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.
I love to travel cross country by car but recently I have been saddened how many cities and towns have been spoiled by over development that is not architecturally or environmentally pleasing. There are some really ugly developments out there. I remember when the area was a beautiful meadow or forest, but it was built with no concern about appearances.
There can be development that is both economically healthy but still environmentally sound and attractive but some communities do not have much of this.
What city or metro area has the most development that does not have any redeeming qualities architecturally or visually?
Last edited by Refugee56; 10-14-2008 at 01:29 PM..
phoenix metro - i agree with this. It's monochrome: the buildings (with the exception of the small downtown area), houses, mountains, land. Everything looks the same. You get a large concentrated dose of this driving on I-17 in/out of the city.
I've never been there, though. I've only seen pictures. But from what I've seen Houston doesn't have much historical architecture, at least downtown. Other people may be different, but I'd like a mix of historical and modern. Houston only seems to have modern.
Logic, elegance and daily-enjoyability in architecture and environmental matters require many bucks and much taste....rare in any urban/suburban/rural region anywhere in world, esp places w/weak regional economies and lots of obese people....
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.