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.
Interesting. I thought of these and came up with my list based on yours. Mine turned out totally different. I lived in New York and Madrid for many years and miss terribly the close proximity of people, friends, the constant get-togethers. It's uplifting.
- Some space on the street somewhere, or a little parking lot somewhere to park my car;
- Just enough space to entertain my family and friends;
- I'm not into outdoor cooking - Viva Italian and Spanish food! Yum!;
- I don't care if people live upstairs;
- I like row houses, brownstones, condos, and anything that creates great density of population, so joined walls are fine with me;
- I don't mind an elevator but I'd rather be on the first floor;
- I would rather have cafes and coffee shops downstairs to hang out at, and street parties, and friends I could sit with at the entrance of the building, homes, etc. and chat with, and people constantly dropping by, and places nearby to go dance and listen to music. I don't want to listen to loud music alone, just as I don't like drinking alone;
- Taxes are what keep the country from turning into a gigantic hovel;
- I opted not to have kids, so schools are not a big issue for me, though I'm not against sufficient taxation to make public schools good.
Your post and mine are examples of why we need both suburban and urban environments. The attitude of many (but not all) urbanists seems to be that mankind must live in dense environments for the good of all. Well it isn't good for all.
Your post and mine are examples of why we need both suburban and urban environments. The attitude of many (but not all) urbanists seems to be that mankind must live in dense environments for the good of all. Well it isn't good for all.
It would be easier for democrats and republicans to agree on a fiscal policy before you ever get urbanist to agree on that statement.
That's it! That's what I long for, the pulse of a vibrant, alive city, something you do not find in any suburb.
LOL! You should go to the downtown of my suburban city, especially on a Friday night in the summer. There is a free concert, a "street fair"; there are so many people that this year they have procured some pedicabs to take people from far-out parking. Then the farmer's market is Saturday. Public transportation, too. And more.
Is your town walkable? I live in a small city that has lots of events, but it's just simply not walkable. We can't use our feet for anything. Everything requires driving here, driving there, driving everywhere, and as for public transport, don't look there, it's dismal.
I guess I grew used to NYC, Madrid, and other such places where there was such density that you could walk anywhere. For ex., any neighborhood in Madrid has a doctor, supermarket, and any other store you could want within a short walking distance, so everyone walks around. There are always people outside, there are sidewalks everywhere, everyone knows neighbors, and everyone takes the time to know everyone's needs and so on. For ex., if I ran out of eggs, I literally stuck my head out my window, called out to my neighbors and asked if anyone could "lend" me some eggs. Someone would answer. lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
LOL! You should go to the downtown of my suburban city, especially on a Friday night in the summer. There is a free concert, a "street fair"; there are so many people that this year they have procured some pedicabs to take people from far-out parking. Then the farmer's market is Saturday. Public transportation, too. And more.
I would live in the city if there were ample free surface parking for businesses, wider roads to accommodate cars, more chain stores that I frequent, less crime, and less hassle.
Is your town walkable? I live in a small city that has lots of events, but it's just simply not walkable. We can't use our feet for anything. Everything requires driving here, driving there, driving everywhere, and as for public transport, don't look there, it's dismal.
I guess I grew used to NYC, Madrid, and other such places where there was such density that you could walk anywhere. For ex., any neighborhood in Madrid has a doctor, supermarket, and any other store you could want within a short walking distance, so everyone walks around. There are always people outside, there are sidewalks everywhere, everyone knows neighbors, and everyone takes the time to know everyone's needs and so on. For ex., if I ran out of eggs, I literally stuck my head out my window, called out to my neighbors and asked if anyone could "lend" me some eggs. Someone would answer. lol
Yes, my town is "walkable". What small town isn't? I'm surprised your small city isn't walkable.
Anyway, you were talking about "shopping, pubs/taverns, a farmers market, public transportation, and the like", not walkability.
I would live in the city if there were ample free surface parking for businesses, wider roads to accommodate cars, more chain stores that I frequent, less crime, and less hassle.
Sounds a lot like "I'd go on a diet if I could eat cheeseburgers and chocolate cake every day and not gain weight." A lot of these hypothetical "Would you X if you are a Y?" questions don't take into account the sort of compromises and trade-offs that people have to make in real life. So, in the case of this forum, the responses turn into "I'd live in a city if it was a suburb" or "I'd live in the suburbs if it was a city" or some variant thereof--along with loud proclamations that other posters stop trying to turn the suburbs into cities (or cities into suburbs.)
Problem is, of course, that there aren't any diets that let you eat chocolate cake and cheeseburgers every day (unless, of course, your objective is to gain weight.) But what's obvious for diets isn't obvious in city planning.
Sounds a lot like "I'd go on a diet if I could eat cheeseburgers and chocolate cake every day and not gain weight." A lot of these hypothetical "Would you X if you are a Y?" questions don't take into account the sort of compromises and trade-offs that people have to make in real life. So, in the case of this forum, the responses turn into "I'd live in a city if it was a suburb" or "I'd live in the suburbs if it was a city" or some variant thereof--along with loud proclamations that other posters stop trying to turn the suburbs into cities (or cities into suburbs.)
Problem is, of course, that there aren't any diets that let you eat chocolate cake and cheeseburgers every day (unless, of course, your objective is to gain weight.) But what's obvious for diets isn't obvious in city planning.
Well i moved to the surburbs because of schools and crime. Should I compromise those two just to live in the city?
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.
Someone would answer. lol 
