U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-04-2011, 10:18 AM
 
Location: Boston
5,408 posts, read 9,451,811 times
Reputation: 5794

Advertisements

Define urban...

If you're talking about strictly population density, the Tenderloin has about 72,000ppsm and Harlem has about 56,000ppsm. Therefore, the Tenderloin would be more "urban." I think this is the only argument the pro tenderloin people can use (though I can't believe I've heard Harlem called a "suburb").

To me, Harlem is more urban. The tenderloin covers a tiny area of under 1/2 a square mile. Harlem, on the other hand, is closer to 4 square miles. Harlem covers a larger area, has a staggeringly high population density over a larger area, and has a variety of different neighborhoods within its boundaries. The tenderloin feels like a tiny urban pocket (one that I actually think is pretty cool... some of my favorite bars are in/on the periphery of the tenderloin) than a massive imposing "urban" area. Just my opinion. I think that the Tenderloin is too small to feel more urban than Harlem which is pretty huge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-04-2011, 10:28 AM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,395 posts, read 14,881,557 times
Reputation: 5330
Quote:
Originally Posted by overunder12 View Post
You're point is well taken, but -

Harlem = 215,753 total population

San Francisco = 805,235 total population

Tenderloin = 25,067 total population

So, Harlem has a little over 1/4 the total population of San Francisco. Not sure how you got 2/3.

Also, it has 9 times the population of the tenderloin - so, yes, it is apples and oranges.
Your #'s are off, that's how, or at least diff than the ones I am using, I know how to divide . I'm using the nyc.gov definition of the area of Harlem, which includes some peripheral areas. But still, if you use those smaller #'s...it is still an apples/oranges comparison.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2011, 10:33 AM
rah
 
Location: San Francisco
3,104 posts, read 5,238,752 times
Reputation: 2187
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico View Post
Your #'s are off, that's how.


He's right, Harlem is not 2/3 of SF's population. It's closer to 1/4. Or were you under the impression that SF only has 300,000 people?

Oh i see you've now edited your post...so you're saying that Harlem actually has 600,000 people, and that it makes up over 1/3 of Manhattan's population?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2011, 10:34 AM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,395 posts, read 14,881,557 times
Reputation: 5330
Quote:
Originally Posted by rah View Post


He's right, Harlem is not 2/3 of SF's population. It's closer to 1/4. Or were you under the impression that SF only has 300,000 people?
great contribution!!! yes that is the impression I was under!


Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2011, 10:36 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
17,595 posts, read 10,061,391 times
Reputation: 6204
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox View Post
Define urban...

If you're talking about strictly population density, the Tenderloin has about 72,000ppsm and Harlem has about 56,000ppsm. Therefore, the Tenderloin would be more "urban." I think this is the only argument the pro tenderloin people can use (though I can't believe I've heard Harlem called a "suburb").

To me, Harlem is more urban. The tenderloin covers a tiny area of under 1/2 a square mile. Harlem, on the other hand, is closer to 4 square miles. Harlem covers a larger area, has a staggeringly high population density over a larger area, and has a variety of different neighborhoods within its boundaries. The tenderloin feels like a tiny urban pocket (one that I actually think is pretty cool... some of my favorite bars are in/on the periphery of the tenderloin) than a massive imposing "urban" area. Just my opinion. I think that the Tenderloin is too small to feel more urban than Harlem which is pretty huge.
This is a good response.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2011, 10:44 AM
rah
 
Location: San Francisco
3,104 posts, read 5,238,752 times
Reputation: 2187
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico View Post
great contribution!!! yes that is the impression I was under!


It sure looked like it based on your post

Or did you forget how to do math?

Also, i responded before you edited your post (and i edited mine in turn). So i ask you again:

You're saying that Harlem actually has 600,000 people, and makes up over 1/3 of Manhattan's population (source please)? According to City-Data, Harlem has 215,000 people, and according to this: Harlem's Shifting Population (Gotham Gazette, Aug 2008), Harlem has a population of 375,000 (as of 2006). So that's 1/4, or nearly 1/2 of SF's population...but not 2/3.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2011, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
25,306 posts, read 33,044,989 times
Reputation: 10724
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Easy View Post
Reread the original question. It's not which area is larger or has more people, it's which area is more urban. And yuppie and haute cuisine have nothing to do with anything. You're letting peripheral information that is unrelated cloud your judgment. The simple fact is that Harlem is very much like a very dense suburb. Like a Parisan suburb. I think that it's close, but Harlem isn't quite as urban as the Tenderloin imo. But it's more of a subjective opinion as "urbaness" is hard to quantify.
Yes I agree but this is way over the heads of many Americans.

Paris has incredibly dense 'suburbs'-- Noisy-le-sec, Bondy and Bobigny are all very similar to Harlem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2011, 11:33 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,336 posts, read 451,051 times
Reputation: 344
Harlem was New York's first suburb. What's so hard to understand about that? I think most people would get it right away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Yes I agree but this is way over the heads of many Americans.

Paris has incredibly dense 'suburbs'-- Noisy-le-sec, Bondy and Bobigny are all very similar to Harlem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2011, 12:29 PM
 
Location: Boston
5,408 posts, read 9,451,811 times
Reputation: 5794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dub King View Post
Harlem was New York's first suburb. What's so hard to understand about that? I think most people would get it right away.
The issue lies with the difference between "was" and "is." In most older cities, neighborhoods that were initially inner suburbs are now full-fledged urban neighborhoods. It simply comes with the nature of cities which grow outward from the core. When Harlem was established as a suburb, places like Mt. Vernon, Eastchester, Englewood, Ridgefield, etc, etc, etc, etc didn't exist in their current form. Like almost every city's "first suburb," Harlem has become very much an urban neighborhood within the city of New York, not a suburb. It functions as an urban neighborhood, it's built like an urban neighborhood, and I highly doubt any Realtor would show properties in Harlem to a client looking for a place in the suburbs.

Personally, I have a hard time thinking of just about anything on Manhattan as "suburban," even if Inwood, Fort George and Washington Heights are getting out there. Manhattan is the very innermost borough in the most urban city in the country. Harlem is a very urban section of that borough. It may have begun as a suburb, but it's no longer a suburb by just about any measure. It's a real reach/nitpick to try to argue that it is a suburb.

Last edited by lrfox; 08-04-2011 at 01:01 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2011, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,336 posts, read 451,051 times
Reputation: 344
Except that it lacks office towers and is primarily residential. But I know what you are saying and in this country the very definition of suburban has changed and in some cities, 'suburb' means another municipality altogether. Nobody is going to call Yonge St. in Toronto suburban, but that's where the Harlem as suburb argument would be headed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox View Post
The issue lies with the difference between "was" and "is." In most older cities, neighborhoods that were initially inner suburbs are now full-fledged urban neighborhoods. It simply comes with the nature of cities which grow outward from the core. When Harlem was established as a suburb, places like Mt. Vernon, Eastchester, Englewood, Ridgefield, etc, etc, etc, etc didn't exist in their current form. Like almost every city's "first suburb," Harlem has become very much an urban neighborhood within the city of New York, not a suburb. It functions as an urban neighborhood, it's built like an urban neighborhood, and I highly doubt any Realtor would show properties in Harlem to a client looking for a place in the suburbs.

Personally, I have a hard time thinking of just about anything on Manhattan as "suburban," even if Inwood and Washington Heights are getting out there. Manhattan is the very innermost borough in the most urban city in the country. Harlem is a very urban section of that borough. It may have begun as a suburb, but it's no longer a suburb by just about any measure. It's a real reach/nitpick to try to argue that it is a suburb.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top