Houston vs. Dallas (Austin, Waco, Killeen: automobile, average, rain)

[mpope409]

Originally Posted by sogod

No, you just don't understand that the word barely means anything, and you have interpreted the definition to mean diversity.

But lets say you are right and cosmopolitan = diversity + a tiny bit of something else, then how could cities like Moscow, Tokyo, or Paris be cosmopolitan? Or do you believe they aren't and Houston is more cosmopolitan than them?

Moscow, Tokyo, and Paris are diverse. And yes they are cosmopolitan.

The thing is, though, that I don't remember saying Dallas wasn't cosmopolitan. I said it wasn't more cosmopolitan than Houston. Houston has the diversity edge over Dallas. When hundreds of different nationalities and religions are represented in a city, it's not likely that it will have very many local ideals.

Anyone can tell you that Dallas is more the quintessential Texas city, drawing a lot from Texas values and ideals. While Houston, the world city, has the diversity that helps it draw from the world's values and ideals.

[mpope409]

Originally Posted by JamesAbilene

Texas cities dominate the Forbes Traveler 30 Most Visited U.S. Cities list, and Houston is the king of the hill among the state’s urban travel meccas.

Wait...what? What did that say? Does that say that Houston is the king of the hill among the state's URBAN travel meccas? I don't think it mentions anything about the suburbs, Spade.

[Spade]

Originally Posted by mpope409

I couldn't have put it any more simple.

I still don't understand.

There is only one strip mall on Rancier Boulevard. Specifically. But that's beside the point because Killeen is urban. There are no crack houses in the suburbs. lol

There are more strip malls on Rancier Ave than one as that is all that is being built. Everything on that street is built for people with a car. I have lived in Killeen from 1987-2004, Rancier is not urban. It's low dense sprawl and as stated before, sprawl does not equal urban. You can barely walk down Rancier because on many parts, sidewalks either do not exist for a stretch or they are very narrow. Not made for humans to freely walk down the street and enjoy yourself because you have to worry about not getting hit by a car. I don't care if I can't prove it. To any urbanist person from around the world, they would not call Rancier Ave in Killeen urban at all.

That doesn't mean it isn't urban.

What is your definition of urban. Give me your definition besides websters or dictionary.com. Show me a picture of an urban city that is urban in nature.


Killeen and Waco may not be urbane, but they are urban.[/quote]
Urbane means courteous or elegant. Hardly has anything to do with what we are talking about. They are urban as far as being a built area. But it goes far beyond being just a built area as I already have given examples.

[Spade]

Originally Posted by mpope409

Wait...what? What did that say? Does that say that Houston is the king of the hill among the state's URBAN travel meccas? I don't think it mentions anything about the suburbs, Spade.

I do not believe I never said Houston was not urban. I said Houston was suburban in nature. That is different that calling it a suburb. That's the part you're not understanding. Me saying a city is suburban in nature does not mean it is a suburb. Houston is a city just like Dallas, San Antonio, and Austin. I may need to clarify that for Killeen and Waco as well. They are also suburban in nature.

[mpope409]

Originally Posted by Spade

There are more strip malls on Rancier Ave than one as that is all that is being built. Everything on that street is built for people with a car. I have lived in Killeen from 1987-2004, Rancier is not urban. It's low dense sprawl and as stated before, sprawl does not equal urban. You can barely walk down Rancier because on many parts, sidewalks either do not exist for a stretch or they are very narrow. Not made for humans to freely walk down the street and enjoy yourself because you have to worry about not getting hit by a car. I don't care if I can't prove it. To any urbanist person from around the world, they would not call Rancier Ave in Killeen urban at all.

Yeah, urbanists. People with sticks up their asses, pointing their noses up at anything that has the nerve to call itself urban just because it doesn't look like their cramped city. Killeen is urban.

What is your definition of urban. Give me your definition besides websters or dictionary.com. Show me a picture of an urban city that is urban in nature.

That's the difference between you and I. I don't have my own definition of urban. I get my definition from the dictionary. I don't go around making up my interpretations of a word.

Urbane means courteous or elegant. Hardly has anything to do with what we are talking about. They are urban as far as being a built area. But it goes far beyond being just a built area as I already have given examples.

That is not what urbane means. In other words, urbane generally describes a place or person that grasps the essence of living in a city (preferably a big city). For a person it could mean having a suave or sophisticated manner, and for a place...well, here's where your definition of "urban" fits. Having that polish of a dense place like New York or Chicago.

