Unpopular opinions involving cities

[jayden]

Title pretty much explains it. Post your opinions on topics the majority of people would disagree with.

Newark, New Jersey is not THAT BAD. The downtown area has the old northern city feel. Aside from everything closing by 7pm, the city is fairly walkable, and only seems to be getting better.

Dubai is not that great. In fact, the skyline looks a mess. But congrats on having the tallest structure in the world!

[mhays]

I have little interest in seeing Dubai. The buildings look fine, but it appears to be dominated by cars in the newer areas, and of course the heat would be impossible.

[photoLith]

Im confused.

[jayden]

Originally Posted by photoLith

Im confused.

Post your opinions on topics involving cities the majority of people would disagree with.

[MonkeyRonin]

I don't think either of those are unpopular opinions around here.

[Private Dick]

Camden is a very safe city.

Houston is a really beautiful city.

Detroit is SOOOOOO white.

Phoenix has the most impressive skyline.

New York is boring.

Minneapolis weather is ideal.

Honolulu is an industrial slum.

Miami has the best sports fans.

Salt Lake City parties like nowhere else does.

San Francisco is a highly conservative city.

New Orleans is really clean.

Los Angeles people are so cool.

Oklahoma City is the most interesting city in the world.

[brickell]

taking the train is sometimes really annoying.

[pdxtex]

from a policy standpoint, having no rules (houston), is far more egalitarian and actually progressive, than having LOTS of rules (portland, and every other far left, white majority city). urbanists have such a hard on for the northwest, but its just because the topography is pretty. the reality is mega left cities try to operate as if its a nanny state but the greater framework is capitalist. square peg round hole. market driven growth leads to a much more diverse, built landscape. just look at houston's treasure trove of row houses and multifamily development. also, driving a car in this town sucks and our rail transit is massively over hyped. the quality of life here is high only because we don't have a high violent crime rate. portland planning policy and our city hall is making life here miserable, favoring pedestrians and cyclists over automobiles. and I ride a bike too! too many road diets and made up traffic patterns. is as if we are some test kitchen for stupid ideas and the city wants to make EVERY neighborhood, cute and walkable, even if the arterial street has a high traffic count and 45 mile per signage. the city is already a giant neighborhoody grid and there are shit tons of sidewalks. its easy to get around by foot or bike here so stop mucking with the roads...and fix the potholes too....

[niwell]

Sometimes extremely interesting independent stores and best "authentic" restaurants are in the suburbs.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

from a policy standpoint, having no rules (Houston), is far more egalitarian and progressive, than having LOTS of rules (Portland). urbanists have such a hard on for the northwest, but its just because the topography is pretty. driving a car in this town sucks and our rail transit is massively over hyped. the quality of life here is high only because we don't have a high violent crime rate. this city is nimby town and nimbys want to keep it that way.....

I guess you mean egalitarian from a real estate developer's perspective...

and have fun driving in Houston...

[The North One]

Dubai looks absolutely soulless, the city continues to make all the same urban planning mistakes American cities did in the mid-century. The day the Burj was built was when people stopped caring about the world's tallest building title since it became an obvious farce.

[pdxtex]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

I guess you mean egalitarian from a real estate developer's perspective...

and have fun driving in Houston...

developers build what people want. you've got it the other way around. its not as if they are pulling as fast one on anybody. their product is a result of a desire to have it. from a policy standpoint, lots of cities favor single family zoning, yet their populations continue to grow and competition for the housing stock gets worse and worse. its that missing middle that im envious of. medium density, urban-ish housing. we have some, but its still hard to develop here. Portland zoning code, pre ww2 was far more urban minded than our existing code, 2017...its like that everywhere. laissez faire policy makes for a better city. or at least it did. this country was way more urban 100 years ago in than it is now.

[ChargerCarl]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

I guess you mean egalitarian from a real estate developer's perspective...

and have fun driving in Houston...

For all of Houston's faults at least poor people can afford to live there.

Walkability doesn't mean shit to the people who are forced to drive long distances because they've been priced out of the city.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by niwell

Sometimes extremely interesting independent stores and best "authentic" restaurants are in the suburbs.

this. sometimes an entire cuisine is only available (done well/authentic) in the "suburbs."

[ChargerCarl]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

this. sometimes an entire cuisine is only available (done well/authentic) in the "suburbs."

Tyler Cowen actually wrote about this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/11/bo...ler-cowen.html

[The North One]

Boston is the greatest city in the Northeast corridor.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

developers build what people want. you've got it the other way around. its not as if they are pulling as fast one on anybody. their product is a result of a desire to have it. lots of cities favor single family zoning, yet their populations continue to grow and competition for the housing stock gets worse and worse. its that missing middle that im envious of. medium density, urban-sh housing. we have some, but its still hard to develop here. traffic sucks everywhere too.

Yeah, I get what you're saying, but it's not as if it's some "free market/give the people what they want" situation in Houston anyway. There are rules in Houston... tons of deed restrictions, certain taxing zones, lot size limits, special allowances only in "activity zones", density restrictions/allowances, etc... but it's so haphazard and non-comprehensive that it is FAR from egalitarian for everyone.

The thing is, in many cases throughout Houston, the opposite of what you claim above is true... the system does not work for all people, and people in areas without the political clout/money (and the resulting special rules), get whatever developers/land owners want to put there that will make them money, often to the detriment of neighbors and the surrounding area in a variety of ways. Wealthy Houstonians are as NIMBY as people are anywhere else.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

For all of Houston's faults at least poor people can afford to live there.

Walkability doesn't mean shit to the people who are forced to drive long distances because they've been priced out of the city.

Strange responses.

Affordability is another topic. Lack of zoning laws does not translate to poor people being able to afford to live there.

Who was talking about walkability? Anyway, also another topic. Walkability and terrible traffic are also not mutually exclusive situations. A city can have both, one or the other, or neither.

[mhays]

If you're poor, it's best if you don't need a car to live a reasonable life.

[ChargerCarl]

Originally Posted by mhays

If you're poor, it's best if you don't need a car to live a reasonable life.

Agreed. But strict zoning has made it so that walkable cities are completely unaffordable for all but the rich, offsetting any transit savings.