What is your favorite US city that is not located in....

[poshbakerloo]

Phoenix!

[Fitzrovian]

Originally Posted by diablo234

No, it's just simply your opinion, it is not "fact".

I acknoledged Houston isn't the perfect city in my first post here and yes it is auto-centric but there are plenty of vibrant and interesting neighborhoods here (such as the ones I mentioned earlier), it is not the city's fault if idiot tourists such as yourself don't seek them out.

Also I have been to eleven different countries so far, so I would not be so quick to pass judgement on others if I were you.

Houston is bland. And it shouldnt come as a shock. Any city that is almost entirely suburban, has no zoning and whose biggest tourist attraction is a shopping mall would be. It's basically a poster child for everything that is wrong with the American urban model of the post war period.

I am glad things are changing for the better. But it will be a long road -- reversing over half a century of wrong-headed urban policy will not happen overnight.

[SydneyCity]

Washington DC or Philadelphia for me. Savannah GA also looks nice.

[royal rose1]

Also, if I'm allowed to say it, Spokane, Washington seems like an awesome place! Being an inland city in Washington I thought it might not count as West Coast. If Coeur D'Alene can count it seems Spokane is fair game.

[chicagogeorge]

Originally Posted by Fitzrovian

I am glad things are changing for the better. .

I'm curious. What exactly is changing? Where are these supposed changes taking place?

[musiccity]

Originally Posted by royal rose1

Also, if I'm allowed to say it, Spokane, Washington seems like an awesome place! Being an inland city in Washington I thought it might not count as West Coast. If Coeur D'Alene can count it seems Spokane is fair game.

I'll let is slide..

[musiccity]

Originally Posted by chicagogeorge

I'm curious. What exactly is changing? Where are these supposed changes taking place?

I'm curious about that too, if anything American Metros are becoming ever more suburban and many cities are actually steadily losing in population because people are moving to the suburbs.

Also, It's not all White Flight.. especially in Southern Metros. In Atlanta, Blacks are actually leaving the city itself and moving to the suburbs. DeKalb County, GA and Clayton County, GA are perfect examples of this. They are entirely suburban and are 54.7% Black and 62.9% Black respectively.

[Xusein]

Originally Posted by tikiturf

Small but my favorite is Hartford, CT

Interesting, why exactly? I mean Hartford's OK but there's not much that sets it apart really.

[royal rose1]

Originally Posted by musiccity

I'm curious about that too, if anything American Metros are becoming ever more suburban and many cities are actually steadily losing in population because people are moving to the suburbs.

Also, It's not all White Flight.. especially in Southern Metros. In Atlanta, Blacks are actually leaving the city itself and moving to the suburbs. DeKalb County, GA and Clayton County, GA are perfect examples of this. They are entirely suburban and are 54.7% Black and 62.9% Black respectively.

Cities like Seattle and Portland are seeing huge numbers of whites and people in general moving into the cities. New York is the same, a lot of the more affluent people are now choosing the inner city as a place of residence because places like Chelsea are becoming very attractive. I'll let NYC slide as an example though because it has always really been an exception to the rule. But another example is Charlotte, a HUGELY suburban city, in recent years there have been condo buildings built downtown to accommodate the increasingly large number of people seeking to live in the city. I think the same trend is being seen in Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Philly, and also places like San Diego and San Francisco. It also must be said that some of this condo building could just be considered periodical.

But I think the real leaders are Portland and Seattle, they are definitely exceptions to the rule. Seattle has the all-residential neighborhood of Belltown, which is literally right next to downtown. And the trend of people moving into the city doesn't look to be stopping in the PacNor.

[LtBk]

When I lived in the city of Chicago, I didn't own a car for 10 years because I took the train to work everyday (my wife always had a car). Waiting for the train in freezing cold or blistering heat, and sharing it with 52355 other people isn't all that fun.

I'd rather sit in traffic in my comfortable SUV, like I do now. Actually my commute is usually less than 30 minutes because I start work early and end early, so I beat the rush.

Traffic james and other problems associated with driving isn't fun too(I drive btw).

Yeah this is so horrible

Nothing appealing about that. Besides, 90% of kids don't use backyards anymore.

