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 02-14-2014, 08:31 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,538,049 times
Reputation: 7830

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pvande55 View Post
Pedestrian malls created by closing streets.
High-rise public housing
Stadia used for both baseball and football.
UrbanRail.Net > North America > USA > Michigan > Detroit Peoplemover
I know, some will say the whole City of Detroit is a perfect example of bad urban planning.
Ironically Detroit started out as a well planned city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-14-2014, 10:35 PM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,717,097 times
Reputation: 2538
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Ironically Detroit started out as a well planned city.
Very well...until about 1946. But they built every freeway project the DOT ever asked of them. And each one had expressways of wealth leaving the city for the suburbs.

The fine grid network it use to have supported 2 million people. Now it's a city of far less than half that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 11:11 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,538,049 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
Very well...until about 1946. But they built every freeway project the DOT ever asked of them. And each one had expressways of wealth leaving the city for the suburbs.

The fine grid network it use to have supported 2 million people. Now it's a city of far less than half that.
Basically going with destroying their city with freeways was the beginning of the end for Detroit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 11:26 PM
 
Location: Pac. NW
2,021 posts, read 1,524,358 times
Reputation: 3601
Medford, Or. I-5 goes through the middle of town, and it's a spagetti bowl mess to get on and off. Lots of one way streets, etc.

The Biddle Road exit is the strangest most elaborate design I've ever seen. Nearly imposible to take that exit without getting lost.

The freeway is a big elephant smack dab in the middle of town that everyone has to zig-zag through, over and around. A couple of miles down the road in Ashland, they built the town west of the freeway, far enough away so on-off ramps could be built with lots of room.

Appleton, Wi has a river in the middle of town, and the bridge situation is lame.

Phoenix, Az is the biggest example of sprawl I've ever seen. Takes FOREVER to get anywhere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 11:32 PM
 
Location: Pac. NW
2,021 posts, read 1,524,358 times
Reputation: 3601
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Neighborhoods are always changing, and in Portland the available apartment occupancy is extremely low therefore filling these new units isn't going to be a challenge. Plus these buildings are being built along major transportation routes which can potentially mean more transit riders and the need for more transit which is good for Portland transit system.

And with a city that is fully developed like Portland, not every home is going to make it, occasionally they do get torn down or moved to other locations.

Overall Portland is a great example of urban planning for a city in the US.
I agree. Portland is one of the few towns with intersecting rivers that has enough bridges. The airport is far enough away from everything, and it's very clean for a city it's size.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2014, 01:31 AM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,697 posts, read 23,676,966 times
Reputation: 35449
Nobody gets hung up on the tearing down of decaying old structures to make way for new ones to accommodate present housing needs as long as those needs are met. Some people like to use that excuse as a smoke screen to cover up the real issue. The trouble is in Portland, the housing needs are being met for only a few; the few with the most money.

Everyone agreed that urban planners did the right thing when they planned to have an entire block of ramshackle retail structures and rickety old homes a couple of miles away from where I live torn down. They were to be replaced with a large apartment building earmarked for middle income housing which Portland so desperately needs. Everyone was happy to get rid of the eyesores and have a nice new building in its place.

It got a lot of press at the time a few years ago. But unfortunately, when the building was finished, it was instead turned into yet another high income residence far out of the reach of any middle income person. Only partly full, it is still seeking new tenants more than a year later. It has a lot of competition from the other high priced buildings in the area that were already there not to mention the more fancy apartments that are available for the same rent downtown only about ten minutes away.

It's a nice enough looking building in typical cookie cutter new building Portland style and the apartments themselves are typically small but modern and look good. However, those who can afford them can get more bang for their buck in better areas and nicer buildings. These really would have been ideal for the middle income people for whom they were first supposed to be built.

With all the new apartment buildings, Portland still has a small vacancy rate of less than 3%. The apartments are there, they are just not affordable to many who need them. So with all the new apartment buildings being built, people are still going without places to live and our vacancy rate still remains very, very low. The majority of people who need them simply cannot afford them.

Other than that, we do have some very nice bridges here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2014, 03:13 AM
 
8,287 posts, read 11,838,765 times
Reputation: 4948
Quote:
Originally Posted by hurricaneMan1992 View Post
Miami, FL. How many cities that you know of have large surface parking lots adjacent to their busiest Metro station and make people walk 2 blocks for bus transfers, which are located under a highway access ramp?
I think you really are throwing Miami and it's suburbs under a bus! It is a very well planned city and metro compared to the disasters in the rest of the south.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2014, 06:56 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,538,049 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minervah View Post
Nobody gets hung up on the tearing down of decaying old structures to make way for new ones to accommodate present housing needs as long as those needs are met. Some people like to use that excuse as a smoke screen to cover up the real issue. The trouble is in Portland, the housing needs are being met for only a few; the few with the most money.

Everyone agreed that urban planners did the right thing when they planned to have an entire block of ramshackle retail structures and rickety old homes a couple of miles away from where I live torn down. They were to be replaced with a large apartment building earmarked for middle income housing which Portland so desperately needs. Everyone was happy to get rid of the eyesores and have a nice new building in its place.

It got a lot of press at the time a few years ago. But unfortunately, when the building was finished, it was instead turned into yet another high income residence far out of the reach of any middle income person. Only partly full, it is still seeking new tenants more than a year later. It has a lot of competition from the other high priced buildings in the area that were already there not to mention the more fancy apartments that are available for the same rent downtown only about ten minutes away.

It's a nice enough looking building in typical cookie cutter new building Portland style and the apartments themselves are typically small but modern and look good. However, those who can afford them can get more bang for their buck in better areas and nicer buildings. These really would have been ideal for the middle income people for whom they were first supposed to be built.

With all the new apartment buildings, Portland still has a small vacancy rate of less than 3%. The apartments are there, they are just not affordable to many who need them. So with all the new apartment buildings being built, people are still going without places to live and our vacancy rate still remains very, very low. The majority of people who need them simply cannot afford them.

Other than that, we do have some very nice bridges here.
If the apartment vacancy rate is low then that means someone is renting in these new buildings.

Portland rental market continues to raise rents | kgw.com Portland

Rents have been going up because of the limited supply of apartments, not because these new apartments are high priced, which often times the high prices of new apartments is used to cover the cost of construction and to make the building more profitable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2014, 08:24 AM
 
Location: Michigan
4,571 posts, read 7,037,464 times
Reputation: 3599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
Very well...until about 1946. But they built every freeway project the DOT ever asked of them. And each one had expressways of wealth leaving the city for the suburbs.

The fine grid network it use to have supported 2 million people. Now it's a city of far less than half that.
The grid network had nothing to do with the population. Which actually, your assertion makes no sense because the grid network extends into the suburbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2014, 08:33 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,990 posts, read 41,998,698 times
Reputation: 14810
Quote:
Originally Posted by animatedmartian View Post
The grid network had nothing to do with the population. Which actually, your assertion makes no sense because the grid network extends into the suburbs.
Under that logic, Boston's lack of a grid and narrower streets should support less population. Even more so with London.
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
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

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