U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-25-2013, 04:02 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,018,497 times
Reputation: 1349

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maine7090 View Post
With more people no longer working in manufacturing jobs and even traditional office jobs the need for people to live in densely packed business centers are no longer valid. It cost much more to build up then out and most Cities have huge financial liabilities. I think development should focus on sprawl outside and around the old cities in separate towns that have no tax liability to the cities themselves.
Even in service work, people need to be connected. If companies like Facebook, Google, and Apple are all creating workspaces in the SF Bay area which further concentrate employees and force them to interact, I'd say it's worth re-evaluating your premise. I'm not saying that these tech giants are right, but their actions should give pause for reflection.

Cheap, easy, reliable, high-fidelity SOHO video conferencing still hasn't reached a tipping point that would facilitate decentralization like you suggest. Video conferencing needs, and doesn't yet have, what the iPhone was for smart phones, Google Hangouts and Facetime notwithstanding.

But, ignoring the technology and employment aspects, it is in our interests to consolidate our cities, focusing on developing walkable places that reduce (we're not going to eliminate the need) ownership of private automobiles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-25-2013, 04:16 PM
 
Location: Michigan
4,571 posts, read 7,074,851 times
Reputation: 3600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maine7090 View Post
We should do what is best for people, not whats best for the "city"
It's in the best interests for the whole metropolitan region because in the real modern world, cities are not islands of themselves. Cities are connected globally and a whole region can lose out on productivity if there's no centralization for outside businesses to connect to.

No smart company is going to show up to a city and spend hours going all over the metro to have meetings. That's a waste of resources and time. Even with modern technology, you still have to transport raw goods and people, and longer distances for them to travel costs even more money over time than it does to build a densely packed city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:04 PM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,739,536 times
Reputation: 2538
Dense cities create interest, opportunities and efficiencies. They are far more pleasant places to live, work and play in, and, with rare exceptions command enormous premiums over suburban sprawl due to a whole host of factors that people prefer. If you look at a single metric (cost per SF to build) you completely distort reality and miss the big picture...but then, its pretty clear that's exactly the intent of your little series of posts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:14 PM
 
Location: Monmouth County, NJ & Staten Island, NY
407 posts, read 410,011 times
Reputation: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
They are far more pleasant places to live, work and play in
...in your opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 03:16 AM
 
90 posts, read 76,971 times
Reputation: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maine7090 View Post
With more people no longer working in manufacturing jobs and even traditional office jobs the need for people to live in densely packed business centers are no longer valid. It cost much more to build up then out and most Cities have huge financial liabilities. I think development should focus on sprawl outside and around the old cities in separate towns that have no tax liability to the cities themselves.
trolololol!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 06:21 AM
 
5,747 posts, read 8,837,817 times
Reputation: 4970
Quote:
99% of the country is already covered in sprawl.
You are being as silly as the OP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 09:34 AM
 
1,750 posts, read 2,907,250 times
Reputation: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maine7090 View Post
It cost much more to build up then out
This is false.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 12:02 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,018,497 times
Reputation: 1349
Quote:
Originally Posted by prelude91 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maine7090 View Post
It cost much more to build up then out
This is false.
I remember an econ. prof. lamenting that it was silly that we built cities up beyond a point, because the cost of density overcame the sum of the benefits of it. So, I'm not sure it's entirely false, only that it isn't true across the spectrum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 06:38 PM
 
12,341 posts, read 15,307,306 times
Reputation: 8157
Densely populated cities are good for large projects, bringing people together. It works best when there is a comprehensive rail network that can bring people in from the whole metro. Typically suburban sprawl office parks can only draw from that suburban market.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 06:58 PM
 
9,531 posts, read 14,962,755 times
Reputation: 9782
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvande55 View Post
Densely populated cities are good for large projects, bringing people together. It works best when there is a comprehensive rail network that can bring people in from the whole metro. Typically suburban sprawl office parks can only draw from that suburban market.
That is certainly not true. There is nothing about an suburban office park which prevents people from driving in from far away, and indeed they do. For a while I was driving from Collegeville, PA to an office park in Newtown, PA, about 50 miles away. Took me about 50 minutes. It takes me an hour (mostly by rail) to get from my place in suburban New Jersey to my office in New York City, which is 15 miles away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:09 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top