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.
How about tyson's? It's denser, and as far as I know the most dense business district in all of NoVa - but it's certainly not walkable just yet.
I prefer to keep city for incorporated cities (at least in the US) while I accept in theory that an unincorparated place could be a city, I dont know of any that are, yet. As you point out, Tysons today does not resemble a downtown (whether it will by 2050, I do not know, though I hope it will). And even if it does, a city is more than a downtown - its a downtown plus surrounding areas that usually gradually step down in density, or in other ways show the centrality of downtown. Tysons is surrounded by low density suburbs, and the road network, the density gradient, etc are still more about the location of the metro core in downtown DC then they are about Tysons, despite Tysons huge gravitational pull.
Well it's still going to be boring, that much I know.
I assume you mean in layout and design. There's already loads of retail, movies, restaurants, and I think a few bars and clubs (I dont follow those so much) It defintely needs more in the way of arts venues, parks, and similar public facilities. It lacks the kind of layout (and even after densifing it will) for hip retail - all the walkable retail will be new and will command too high rents.
Whether it will become walkable - I think the individual sectors of it stand a good chance, but crossing 7 and 123 will be issues.
I assume you mean in layout and design. There's already loads of retail, movies, restaurants, and I think a few bars and clubs (I dont follow those so much) It defintely needs more in the way of arts venues, parks, and similar public facilities. It lacks the kind of layout (and even after densifing it will) for hip retail - all the walkable retail will be new and will command too high rents.
I think I meant as far as nightlife is concerned. The DC social scene is quite boring (to me), and Arlington is even worse. I expect Saturday nights in TC to be an even weaker distillation. Similar-dressed young defense contractors networking at a now-walkable Houlihan's or something.
I prefer to keep city for incorporated cities (at least in the US) while I accept in theory that an unincorparated place could be a city, I dont know of any that are, yet.
Columbia, MD. Technically it's an overgrown homeowner's association.
Returning to the original subject, we have two mega-trends: (1) the US population will keep growing rapidly, and (2) escalating cost of energy will make long private automotive commutes ever more expensive. Even if city-cores fall out of fashion as today's youth become tomorrow's middle-aged parents, it'd doubtful that we'll reprise the trends of the 1950s-1980s, with mass flight from cities to suburbs. First, there isn't enough space left to build new suburbs, unless people accept 50-mile commutes. And second, they won't be able to afford those commutes.
Population growth seems to be slowing down; the US total fertility is around 1.9 at the moment - down from 2.1 a few years ago. That's actually at the same level as France and a few other European countries. Basically, fewer younger people are having kids, fewer are getting married, and childlessness is rising among women in their 40's, which is usually considered a demographic cutoff point after which they are unlikely to bear children at all.
This is an interesting trend. If suburbanization is driven at least in part by concerns over schools and yard space, a lack of kids would presumably reduce the desire to suburbanize.
And it's actually possible to have a declining national population while the major cities become even more populated. We see this in Japan; the countryside is losing young people to the big cities and losing old people via attrition. The population loss is not visible if you only visit the cities. They, in fact, continue to grow steadily.
Returning to the original subject, we have two mega-trends: (1) the US population will keep growing rapidly, and (2) escalating cost of energy will make long private automotive commutes ever more expensive. Even if city-cores fall out of fashion as today's youth become tomorrow's middle-aged parents, it'd doubtful that we'll reprise the trends of the 1950s-1980s, with mass flight from cities to suburbs. First, there isn't enough space left to build new suburbs, unless people accept 50-mile commutes. And second, they won't be able to afford those commutes.
1) is not going to happen. See the post below yours.
2) may not happen either. Electric cars and hybrids are becoming mainstream.
2) may not happen either. Electric cars and hybrids are becoming mainstream.
And internal combustion only cars keep getting more efficient as well. As an example Ford is bringing out a 1000cc 3 cylinder turbo Fiesta this year and Chevy a diesel Cruze. And guys like me who used to drive big V-8 Crown Vics are now driving 4 cylinder Focuses and such.
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.
