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.
lol I don't hate trees. And you can love living in the forest all you want, but that will only support so much density and that's the truth.
Its not a bad thing, it's actually a good thing in my lover of nature eyes.
In a lot of cities trees look like a designing element or an after thought.
In Atlanta it looks the opposite. It looks like they designed the city in relation to trees.
The other cities pack houses in as jam-packed as possible, then there might be room for a solitary tree in the corner somewhere strategically placed or the more common line of the same type of tree that the developer put in because the first thing they did was wipe out every last tree.
And in Atlanta it isn't just a few neighborhoods, the entire metro is nicely covered in trees.
I mean it is delightful for such a populated metro to be as forested from naturalist standpoint; but from an urbanism standpoint the crappy version with the perfectly straight line of tiny trees is the more optimal design.
In not saying that Atlanta doesn't have is areas with the monoculture of tiny trees, but that's the exception and not the rule.
Even in Houston, which has a fairly decent tree cover, the residential areas generally follow the minimalistic approach.
I know too that in some areas people don't want to take on the liability of wind damaging roofs. Especially in high hurricane/tornado areas
Cumberland, Vinings, Sandy Springs, The Battery - there's development and also a lot of walkable "town downtown" areas.
Yep that's about it the rest of the area is mostly low density. And places like the battery, other mixed use developments or "town downtowns" are all over DFW. Those developments are not unique to Atlanta, along with higher density residential.
Lol, and Atlanta votes are still going up.
I don't think people read what is being asked, or even care.
They see Atlanta and the south and immediately go with that
Ain't nothing wrong with that, but to turn around and vote for it as most urban is homerism tho
Not really. Urban isn't the same thing as density in many peoples eyes, including mine. Atlanta proves that it is absolutely possible to be urban AND green.
Yep that's about it the rest of the area is mostly low density. And places like the battery, other mixed use developments or "town downtowns" are all over DFW. Those developments are not unique to Atlanta, along with higher density residential.
Please point to the posts where anyone claimed these areas are unique to Atlanta, I seem to have missed them.
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.
