Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-05-2020, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Bellingham, WA
1,422 posts, read 1,915,697 times
Reputation: 2777

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays25 View Post
Agreed, it's not the whole story.

But Portland's Alberta and Mississippi examples are low-intensity districts. If you're happy with a few restaurants, a coffee shop, and a few other stores within a short walk, plus a decent bus line or two, they're great. They're like bearded small towns.

Stepping back a bit... The best retail streets aren't necessarily multi-story and might not have much new. Single use buildings have a lot of advantages for retail...stores can use the full depth of the building, they don't need to worry about kitchen exhaust annoying people upstairs, they can be noisier at night, they might not cover the whole site so there's room for a patio or a few parking spaces in back, and so on.

But solid retail for any distance requires a LOT of customers. There are two ways to do this: 1. Draw people from outside the walking radius, typically through a mix of transit/uber/driving, and/or 2. Have tons of people inside the easy walking radius. If the retail is a half-block deep, it's helpful for at least the next few blocks (and a half) to be very high density, like 30,000 or 60,000 residents/sm instead of 10,000. The walk needs to be easy and pleasant. If the retail itself has other uses on top, that can add intensity and broaden the activity, while possibly adding some hurdles to the retail.

Highly-active districts also mix other uses. Add a college, offices, and a few hotels and you'll be active every day and evening. The Portland examples probably don't get big lunch crowds.

That's very different from 1920. Back then most retail dollars were spent in the neighborhood. Today you might capture 1/4 or 1/2, the latter probably requiring a supermarket. So figure 20 square feet per resident since we average 40 today.
I understand what you're saying about what's generally needed to support big retail in an urban setting, but we're talking about what's being regarded as cool vs. uncool, and I'd wager that many of the neighborhoods people regard as cool come nowhere near your threshold.

Believe me, I'm a fan of density, but you certainly don't need 30k-60k per square mile to achieve a good scale for a sense of place or even high walkability. And even that high of a number can't necessarily keep big retailers afloat, as you're well aware in Seattle.

You also don't need Manhattan-level density to have highly-active districts. You need some density, but with a good layout, the right zoning, a good blend of types of residential, shops and restaurants, and proximity to attractions and businesses, an area can create around the clock activity in much lower numbers.

But back to my point- different strokes for different folks. Personally I think there are a lot of intangibles in what I'd consider to be a cool area or town, and I really can't really make the assessment until I actually visit the city. Your main criteria seems to be primarily focused on density, which is fine. But I think that plenty of cool places in the country aren't limited to only the CBDs of the biggest cities. In fact, I think those places often price out interesting and independent retail and dining offerings, as frequently only chains can afford the rent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-05-2020, 01:43 PM
 
8,753 posts, read 6,674,180 times
Reputation: 8474
A spot can be cool no matter where it is, regardless of density.

But to me, a city's coolness includes activity level and easy walkability to a million things, and density is a component of that...not my main criteria, but a big one.

I certainly don't think Manhattan density is required, though it would be nice. The 30-60k range is well below that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2020, 01:59 PM
 
Location: Bellingham, WA
1,422 posts, read 1,915,697 times
Reputation: 2777
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays25 View Post
A spot can be cool no matter where it is, regardless of density.

But to me, a city's coolness includes activity level and easy walkability to a million things, and density is a component of that...not my main criteria, but a big one.

I certainly don't think Manhattan density is required, though it would be nice. The 30-60k range is well below that.
No, I get it, and I'm not passing judgment- I realize that super high density is important to you. I'm saying that very pedestrian-friendly areas can occur at far lower thresholds. For example, I live in a neighborhood now that has an 8k/sq mi density that is far more conducive for walking and daily activity than where I used to live- in a neighborhood with 25k/sq mi density. Again, I think it's tough to judge how cool a place is without physical experiencing it firsthand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2020, 11:30 PM
 
2,181 posts, read 1,345,415 times
Reputation: 2872
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enean View Post
I've been to Omaha, and it's definitely underrated by people who haven't been there. It's hilly, has dense areas, sits on a major river, has lovely, leafy neighborhoods, and a healthy economy. If someone bashes it, just because of where it sits, that's their problem. I predict Omaha will grow in the future, as the popular cities that are growing now, become more and more expensive. Wait for it.
I'm not bashing it, my point is simply that Omaha is a very isolated city. Austin has had a continuous stream of people relocating from other places in Texas for almost 100 years (largely driven by UT). Omaha doesn't and likely won't ever have that in Nebraska.

