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.
This brings me back to my variety point. People are comparing the Hill Country scenery to all of Atlanta MSA which tends to have a consistent tree canopy found throughout the Piedmont region. The further East you go in Austin, the bigger the trees are and the more greenery you see, especially in the main areas of Austin. One side of Austin will look different from the other.
This is true. Driving around in central and east Austin, it feels very "Atlanta-ish". West Austin feels very "California-esque". East and West Austin have a very different feel from one another. With East Austin feeling like it can be in the south eastern US and west Austin feeling like it can been in California or the Iberian Peninsula. Personally I think that's a big positive and not negative. There are not very many metro areas that have such a stark geographical contrast within a 10 mile drive of one side of the city to the other.
So the scenery comparison comes to one's personal preference, since it is a subjective matter. If the topic was "Which city has a denser tree canopy?", then it would clearly be Atlanta, because that is an objective subject. Both cities are beautiful in their own respective way and both cities will have a lot to do in their greater metro area. Atlanta has the foothills of the Appalachians, Chattahoochee with its camping, hiking, and biking, its rivers and lakes, and Austin has the Texas Hill Country with its camping, hiking and biking, Texas wine country, Bastrop State Park with its pine forests, and numerous lakes and rivers.
50 miles outside isn't atlanta anymore. I do respect your opinion though. Both cities are beautiful and both are the capital of their respective states.
You dont even have to go 30 and you have beautiful areas. Fifty was way too much but if you want to make teh argument that Atlantas do go often that far because of the mountains then I see why
This is true. Driving around in central and east Austin, it feels very "Atlanta-ish". West Austin feels very "California-esque". East and West Austin have a very different feel from one another. With East Austin feeling like it can be in the south eastern US and west Austin feeling like it can been in California or the Iberian Peninsula. Personally I think that's a big positive and not negative. There are not very many metro areas that have such a stark geographical contrast within a 10 mile drive of one side of the city to the other.
So the scenery comparison comes to one's personal preference, since it is a subjective matter. If the topic was "Which city has a denser tree canopy?", then it would clearly be Atlanta, because that is an objective subject. Both cities are beautiful in their own respective way and both cities will have a lot to do in their greater metro area. Atlanta has the foothills of the Appalachians, Chattahoochee with its camping, hiking, and biking, its rivers and lakes, and Austin has the Texas Hill Country with its camping, hiking and biking, Texas wine country, Bastrop State Park with its pine forests, and numerous lakes and rivers.
Scenery in other words is "scenic". Driving around Atlanta most people can tell Atlanta is a very scenic city. Focusing just on hills,trees,lakes and mountains doesnt show you how scenic a city is. Sure I would say Austin is more outdoorsy but that is not the same as being scenic necessarily
Scenery in other words is "scenic". Driving around Atlanta most people can tell Atlanta is a very scenic city. Focusing just on hills,trees,lakes and mountains doesnt show you how scenic a city is. Sure I would say Austin is more outdoorsy but that is not the same as being scenic necessarily
Have you been to Austin before?
To pick Atlanta is a reasonable opinion. To say that Austin is "not scenic" is demonstrating a lack of familiarity with the city.
Austin. Ive never seen anything in Atlanta that looks like Lake Travis. I was actually shocked how beautiful Austin was. It’s like a west coast city trapped in the south.
More than half of the places there aren't in Atlanta.... Almost every one of my links are within 5 minutes of downtown Austin.
YAll are funny.
As I said before,Austin city limits is 319 aq miles. If Atlanta was only 250 sq mi it would have a lot that is not in its city limits now.There was no distinction made if we were discussing metro areas or sity propers
I bet most of the people going to these places drive there in Austin as they do in Atlanta. Even though Atlanta you can go to some of these attractions using MARTA
So whats the point is if you have to drive 5 minutes or 20 minutes if these sites are more used?
Where in all of Austin is there an outdoor attraction as popular or as visited as Stone Mountain?Chattahoochee National Recreational Area? Or even Piedmont Park?
Which for some reason we are leaving out parks. Austin doesnt have as good parks as Atlanta
Every metros scenic attractions are only as good as how well they are used. Atlanta has attractions that people come from around the region to go to. So even though some of Atlantas attractions are further out,they are just as well used or more. Thats all that matters. Only yall on CD need to make an irrelevant point that has no bearing whatsoever on how these areas are used in their respective metros
YAll are funny.
As I said before,Austin city limits is 319 aq miles. If Atlanta was only 250 sq mi it would have a lot that is not in its city limits now.There was no distinction made if we were discussing metro areas or sity propers
I bet most of the people going to these places drive there in Austin as they do in Atlanta. Even though Atlanta you can go to some of these attractions using MARTA
So whats the point is if you have to drive 5 minutes or 20 minutes if these sites are more used?
Where in all of Austin is there an outdoor attraction as popular or as visited as Stone Mountain?Chattahoochee National Recreational Area? Or even Piedmont Park?
Which for some reason we are leaving out parks. Austin doesnt have as good parks as Atlanta
Every metros scenic attractions are only as good as how well they are used. Atlanta has attractions that people come from around the region to go to. So even though some of Atlantas attractions are further out,they are just as well used or more. Thats all that matters. Only yall on CD need to make an irrelevant point that has no bearing whatsoever on how these areas are used in their respective metros
Its obvious you know nothing of which you speak as far as Austin goes. Austin has some of the most beautiful parks. Zilker Park, Barton Creek, Roy Guerrero, Emma Long, Walnut Creek. Austin even has a state park within the city, Mckinney Falls. Austin has hundreds if not thousands of miles of trails and greenbelts within the city and right along downtown. Austin also has awesome natural pools within the city, Barton Springs and Deep Eddy. People come from all over the world to Zilker Park and Barton Springs. People come from across the state for Mckinney Falls, Emma Long, and Lake Travis.
The fact of the matter is, every large city has numerous parks and regional natural attractions. For you to try and convey that it's unique to Atlanta, and it's surrounding areas is ridiculous.
Last edited by gabetx; 11-22-2020 at 12:37 AM..
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.
