First off, most of the houses in the inner sprawl neighborhoods are bungalows, so while the houses in the burbs may have two storeys, they have more square footage, so the actual footprint isn't much different. Yes the lots are bigger in the inner sprawl areas. Is the space better utilized in the burbs? Yes it is, but not grossly different. The burbs are more dense, but the density is done poorly, so it negates it anyhow. That and the suburbs in general, just look like 🞵🞵🞵🞵. I'd rather have a nicer looking city, than density for the sake of density when it's done wrong, and looks like 🞵🞵🞵🞵.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbia
WTF? You have 6,000sf lots plus an added 1000sf of dead space all for 900sf houses in the Inner Sprawl neighbourhoods, and you're claiming that is about beauty and nothing to do with under utilization of urban space? That's a joke if I ever heard one.
If you want low land utilization but at least with beauty, look at some of the gorgeous houses and lots in upper mount royal. Imagine how that would look with back alleys with piles of 🞵🞵🞵🞵.
|
Threaded Mode