Who says? Statistics certainly don't say that

Joel Kotkin dislikes traditional urbanity, so it's not surprise that his website will have strong pro-sprawl bias. Anyways, of course the suburbs are still growing, but for the first time in decades, the traditional urban cities are competing(Why do you think the central cities have so much construction going on?). It be interesting to see what the next 10 years will hold. Besides, much of the metropolitan growth is in outer suburbs/exurbs, and not the inner ones, which are declining.

Much more quiet, more space, less, crime, better schools. I didn't have any of this growing up. I think my children will benefit.

This is why suburbs will continue to grow and sprawl outside the city.

From my experience, suburbs aren't really that quiet. Many suburbs aren't exactly healthy too in terms of good schools and crime. Keep in mind that I have nothing against single-family detached homes as long as they work well with an urban environment.

[chicagogeorge]

Originally Posted by LtBk

Traffic james and other problems associated with driving isn't fun too(I drive btw).

I deal with it now and then... and I'm ok.

Nothing appealing about that. Besides, 90% of kids don't use backyards anymore.

How do you know. Did you take a survey? Better than playing in the street like I did as a kid.

Joel Kotkin dislikes traditional urbanity, so it's not surprise that his website will have strong pro-sprawl bias.

Statistics don't really have a bias though.

Anyways, of course the suburbs are still growing, but for the first time in decades, the traditional urban cities are competing(Why do you think the central cities have so much construction going on?).

Most of the construction is (or was rather) is happening near the CBD. That's a good thing, but it pales in comparison to the amount of suburban construction occurring.

It be interesting to see what the next 10 years will hold. Besides, much of the metropolitan growth is in outer suburbs/exurbs, and not the inner ones, what are declining.

Actually the results of the 2010 census shows that suburbs grew more rapidly than cities when compared to the 2000 census.


Even in NYC, the growth was greater in the suburbs, especially in the outer ring suburbs, but even the inner ring suburbs are growing faster than the city.

From my experience, suburbs aren't really that quiet. Many suburbs aren't exactly healthy too in terms of good schools and crime.

There certainly are poor suburbs. Chicago is now seeing the vast majority of it's immigration bypass the city and settle in the suburbs.

Immigrants bypass city for suburbs
Listen to this Story
ODETTE YOUSEF | FEB. 14, 2011
More immigrants to the area are bypassing the City of Chicago completely and moving directly to the northern suburbs, according to a new study by the Voorhees Center for Neighborhood and Community Improvement at the University of Illinois at Chicago. The report finds that the foreign-born population in 16 north shore communities increased by nearly 20 percent between 2000 and 2008. Meanwhile, the native-born population shrank by roughly 3 percent.

“The suburbs became sort of the Ellis Island, if you will, of the Chicago region,” said Janet Smith of the Voorhees Center, “with a lot more people just moving directly to the suburbs.”

Smith says the foreign-born now account for 27% of the population in the northern suburbs, with Mexicans, Polish, and Indians constituting the largest groups. Smith says immigrants appear to be heading directly for the suburbs because of abundant work opportunities, particularly in construction, and cheap housing. She says it is still not clear how the collapse of the construction industry may have affected that

http://www.wbez.org/story/chicago/im...s-city-suburbs

According to the U.S. Census, Chicago’s Latino population increased just 3.3 percent in the last 10 years, from 753,644 to 778,862. Neighborhoods such as Little Village, Logan Square and Pilsen — traditional ports of entry for immigrants — lost between 8,000 and 12,000 people.

Latinos probably were undercounted because some are undocumented immigrants and tend to avoid the census. Even so, the limited growth of the Chicago Latino community seems shocking.

But it shouldn’t be a surprise. Latinos and other immigrants are bypassing Chicago altogether to settle in suburbs such as Aurora, Elgin and Waukegan. In the last 20 years, the traditional migration pattern has changed dramatically. No longer are immigrants coming first to Chicago, staying for several years and then leaving once they save enough money to buy a house in the suburbs.

According to a new study by University of Illinois at Chicago, the foreign-born population in 16 North Shore communities increased 19 percent, to 147,500. The largest groups came from Mexico, with 14 percent; Poland, 10 percent, and India, 9 percent. The native-born population in these suburbs has decreased 3 percent since 2000 to 422,700.