I don't think I agree at all with the idea that "coolness" is driven by population density. Most of the fastest growing cities are not particularly dense, especially compared to the legacy cities in the northeast and midwest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2020, 09:38 AM
 
6,772 posts, read 4,420,268 times
Reputation: 6061
Anytime I see buzzwords like cool/uncool/hip/etc., I chuckle and shake my head, lol. I guess at 54, I'm ancient/old enough to realize and have learned that these terms are wildly subjective. They really carry no substantive weight whatsoever in determining nearly anything other than younger people are moving there for any number of reasons, usually fleeting. It can make for some interesting banter, but little else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2020, 11:01 AM
 
8,753 posts, read 6,674,180 times
Reputation: 8474
Absolutely subjective. Even in this thread we seem to have a million definitions or ideas.

I wouldn't correlate it with population growth. A closer correlation would probably be where young people would move if they could afford to. Surveys suggest places like New York.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2020, 01:47 PM
 
37,794 posts, read 41,491,884 times
Reputation: 27052
I'm not sure if it's been said yet, but since the topic of this thread isn't "'Cool' cities" but "'Uncool' cities," just because a city isn't known for being "cool" doesn't automatically make it "uncool." Just as much goes into a city being "uncool" as it does being "cool," just on the opposite end of things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2020, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Alabama
13,377 posts, read 7,685,557 times
Reputation: 6942
In my state at the moment, it seems like Mobile is the cool city and Birmingham is the uncool one.

15 years ago, it would have been the opposite.

Huntsville is the growing boomtown of the state, but I don't think anyone really thinks of it as cool or uncool.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2020, 03:16 PM
 
37,794 posts, read 41,491,884 times
Reputation: 27052
Quote:
Originally Posted by FSUMike View Post
In my state at the moment, it seems like Mobile is the cool city and Birmingham is the uncool one.
Not saying Mobile is uncool, but it seems that within the past 10 years or so, Birmingham has started gaining some cool points with all of the investment and development happening in the city, fresh new leadership, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2020, 04:50 PM
 
1,295 posts, read 2,499,003 times
Reputation: 1307
Quote:
Originally Posted by whereiend View Post
I'm not bashing it, my point is simply that Omaha is a very isolated city. Austin has had a continuous stream of people relocating from other places in Texas for almost 100 years (largely driven by UT). Omaha doesn't and likely won't ever have that in Nebraska.

I don't think I agree at all with the idea that "coolness" is driven by population density. Most of the fastest growing cities are not particularly dense, especially compared to the legacy cities in the northeast and midwest.
I've lived in both Omaha and San Antonio, and have spent a lot of time in Austin when I was younger. Omaha is a surprisingly cool city for its size, with amenities that other cities its size just don't have. It reminds me a little of Austin in the 1980's. There are some differences, though. Austin has always been more liberal/open/young and Omaha, while it has its progressive element, still skews conservative. Omaha was a relatively large city in the late 1800's, and has a surprisingly large stock of buildings from that era. The Old Market neighborhood, the South Omaha business district (little Mexico), mid-town, Dundee, Benson, Bemis Park, Field Club neighborhood, the Blackstone neighborhood, and others all are over 100 years old, and all have buildings on the National Register. I currently live in the DC metro area, but am considering Omaha as a retirement destination down the road (it also has 2 teaching hospitals, UNMC and Creighton). The cost of living is much cheaper than Austin's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top