Killeen and Waco may or not be urbane, but they are urban. It's impossible to persuade me otherwise. Unfortunately for you, you're talking to someone with an education.

[mpope409]

Originally Posted by Spade

I do not believe I never said Houston was not urban. I said Houston was suburban in nature. That is different that calling it a suburb. That's the part you're not understanding. Me saying a city is suburban in nature does not mean it is a suburb. Houston is a city just like Dallas, San Antonio, and Austin. I may need to clarify that for Killeen and Waco as well. They are also suburban in nature.

You should try to find another way of wording your opinion that they are "suburban in nature" because the way you say it makes no sense.

[Spade]

Originally Posted by mpope409

You should try to find another way of wording your opinion that they are "suburban in nature" because the way you say it makes no sense.

It gets no simpler than what I'm saying. Suburban in nature is a city that is built in a suburban type of way. The majority of Houston meaning outside the loop has the characteristics of a suburban type of environment. Does not mean it isn't a city. Just that it's suburban.

This is what most of the outter loop looks like and this is in Houston.

http://http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2296/2064633288_21b50d46f6_b.jpg (broken link)
http://http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/1600/picture3651hf1.jpg (broken link)

That said. There is urban living in Houston. Notice how they have signs in the loop that emphasizes this. Because even the city of Houston knows that most of the city is not what many urbanists look for.
But this is why I love the inner loop and the only place I would live in if I was to move to Houston. It has what I'm looking for and why I'm glad I'm moving to the city of DC next year.
http://http://static.flickr.com/108/311739128_807e5d6079_o.jpg (broken link)
http://http://farm1.static.flickr.com/157/351724934_bf9cded4b9_o.jpg (broken link)
But sadly, most of these are only in the inner loop. That area has the potential to be one of the most urban places in the US if they build right.

[Guerilla]

They are. The four new light rail lines in addition to all of the new development will make the entire inner loop very urban. Already close to 600,000 people live there, in an area of 96 square miles. It isn't insanely dense, but it is dense.

[Spade]

Originally Posted by mpope409

Yeah, urbanists. People with sticks up their asses, pointing their noses up at anything that has the nerve to call itself urban just because it doesn't look like their cramped city. Killeen is urban.

It is not about being just cramped. It's about amenities made for the human element for convenience without always using your car. Urbanists love going coming home from work on the weekend, than going out with their friends at a local bar, have a few drinks and mingle, than go back home and not having to use their car to do so. They love that they can go shop, work, and play all within walking distance or a subway or even a short bus ride away from their home. You just cannot do that outside the loop.

That's the difference between you and I. I don't have my own definition of urban. I get my definition from the dictionary. I don't go around making up my interpretations of a word.

I'm not making up my own interpretation of anything and apparently the developers inside the cities agrees with me because they keep emphasizing new urban living or city living at it's finest inside or close to city cores in the sunbelt.

That is not what urbane means. In other words, urbane generally describes a place or person that grasps the essence of living in a city (preferably a big city). For a person it could mean having a suave or sophisticated manner, and for a place...well, here's where your definition of "urban" fits. Having that polish of a dense place like New York or Chicago.

No what you described in the first part of this post is urban. not urbane. Look up urbane since you like using dictionary.com. Urbane is exactly what I said.
From the American heritage dictionary, this is urbane:

Polite, refined, and often elegant in manner.

http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_planning (broken link)

Killeen and Waco may or not be urbane, but they are urban. It's impossible to persuade me otherwise. Unfortunately for you, you're talking to someone with an education

.
Killeen and Waco are urban that they are built up areas. However, they are not urban in a way you cannot enjoy city living like you can in other cities such as Old Town Alexandria, Annapolis, or Providence, Rhode Island. All three are around the size of Killeen and Waco. Also, unfortuantely for you, you're also talking to someone with an education. You can keep your little sly condescending remarks to yourself because I'm not the one.

[Spade]

Originally Posted by Guerilla

They are. The four new light rail lines in addition to all of the new development will make the entire inner loop very urban. Already close to 600,000 people live there, in an area of 96 square miles. It isn't insanely dense, but it is dense.

600,000 people in 96 square miles is very impressive. For example Atlanta has only 490,000 in an area of 132 sq miles. The inner oop is adding alot more people each year and even people outside the loop are not starting to notice the momentum the inner loop has to provide. I like the way midtown in Houston is building.