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.
I know you've stated this before and I've personally corrected you multiple times with very straightforward statistics.
Why do you obsess over everyone in Chicago living in single family homes and bungalows?? I normally respect everything you have to say, but this one really makes me roll my eyes - just cause it's basically trolling when you keep stating things you know are so far from the truth. Not sure why you care....
It's been pointed out multiple times and you've responded to the fact that only 25% of housing in Chicago is single family homes or bungalows.
Single Unit: 25% of structures
2-10 Units: 46% of structures
10+ Units: 28% of structures
After the highrise boom of the 2000's with upwards of 100 new highrise residentials built, the number of highrise units is now around equal to the number of single family homes in the city. The other ~half or so are multi unit 2-12 flats and courtyard apartments.
The only way I can think of that might solve this argument is if that weren't percentages of structures, but instead percentage of the population living in those conditions (the other ways to solve the discrepancy would be if his stats were accounting for the metro or if one of your guys's stats were wrong). If it were 25% of people living in SFHs then it would occupy a lot more of the city and the amount of total structures due to single units able to house comparatively small numbers in comparison to the multi-unit structures. I'm not disagreeing with you (haven't seen the stats), but are you sure that's percentage of structures rather than percentage of population living in those units?
Also, to everyone, more pictures! These are beautiful shots of different cities. I'd like to see more of those and more shots of other cities. I'm especially interested in the twin cities as I recall reading somewhere that Minneapolis has far more newer structures while St. Paul has retained much more older structures.
The only way I can think of that might solve this argument is if that weren't percentages of structures, but instead percentage of the population living in those conditions (the other ways to solve the discrepancy would be if his stats were accounting for the metro or if one of your guys's stats were wrong). If it were 25% of people living in SFHs then it would occupy a lot more of the city and the amount of total structures due to single units able to house comparatively small numbers in comparison to the multi-unit structures. I'm not disagreeing with you (haven't seen the stats), but are you sure that's percentage of structures rather than percentage of population living in those units?
Also, to everyone, more pictures! These are beautiful shots of different cities. I'd like to see more of those and more shots of other cities. I'm especially interested in the twin cities as I recall reading somewhere that Minneapolis has far more newer structures while St. Paul has retained much more older structures.
It's the number of units. That's almost always how it's discussed when talking housing. Otherwise you could have a highrise with 400 units in it and then 100 single homes and say "The city is made up of over 99% single family homes".
Well yes if you look at the sheer number of buildings, but in actuality 80% of the people in the city are living in the one highrise.
(1)I see that you fall victim to the same eye problems that many of your compadres have. (2)Bungalows and flats are the most dominant form of living in Chicago. (3)Not high rises, which are only near the lake. (4)70 percent of Chicago lives in single family homes.
1. What might that be? Sight?
2. Dominant how?
-Absolute numbers?
-Percentage of people living in that particular type of residence?
-Visually overwhelming?
-What type/design of residence that is currently being built?
-Iconic residency image associated with the city?
3. You mean the lake which runs 20+ MILES along Chicago? That lake? Even if you want to say the Southside is Dresden 2.0, that still leaves about 10 miles of lakefront in which you would be hard pressed to find a building that didn't service at least 3 units with (optional) some sort of retail on the ground floor, on, if not within steps, of the lake.
What about Miami? Similar situation but with the ocean instead of a lake. Does Miami not have a substantial amount of high rise living and architecture? Or is that negated by the fact that people will pay money to live by a large body of water, no matter if it is drinkable or not?
4. Out of the 2,695,598 people living in Chicago, 1,886,918 people live in single family homes? I have not been anywhere in this city where I have seen a house with less than two floors. Not attics, or decoration, or anything like that. I have not seen a single place yet that did not have at least 2 floors of usable space.
So you're saying that *ONLY* 808,679 people (30% of Chicago's population) that live in Chicago live in a building that houses more than two residents/units?
Or are you saying that *2,940,000* people live in single family homes in Chicago, 30% of the metro area?
There seems to be more people living in single family homes in Chicago proper than there are officially recognized city residents if you're using metro numbers to define what is found WITHIN CHICAGO...
Either you:
1. Took the metro numbers into account when talking about the city and the types of residences found in the city
2. Ignored the city/suburb boundaries and choose to use metro numbers to define a city.
3. Pulled the numbers from a place where the Sun doesn't shine.
Chicago has more styles of residential architecture with more standouts to point to, than any other city in the Midwest, my opinion which could be fact if someone wants to do a scientific study on this. Until then, I would say it is a valid hypothesis.
I have yet to see a picture on this thread that doesn't make me think of some place I have seen in Chicago. The only exception would be St. Paul. A couple of those pics struck my eye as something I haven't seen here (yet) because of the massive size of some of those rocks/stones (in comparisons to the brown/gray stones). A couple looked to be full on zombie proof.
Chicago has more styles of residential architecture with more standouts to point to, than any other city in the Midwest, my opinion which could be fact if someone wants to do a scientific study on this. Until then, I would say it is a valid hypothesis.
I have yet to see a picture on this thread that doesn't make me think of some place I have seen in Chicago. The only exception would be St. Paul. A couple of those pics struck my eye as something I haven't seen here (yet) because of the massive size of some of those rocks/stones (in comparisons to the brown/gray stones). A couple looked to be full on zombie proof.
I don't know... I'm not disputing that Chicago has incredible diversity in residential architecture, but Federal style rowhouses to my knowledge are extremely scarce (if they exist at all) in Chicago, yet St. Louis has them in spades on the Near North and Near South sides. After all, these neighborhoods were firmly established and mature when St. Louis was still bigger than Chicago (1840s-1870s), and neighborhoods like Carondelet were settled when Chicago was still an onion patch.
Not that we should expect all cities to offer all the same styles anyway. I'm just making the point that a lot of very old housing stock in St. Louis survives today, while very, very little remains in Chicago from the same era.
Cincinnati and St. Louis have the most awesome residential architecture in the Midwest because they're heavily inspired by the architecture in Pennsylvania and Maryland.
Must you troll every thread?
Colts had it pretty close to accurate early in the thread.
This thread was an interesting read, especially the St. Louis vs Chicago debate.
I was amused by Chicagoans constantly insisting "we have rowhouses too!" Sorry, but Chicago's rowhouses are rare and not too impressive. What I like most about Chicago's residential architecture is its distinctiveness. You just can't find blocks like this one in Wicker Park anywhere else. I also love how on many of Chicago's blocks, each house looks different from each other...keeps things interesting. That IMO is the best argument for Chicago.
As an Easterner, I like St. Louis's residential architecture a lot. But to be honest, St. Louis look like a slightly dumpier Baltimore. A great deal of St. Louis's classic architecture has went to the way of the wrecking ball, and since the city is still in bad shape, more of it will probably have to be demolished in the future. It's sad.
Cincinnati is also very nice, but like St. Louis, many of its historic neighborhoods are decaying. There are a lot of vacant lots in once dense rowhouse neighborhoods. Here's a good example of what I'm talking about. Like St. Louis, much of Cincinnati looks like a run-down Eastern city.
I prefer the architecture of cities like NYC, Philadelphia and Boston. But I don't think it makes sense to rate a city's architecture based on how closely it follows the style of another place. That's boring. You have to rate a city on its on terms. St. Louis and Cincinnati don't really bring anything new to the table. Chicago does. Much of Chicago's classic architecture is still in great shape as well.
Therefore, I have to crown Chicago the winner on this one.
Last edited by Frank Bones; 02-21-2015 at 07:53 AM..
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.
