More urban LA, SF, DC, Philly, and Boston? (living, state, better)

[rootzdread]

I read a couple posts from 2010 saying in 5-10 years DC would be the most urban of all the cities listed. Has that time come?

[the resident09]

Originally Posted by rootzdread

I read a couple posts from 2010 saying in 5-10 years DC would be the most urban of all the cities listed. Has that time come?

Depends on the criteria your talking about, but SF, Boston, and Philly are probably firmly entrenched in their spots for urbanity. The rapid infill of DC keeps it ahead of the cities behind it in urbanity, but LA and DC are considered next on the list. Then probably Seattle and Baltimore. There are numerous threads of LA's urbanity vs DC's but they are polar opposites and one is a mega city while the other is 61 sq miles.

[Jcoughlin187]

Boston and SF I'd say. Followed by Philly, LA, and DC. Although LA is spread out in some areas

[travelingeverywhere]

Boston and SF?

Philadelphia is definitely at most ahead of Boston and at least tied with Boston.

[Codederick]

The inclusion of LA here is very bizarre. It's as suburban as it is urban. Neighborhoods like Brentwood, Bel-Air, and Pacific Palisades are all entirely suburban yet are in the LA city limits.

[That_One_Guy]

D.C. is being very underrated in this poll

[RightonWalnut]

San Francisco
Philadelphia
Boston
DC
LA

[rainrock]

Originally Posted by Calisonn

Obviously San Francisco..duh!

SF pound for pound looks to be the most urban. Love the grid.But keep in mind the entire city of SF comes in at a cozy 45 Sq Miles. The main urban grid of the city of Philly(between the 2 rivers) is considerably larger than 45 sq miles. I would estimate it slightly less than 2x the size of SF . When you take that fact into consideration it may sway the argument towards Philadelphia.


https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/690/22...85c667c3_b.jpg

Looking East toward South Jersey

https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3888/3...f271591e_b.jpg

[odurandina]

The top 10 or 12 cities in USA are consolidating their economic might. In Boston + Cambridge and the rest of the Metro, are somewhere around 110~120M sq ft (incl. air rights towers over rail and freeways), planned, approved, u/c, topped or completed. It will change people's perceptions about Boston.

Originally Posted by travelingeverywhere

Boston and SF?
Philadelphia is definitely at most ahead of Boston and at least tied with Boston.

it's a tough call. Boston is getting more infill and midrises.... Philly more tall skyscrapers.
Boston wins on 189-399' highrises approved or u/c, topped, etc....

Just the same, Boston has 3 skyscrapers completed, 4 u/c and nearly a dozen more getting ready to commence construction.... w Biotech labs, Medical campuses, college dorms, condos and every other damn thing from 100-189'. ....3 new 20-25 story highrise proposals came down just last Tuesday. And several others in recent days. It's an effort to keep up with logging them in.... Philadelphia has many projects planned, u/c or completed, but Boston-core, msa, and csa is well ahead of Philly in total sq ft, and still pulling away.


As dazzling as Philly's real estate empire is looking these days, (something that can't be overstated) all the reports Red John/Facts Kill Rhetoric keeps posting tell the bigger picture. (In 10-15 years, the trend will likely reverse).... But, Philly has not overtaken Boston just yet.

How many projects will get built before it all comes crashing down? Who the hell knows? Boston and Cambridge are now in a tight-fisted duel to approve everything in rapid fire.....

Btw, what other US cities besides NYC are attempting complex air-rights projects? BIG plans for air-rights towers and mid-rises on both sides of the Charles by Mass.gov, are either already approved or in various stages of planning. There will be a lot of height coming with these; w/ many having to rise 400-600' to be economically viable. They'll be coming with more stations + DMU service....

There are only 3 US cities with population density's above 14,000. The truth; is that Boston's trajectory is very similar to SF, but probably about 7-8 years behind. Boston's current foreign investment + venture capital will continue to 'bear this fact out.' While both cities continue to build, Boston has the potential to close the gap slightly in the next 5-10 years (with an edge of land in reserve vs anti-development pushback).... Just the same, if you count Boston's [population + students] vs SF [population + students], Boston ranks not far behind SF for 2nd densest US city (actual) after NYC (on that basis).... i need to look at these numbers for Philly, DC, and Chicago; as their densities will come up considerably, with Philadelphia likely gaining the most.

Boston vs San Francisco [resident population + college students]

1. San Francisco ~19,000/sq mi
2. Boston ~17,800

stay tuned.

Development Map and Chart - Page 7 - archBOSTON.org

[Edward234]

SF, no doubt.