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.
Aren't there like a hundred threads that compare Atlanta, Houston and Dallas against eachother? Can this debate be taken to one of those instead?
I don't like to interject like this but this tangent has gone on for pages now and every time I see an update in this thread I'm disappointed to find more banter about ATL vs. HOU.
There should be very little doubt that Houston, Atlanta and just about every city in the country (with few exceptions) is going to have predominately single family homes within its boundaries. Most of Chicago is SFH's, for example. In that pic, the areas that aren't SFH's aren't primarily multi-family homes either, but rather office and industrial uses.
I can't think of many cities where there are numerous square miles of high-intensity residential uses, like rowhomes, apartments, mid-rises and hi-rises (Some that come to mind include: NYC, SF, Chicago, Boston, Philly, Baltimore, LA, Miami, DC).
Most of the loop is still single family homes and suburban...so stop using the loop as if it's Houston's inner urban core. Atlanta still has a more cohesive, walkable urban core than Houston. Most people who've been to both cities know this.
I'm not impressed with Midtown Houston and I don't consider it a relatively cohesive urban neighborhood like Atlanta's Midtown. I also don't consider TWC to be Houston's urban core.
Hahaha, tmc is not in the Houston core? It's like four miles from downtown. Just stop it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by emcee squared
Here is Houston inside Loop 610. From the air, it looks to be at least 50% single-family homes.
Of course most are. It's no different than Atlanta are the majority of cities. a lot of those single family homes though have been subdivided into apartments. Plus, there are a lot of new townhomes that have replaced many older cottage homes.
Of course most are. It's no different than Atlanta are the majority of cities. a lot of those single family homes though have been subdivided into apartments. Plus, there are a lot of new townhomes that have replaced many older cottage homes.
At least it's becoming more dense. I felt a picture would be nice to see, instead of people arguing back and forth over nothing.
There should be very little doubt that Houston, Atlanta and just about every city in the country (with few exceptions) is going to have predominately single family homes within its boundaries. Most of Chicago is SFH's, for example. In that pic, the areas that aren't SFH's aren't primarily multi-family homes either, but rather office and industrial uses.
I can't think of many cities where there are numerous square miles of high-intensity residential uses, like rowhomes, apartments, mid-rises and hi-rises (Some that come to mind include: NYC, SF, Chicago, Boston, Philly, Baltimore, LA, Miami, DC).
? Single family homes, bungalows here, are 25% of the housing stock.
Hahaha, tmc is not in the Houston core? It's like four miles from downtown. Just stop it.
Of course most are. It's no different than Atlanta are the majority of cities. a lot of those single family homes though have been subdivided into apartments. Plus, there are a lot of new townhomes that have replaced many older cottage homes.
Yeah and I guess everything between downtown and TMC is one continuous long streetwall and urban development.
Midtown Atlanta, literally 1/10,000th of the Atlanta metro, is probably more "urban" in a traditional sense than anything in Houston, or Dallas, and I even prefer it to the denser Brickell Ave in Miami. However, overall, both the City of Houston and the Houston Metro are *significantly* more dense than either the City of Atlanta or metro Atlanta as a whole. Houston has a grid and continuous 6,000+ ppsm density, as well as a smattering of far more random high rises in all directions around the city. It's simply a bigger place and anyone who has been to both knows this. If you took Fort Worth/Arlington away from Dallas, it would be easy to say that Houston is a larger city than Dallas, too. This is evident in person. Downtown Houston, which can swallow up DT Atlanta + Midtown Atlanta, easily, may be more "dead" than Midtown Atlanta (for now), but Midtown Atlanta feels comparatively "dead" to anyone arriving from a smattering of other cities. So those of us who live in one of those other cities laugh at this whole pointless debate.
The end.
Now moving on because when you start debating which area of Houston, Atlanta, Dallas, Phoenix, etc is more urban and more dense, you really start wasting time.
Midtown Atlanta, literally 1/10,000th of the Atlanta metro, is probably more "urban" in a traditional sense than anything in Houston, or Dallas, and I even prefer it to the denser Brickell Ave in Miami. However, overall, both the City of Houston and the Houston Metro are *significantly* more dense than either the City of Atlanta or metro Atlanta as a whole. Houston has a grid and continuous 6,000+ ppsm density, as well as a smattering of far more random high rises in all directions around the city. It's simply a bigger place and anyone who has been to both knows this. If you took Fort Worth/Arlington away from Dallas, it would be easy to say that Houston is a larger city than Dallas, too. This is evident in person. Downtown Houston, which can swallow up DT Atlanta + Midtown Atlanta, easily, may be more "dead" than Midtown Atlanta (for now), but Midtown Atlanta feels comparatively "dead" to anyone arriving from a smattering of other cities. So those of us who live in one of those other cities laugh at this whole pointless debate.
The end.
Now moving on because when you start debating which area of Houston, Atlanta, Dallas, Phoenix, etc is more urban and more dense, you really start wasting time.
If you took north Houston away from south Houston, Dallas is bigger. If you took all of Atlanta's suburbs away from it's metro, Fort Worth is bigger. If you took Cook County away from Chicagoland, Houston is bigger. If's are irrelevant, just take things for what they are. And Fort Worth and Arlington aren't even in the city of Dallas, they are their own municipalities.
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.
