Philadelphia vs Chicago - Which is more urban? (living, best, better)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are stating the blindlingly obvious; not everyone lives in a single family home or in a midrise/highrise.
What's your point exactly? According to the Census, many more Chicago residents live in single family homes than in midrises or highrises.
Probably far more, given that single family homes tend to have more residents than apartment units. And I'm (very generously) assuming that every 20 unit building is a midrise or highrise.
And this directly contradicts your claim that Chicago is an apartment city. A plurality of housing units are single family homes. No, not a majority, but a plurality. More than in midrises and highrises.
It has become clear to me that you have a fundamental reading comprehension problem. My point is, since you seem to forget what started this whole line of discussion, is that the bungalow is not the predominant form of housing in Chicago. While we're at it, SFHs regardless of architectural type isn't the predominant form of housing in Chicago either.
I never claimed Chicago is "an apartment city." I don't even know what the hell that means -- that seems to be an invention of your own making.
You are stating the blindlingly obvious; not everyone lives in a single family home or in a midrise/highrise.
What's your point exactly? According to the Census, many more Chicago residents live in single family homes than in midrises or highrises.
Probably far more, given that single family homes tend to have more residents than apartment units. And I'm (very generously) assuming that every 20 unit building is a midrise or highrise.
And this directly contradicts your claim that Chicago is an apartment city. A plurality of housing units are single family homes. No, not a majority, but a plurality. More than in midrises and highrises.
but isnt that true with most cities, even NYC, well at least in they are not mostly single family dwellings even if attached. Now Chicago does probably does have more single family homes within its borders proprtionally when compared to philly but say you added DE county and similar land areas and closer populations that proportion would likely shift.
On urbanity in many ways they seem overall similar with either exceling in certain aspects.
There are 50,000 more single family housing units in Chicago than any other housing type, which probably translates to a couple hundred thousand more residents than any other housing type.
Yeah, there's lots of that in Chicago, but 3-flats are hardly midrises or highrises. They're detached housing with lawns and alley parking.
Not even equivalent to Philly rowhouses, which mostly front directly on the street,
Yes, it's saying that Chicago has a large diversity of housing, but single family detached homes are the largest type of housing stock. And, in Philly, rowhouses are the largest housing stock.
Big difference, IMO. Rowhouses vs. bungalows.
I think you missed the point. There is no relevant argument between rowhouses versus bungalows because bungalows (a type of detached single family housing unit, and one that reached its peak of a third of housing in the 1940s, but have gone way down since then) are not the predominant form in the city.
It has become clear to me that you have a fundamental reading comprehension problem. My point is, since you seem to forget what started this whole line of discussion, is that the bungalow is not the predominant form of housing in Chicago. While we're at it, SFHs regardless of architectural type isn't the predominant form of housing in Chicago either.
Single family homes are the most common subcategory of homes in Chicago. Predominant means "most common".
If you accept the Census numbers as somewhat close to the truth, then there is no dispute that single family homes are the predominant housing type in the City of Chicago
I think you missed the point. There is no relevant argument between rowhouses versus bungalows because bungalows (a type of detached single family housing unit, and one that reached its peak of a third of housing in the 1940s, but have gone way down since then) are not the predominant form in the city.
Ok, then single family homes, rather than bungalows, are the predominant form in Chicago.
But I suspect that most single family homes in Chicago are bungalows. Not victorians, not colonials, not capes.
But if you want to say detached single family homes as the predominant Chicago style, and rowhouses as the predominant Philly style, then I have no problem with that.
Single family homes are the most common subcategory of homes in Chicago. Predominant means "most common".
If you accept the Census numbers as somewhat close to the truth, then there is no dispute that single family homes are the predominant housing type in the City of Chicago
Since your fixation seems to be on SFHs versus 20+ unit buildings, I'll create my own sub-category in between: Buildings with 2 to 19 units. Units in 2- to 19-unit buildings are the predominant form of housing in Chicago. And not just a plurality either.
Start to see how arbitrary it is to claim that SFHs are the "predominant" form of housing in Chicago?
My old streets (My pics too, don't delete dumb mods)
Might as well be rowhouses.
to me this view is less about the non connectivity and more to the street, sidewalk and set-back widths. But to me this is also very urban. Interesting how timeframe influenced structure.
This block you psted may have higher density than many rowhome neighborhoods yet appears less cramped. I actually do like these areas, especially on the Northside of Chicago but always felt a little less urban in some ways. But urban to me doesnt always mean better as the quality of life in a city/urban perspective can exceed more urban areas. But more of this is on form and fuction and street vibrance to me http://www.city-data.com/forum/newre...ply&p=21271213
These are also something I see more prevelant in Philly - resdiential right to industrial - may be a function of the timing of development. This pic shows one converted but these old factories and warehouses are all over the city in many neighborhoods.
Since your fixation seems to be on SFHs versus 20+ unit buildings, I'll create my own sub-category in between: Buildings with 2 to 19 units. Units in 2- to 19-unit buildings are the predominant form of housing in Chicago. And not just a plurality either.
Yes, you could say that, if you were the Census, and that were an official Census subcategory.
This notion has already been dispatched in this thread, more than once now.
Flying into Midway, all I see are bungalows! I don't see how you can really challenge that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