In Illinois, the number of people who identified themselves as Hispanic or Latino grew 32.5 percent, while the population of whites and blacks declined.

This dramatic demographic shift should concern Emanuel because these immigrants are driving economic growth in suburban areas. I suggest Emanuel start by taking a hard look at the city neighborhoods.

Latinos and other immigrants are leaving the city for a better quality of life. That includes affordable housing, better schools, safer areas and more parks. The new mayor of Chicago will have to stop planting flowers downtown and start revitalizing the neighborhoods.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/escalon...-promises.html

[LtBk]

How do you know. Did you take a survey?

Personal observation over the years. Do people need large yards anymore?

[diablo234]

Originally Posted by Fitzrovian

Houston is bland. And it shouldnt come as a shock. Any city that is almost entirely suburban, has no zoning and whose biggest tourist attraction is a shopping mall would be. It's basically a poster child for everything that is wrong with the American urban model of the post war period.

So are such cities as Miami, Los Angeles, San Diego, etc but to most people here those cities are anything but "bland". Houston is no different since you still have plenty of neighborhoods that predate the post WWII era with a history to match.

FYI: Miami's biggest tourist attraction is also a mall (known as Sawgrass Mills).

[musiccity]

Originally Posted by royal rose1

Cities like Seattle and Portland are seeing huge numbers of whites and people in general moving into the cities. New York is the same, a lot of the more affluent people are now choosing the inner city as a place of residence because places like Chelsea are becoming very attractive. I'll let NYC slide as an example though because it has always really been an exception to the rule. But another example is Charlotte, a HUGELY suburban city, in recent years there have been condo buildings built downtown to accommodate the increasingly large number of people seeking to live in the city. I think the same trend is being seen in Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Philly, and also places like San Diego and San Francisco. It also must be said that some of this condo building could just be considered periodical.

But I think the real leaders are Portland and Seattle, they are definitely exceptions to the rule. Seattle has the all-residential neighborhood of Belltown, which is literally right next to downtown. And the trend of people moving into the city doesn't look to be stopping in the PacNor.

Interesting. People are migrating to the suburbs in most Eastern cities.

[chicagogeorge]

Originally Posted by LtBk

Personal observation over the years.

Have you bothered to look at new construction single family housing in most suburban communities? I don't see a diversion of the traditional model

Not far from my house, a subdivision built in the last 10 years.

image hosted on flickr

Do people need large yards anymore?

Yes, it is better if you have a spacious yard, if you have children. I didn't need one until then.

[Dralcoffin]

This is a great map for looking at population changes since the 2000 census:

at the New York Times

For instance, zooming in on New York, population growth in Manhattan south of Central Park, much of the Bronx, coastal Staten Island, and parts of Brooklyn are cancelling out (and almost cancelled out by) declines in Upper Manhattan, the central corridor in Brooklyn and Staten Island, and most of Queens.

[Xusein]

Here in CT, the census was actually good for the cities. All the top 5 gained population.

[chicagogeorge]

Originally Posted by Xusein

Here in CT, the census was actually good for the cities. All the top 5 gained population.

Connecticut is tiny. Not much room to grow outwards. The population of the state grew by just over 100,000




Lets be frank here. Much of the gains in most large cities this last 10 years occurred in or near the CBD as part of urban core revitalization efforts that were also riding a condo boom. However, most of the population gains were either dampened or even offset by population losses in outer city neighborhoods. In the end it's good that the cities are at least showing some signs of revitalization, but the is no doubt that we are a suburban nation.

[Xusein]

It's not that tiny...there is plenty of rural land, especially in the northwest and eastern parts of the state and sprawl continues to increase, the fastest growing areas are still the exurbs, with some towns seeing almost 30 percent growth since 2000.

But this was the first time since 1950 that all five of the largest cities saw population growth at the same time.

[chicagogeorge]

Connecticut is the third smallest state. I would say that's pretty tiny. Plus we are talking about population gains of a couple of thousand here and there. I wonder if that could be contributed to NYC's slowdown, as more people push outwards, or local real estate values?

Originally Posted by Dralcoffin

This is a great map for looking at population changes since the 2000 census:

at the New York Times

Yeah that island of growth in Chicago is the area around the Loop. While the suburbs are exploding