and diverse neighborhoods, and I believe it would be even more successful in Columbus than in Phoenix.

[nickw252]

Originally Posted by Clevelander17

The problem is for a metro area with as much sprawl as Phoenix has, it's difficult (and costly) to expand lines far enough to cover as much as needed to make sense (especially for a city as geographically gigantic as Phoenix). For instance the current line misses most of northeast Phoenix and the suburbs over there. My guess is that cuts out almost 1.5 million residents who have no real use for the light rail. Though realistically, I have an idea why they did that, as that area is the wealthier area of town.

I think you overestimate how useful rail can be in cities like Phoenix or Columbus that were built and experienced growth after the United States became reliant on the automobile. I've lived in Phoenix, and spend a lot of time in Columbus, and in both cases I just don't see either moving away from their car-dominant culture. I mean drastic changes would have to be made.

There are currently plans to expand the rail into Scotsdale in the Northeast.

And with all due respect - did you live in Phoenix a long time ago? A lot has changed recently.

[Clevelander17]

Originally Posted by nickw252

And with all due respect - did you live in Phoenix a long time ago? A lot has changed recently.

I lived in Phoenix (actually Scottsdale) as recently as May 2008. I still have family there. I won't claim to know a lot about most cities, but Phoenix is one of the few that I feel comfortable in getting involved in discussions about.