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.
Just my personal opinion but Houston has more distinct neighborhoods within it's core than what I've seen in Dallas. Dallas core is just more connected with one another than Houston's core.
Uh oh......this will be hard to convince.....I guess distinct is a broad term....I guess what I mean is Dallas core neighborhoods have distinct difference in character......I guessMORE DISTINCT could also mean the number of neighborhoods.
Uh oh......this will be hard to convince.....I guess distinct is a broad term....I guess what I mean is Dallas core neighborhoods have distinct difference in character......I guessMORE DISTINCT could also mean the number of neighborhoods.
Examples of Character:
*St.Thomas Neighborhood- The Street the Cosby's lived on
*West Village Neighborhood- Looks and feels like a shopping district in San Francisco...Kinda
*General Uptown Dallas neighborhood- Posh, new AA class office space and Residential.
*VICTORY PARK neighborhood-Posh entertainment..... sports....Lights and Flash.
*The Cedars neighborhood- A cut-out version of a Houston neighborhood... *The Design district neighborhood- Riverfront/Irving Blvd character is similar to the character and looks of
Hwy6 from Katy Freeway south to Sugarland....but better.
*DEEP Ellum neighborhood- A larger TEXAS version of the French Quarters.
Hmm, I'm not sure to be honest. I think all of the cities have individual streets and blocks that you could point out, but none of them have a consistent grid of urbanity at the street level. Honestly, it's kind of a wash overall.
Austin - Of the Texas cities, it definitely is the most walkable and vibrant at the pedestrian level overall, and it has the most "new urban" mixed-use developments. But, it was by far the smallest city pre-war and the classic urban build is few and far between and only 1-2 stories. The new stuff, even when well designed, tends to have a lot of space dedicated to parking and that takes away from the urban feel. It's also still an ongoing project and half the buildings you walk by at a given moment are construction sites.
Dallas - I think Dallas has the most "bulk" with relatively narrow streets and very tall skyscraper canyons. It feels the most "big city". However, it's very car-oriented and dead from a pedestrian standpoint compared to Austin, much less NOLA. I like downtown Dallas more than the New Orleans CBD I think but it's blown away by the French Quarter.
Forth Worth - Downtown is really nice for a few blocks actually, maybe the best in Texas. But it is easily the smallest downtown and tails off into suburbia extremely quickly.
Houston - Houston is such a strange city from an urban planning perspective. It's massively built up but the streets are extremely wide, there are freeways everywhere, and an incredible amount of building space is used for parking cars, even compared to these other Texas cities. It might be the best attempt at designing a city for cars, but to me that feels like the antithesis of an urban streetscape.
San Antonio - The best historical downtown core of Texas cities and it's not close, but it's very underused at the moment; there is some nice architecture but nothing really going on outside of whatever the Riverwalk is. NOLA is a tough comparison for San Antonio, because I just think NOLA does the "old timey, rich architecture" schtick much, much better. But, compared to the Texas cities San Antonio does well. With the exception of 1-2 areas like the Pearl, San Antonio outside of downtown immediately falls into incredibly bland endless sprawl, even by Texas standards.
My point was mainly that skyscrapers and urban streetscapes are barely related to each other. Here is the #2 tallest in Houston. This one is downtown and yet is still not an urban streetscape whatsoever. https://www.google.com/maps/place/We...!4d-95.3683567 This is Houston, it's an interesting city.
I picked New Orleans because it's just a few hours from Houston. I agree that neither has much, but I think I slightly lean toward Dallas if forced to pick.
I didn't say these cities are sparsely populated, just that neither has urban streetscapes. Both places are absolutely insane masses of humanity to be clear. Just a tick below the LA/NYC level, really. But density can come in a lot of form factors, and not all of them lead to urban streetscapes. The most dense neighborhood in Houston is Gulfton. Is this an urban streetscape? https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7165...7i16384!8i8192
Its not, but its similar to streets you would find in mid-density metro areas, within city limits.
This is my picture from just two weeks ago. I just missed a group of people coming out of that market. This was in the heat of the day... 100 degrees outside...
All of these cities INCLUDING New Orleans are far superior than Houston and Dallas are in having urban streetscape. How is this a surprise to anyone?
The point of my response is that I don't have to go to New Orleans to know what an urban streetscape looks like. I've been to all those other cities and more...
and yeah, tell us something we don't know... Houston, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, etc... none compare to the older established urban cities... we get it.
Seattle and Portland have massive national forests included in their metro areas.
Literally every city can claim something like this and besides, urban areas account for national forests and reservoirs. Seattle and Portland arent that special here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by natey11
These stats look totally wrong. Probably because they used the county boundaries since it's by metro area, which makes it completely apples to oranges since county sizes vary so much in the U.S. You're better off using the urban area stats.
Urban areas dont go by county sizes. It goes by contiguous development. A shocker to many, but Houston and Dallas develop in a widespread medium density pattern.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redlionjr
Just my personal opinion but Houston has more distinct neighborhoods within it's core than what I've seen in Dallas. Dallas core is just more connected with one another than Houston's core.
Agreed on this. Houston neighborhoods have more unique character. Even taking Deep Ellum and looking at the grafitti, most painted by one guy commissioned by the city. It takes away some of that authentic feel but it still remains a cool spot. Still though Houston's neighborhoods are more organic but Dallas still has some fun hoods. This is why I give the nod to Houston for urban streetscapes. A couple tweaks here and there (more sidewalks, etc.), and it wouldnt be a competition IMO because Houston is the center of its metro, unlike Dallas, and it shows.
Deep Ellum looks more like a Austin neighborhood (i.e. South Congress) to me than French Quarters .
Must be the Terry Black's there...
Lol at dallasboi saying Deep Ellum is like the French Quarter. Maybe he meant by pedestrian activity, in which case Deep Ellum is still not like the French Quarter. In looks, only parts of DT San Antonio will be similar to the French Quarter.
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.
.