Quote:
Originally Posted by bob rulz
This is blatantly false. If that were the case, then European cities would not be such amazing examples of dense, walkable design. I understand that we are not Europe and never will be, but you simply don't need supertall skyscrapers to create dense, liveable cities.
I agree that the far-suburban and exurban developments need to start becoming denser, and believe it or not they are. Those big lots with 2-car garages are not being built nearly as often as they were before the recession. In fact a lot of new development even in Herriman, Riverton, and South Jordan, is townhomes, or single-family homes on small lots.
However, that huge super-dense development near Herriman that was proposed is not the solution. There is good density and bad density - believe it or not, density in and of itself is not the solution to all problems. That development was a prime example of bad density - density for density's sake. Density of that level only works in areas that have pre-existing infrastructure with ready access to transit. What needs to happen is smart design that creates a framework for more mixed-use development, that is allowed to become denser over time. Daybreak is a pretty good example honestly. I wouldn't mind going a bit denser than Daybreak out there, but at least Daybreak is developing that resilient framework.
|
Bob, with all due respect, this is the Skyscraper Page, not the mid-rise clearance at K-Mart Page. SLC does need to grow taller and denser. Much more so than now. The city's attempt of infill is admirable, but far off pace from what is needed. Some of the suburbs are becoming denser than the parts of the city center, which is nonsensical and backwards.
I am strongly against more suburban/exurban sprawl & growth. I disagree with your second paragraph, but I emphatically agree with your third paragraph.
Building around mass transit is essential. Creating dense city centers is critical. Changing an Automobile centric culture is extremely important.
We are to add another 3-4 million on the Wasatch front by 2060. We are geographically hemmed in. We have to grow denser and taller in places like Murray and South Salt Lake, particularly around transit. Despite someone's discouraging post saying it won't happen. If it doesn't this place will be undesirable to live in.
Going cheap will not be the answer. Sprawling into infinity won't work. The NIMBY's and redneck locals need a reality check. The cheap ass developers need a kick in in theirs.