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.
@ adavi215, I don't know lol your post just seemed weird to me. Like mentioning Houston's highway system in my opinion doesn't make a city feel more urban or bigger. And saying that sprawl enhances urbanity doesn't really make much sense. I think the more sprawl the less urbanity, because the more room you have to build out instead of up.
@ adavi215, I don't know lol your post just seemed weird to me. Like mentioning Houston's highway system in my opinion doesn't make a city feel more urban or bigger. And saying that sprawl enhances urbanity doesn't really make much sense. I think the more sprawl the less urbanity, because the more room you have to build out instead of up.
Ok, now I see. Allow me to explain. I think it is common sense to note podunk towns aren't going to have extensive highway systems. Highway systems are designed to move large amounts of commuters quickly. Which would mean a large population is apparent in this area. So an extensive highway system, in essence, has the common goal of public transportation in that one basic aim is to relieve congestion. Now this point will be attack, as I understand. But this is why more public transportation infrastructure is built and highways are created/widened is to relieve congestion. This is not going to ahppen in a small town.
Sprawl enhancing urbanity. Essentially what I'm saying is that going from one development to another, especially like TMC, to Galleria, to Downtown, etc., can seem like the city never ends and that there are multiple foci of attention in the city. Compared to a huge concentration of activity that fizzles as you go from the center. Does that make more sense?
I understand what you're saying, but both Seattle's and Houston's CBD are roughly the same. I think Houston;s is bigger by buildings and office space, but for argument's sake I'll say they're the same. Then you throw in the other skylines/business districs/entertainment disrtricts of Houston and I hope you see what I'm saying.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,060,466 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by adavi215
Ok, now I see. Allow me to explain. I think it is common sense to note podunk towns aren't going to have extensive highway systems. Highway systems are designed to move large amounts of commuters quickly. Which would mean a large population is apparent in this area. So an extensive highway system, in essence, has the common goal of public transportation in that one basic aim is to relieve congestion. Now this point will be attack, as I understand. But this is why more public transportation infrastructure is built and highways are created/widened is to relieve congestion. This is not going to ahppen in a small town.
Sprawl enhancing urbanity. Essentially what I'm saying is that going from one development to another, especially like TMC, to Galleria, to Downtown, etc., can seem like the city never ends and that there are multiple foci of attention in the city. Compared to a huge concentration of activity that fizzles as you go from the center. Does that make more sense?
I understand what you're saying, but both Seattle's and Houston's CBD are roughly the same. I think Houston;s is bigger by buildings and office space, but for argument's sake I'll say they're the same. Then you throw in the other skylines/business districs/entertainment disrtricts of Houston and I hope you see what I'm saying.
Sprawl kind of spreads out a low density sort of urbanness, but I think what the OP was talking about was vibrant inner-city business (or maybe that should be busyness?) which is clearly more apparent in areas with higher density. Sheer mass doesn't really factor in, as we could see with pre-90s LA which was one gigantic suburb.
The majority of downtown Houston is dead during those times but various parts are still "jumping" with clubs, bars, and parks. However, I fail to see why downtown should represent an entire city when you have tons of other interesting areas scattered around the city. If you came to Houston and stayed downtown expecting to have a good time; you failed to do your research and you're the only one to blame for that.
I have been to Houston too numerous times to count and rarely stay or go out downtwon, learned that very quickly, there are areas of interest but I do not like how spread out and isolated they feel.
Call me ignorant, but how can a city having multiple skylines be considered less urban than a city with one dense skyline? Seattle may have better public trans, I'll give that for arguments sake, but it's not like Houston is Spokane or McAllen. It is vastly improving in this regard. And allow us to look at the highways. From what I hear, the highway system in Houston is just purely remarkeable.
And back to the skyline, Houston's CBD is by no means a slouch in density, height, nor architectural design. I voted Houston because of its sheer size. Even though it is immense and sprawled, I think this sprawl is actually a way that enhances its urbanity. If that makes any sense.
Tall building and highways seem to me like they have zero to do with how urban a place it, actually I mostly associate highways with the burbs and the space between cities, that being said they usually are in cities, but more urban cities seem to hide them better, if not done properly they take away from urbanity like moats around a castle. On the buildings, they mostly seem impressive from a disatnce and not at the street level, I care far more about what is at street level
Ok, now I see. Allow me to explain. I think it is common sense to note podunk towns aren't going to have extensive highway systems. Highway systems are designed to move large amounts of commuters quickly. Which would mean a large population is apparent in this area. So an extensive highway system, in essence, has the common goal of public transportation in that one basic aim is to relieve congestion. Now this point will be attack, as I understand. But this is why more public transportation infrastructure is built and highways are created/widened is to relieve congestion. This is not going to ahppen in a small town.
I would argue that extensive highway systems are somewhat at odds with public transportation. I think rail (heavy or light) and buses (on city streets) promote PT, and heavy highway systems suggest that there is more dependence on everyone driving their own cars.
I agree that smaller cities don't have huge highway systems, but I don't think that provides a big city "feel" for the most part. Sure, driving in, you see a lot of people, but that's more relevant to the metro area. What gives a big city feel to me, is block after block of street-facing retail, strong PT, tons of foot-traffic, etc.
Sprawl enhancing urbanity. Essentially what I'm saying is that going from one development to another, especially like TMC, to Galleria, to Downtown, etc., can seem like the city never ends and that there are multiple foci of attention in the city. Compared to a huge concentration of activity that fizzles as you go from the center. Does that make more sense?
Sprawl enhancing urbanity. Essentially what I'm saying is that going from one development to another, especially like TMC, to Galleria, to Downtown, etc., can seem like the city never ends and that there are multiple foci of attention in the city. Compared to a huge concentration of activity that fizzles as you go from the center. Does that make more sense?
This to me this describes a suburban composition, just maybe on a larger scale, but this is how suburbs look, multiple focal points with moderate fill in between. I think the part that confuses you is there are tall buildings. It looks like NOVA with taller buildings is all. No one thinks of NOVA as the city but the same composition in other places is, why because they don't have a real core and lack a higher level of urbanity. But in reality they look feel and appear as large expanses of suburban development. Is Tysons Corner the city? Tysons could be plopped in the middle of Houston and everyone would say hey look a new a downtown but it isn't, it is the intersections of many highways with a concentration of office buildings and malls etc. hell Tysons even has feeder roads of a sort
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.
