tru
-
-
Replying to @MeadBadger
In any case, we're clearly both pro-development here
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @380kmh
I was confused by your statement that inferred people hate towers.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MeadBadger
they generally do; if you can afford a condo in a tower you can also afford your own house
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @380kmh @MeadBadger
besides, urbanism is a street-level affair first and foremost--the proximity of buildings matters more than height
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @380kmh
I would say the proximity of people is foremost. Proximity of buildings is a useful secondary characteristic.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MeadBadger
no way, towers-in-a-park is terrible urbanism vs single-family-houses-packed-together
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @380kmh
but the park acts as a separator of people too, which is the primary concern
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MeadBadger
right but they could still have higher pop density
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @380kmh
there's no way SFH can have higher pop density *if you hold the spacing constant*.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
no I'm saying the towers have higher density
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.