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.
I agree. People look too deep into Houston and how big it is; they simply forget how dense the inner loop is and how thats pretty much where everything is at.
It seems like Houstonians want to have their cake and eat it too. They will be quick to point out that the inner loop is where we should focus our attention in terms of density and urbanity, but then like to tout their city-proper population figure in all of it's 600 sq mile glory.
Location: Originally Fayetteville, Arkansas/ now Seattle, Washington!
1,047 posts, read 3,947,333 times
Reputation: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by toughguy
It seems like Houstonians want to have their cake and eat it too. They will be quick to point out that the inner loop is where we should focus our attention in terms of density and urbanity, but then like to tout their city-proper population figure in all of it's 600 sq mile glory.
Jesus thats alotta space! Lol i didn't realize exactly how much space Houston occupied!
It seems like Houstonians want to have their cake and eat it too. They will be quick to point out that the inner loop is where we should focus our attention in terms of density and urbanity, but then like to tout their city-proper population figure in all of it's 600 sq mile glory.
Ok ,wtf would you give a damn about the rest of Houston if your in the inner loop? Lets talk about Chicago outside of Downtown,or New Orleans out of The French Quarters. It makes no sense to actually worry about the size of a city!!!!!! If your in the right areas you'll have a great time; even NYC has its hellholes.
It's like "Houston was ok,but outside the loop it's nothing but sprawl and strip malls." Sorry but the last thing I worry about in a city while I'm there is it's sq miles and how dense it is.
I know it would be awful! Don't worry though, I'm not saying trees aren't a good thing! I was making the point that while many urban metros have trees, trees detract from a city whose sole intrest is urbanity, and therefore a comparison of urbanity is less limited within that context (because open fields, parks, etc., decrease density).
In some cities, such as Pittsburgh, trees just grow naturally. Cut them down, and they grow up again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by torchwoodchi
For me, to be truly urban there has to be some grittiness. New York, Chicago,
Boston, Detroit, Philly, etc. Imho, there are no "real" urban centers below the Mason Dixon line, or west of the Mississippi. But that's just my narrow view.
Apology accepted. It is also larger than Cincy and Cleveland. 2.4 million compared to about 2.1 for each of the above. I dunno, I just never have felt that Cincy was in the same league as many of these other cities, but maybe that's just me. The picutres posted here remind me somewhat of Pittsburgh, and I know they are a "major-league" city in the sense of having major league sports.
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.
But that's just my narrow view.
