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.
This is 1.7 miles straight down NY Ave from the White House Lawn, there are other intersections like that also.
Below is what a lot of DC looks like, to me, it's too spread out. It's 37k ppsm, but doesn't really look like it. Certainly a nice neighborhood and fantastic architecture but a bit too suburban vibe for what I like.
Adams Morgan is often touted on the boards as one of the coolest neighborhoods, but even then has sideways street parking and such in the main commercial area. I know they were redoing the area or something though.
Here is Evanston area that reminds me of some of DC design elements with the side parking one way, spaced out areas, and then street parking on other sides.
That's completely subjective though, not by any means do those areas in DC "lack urbanity," just because the streets aren't as tight as Boston or Philly? I don't get it.
You cherry picked the pic of Adams Morgan but did not show the side streets around 18th street which is the main corridor through Adams Morgan. Those side streets are as "urban" as anywhere you will find in Boston/Philly etc.
I have to disagree. Of course, there is/has been a staggering amount of development in DC, particularly for its size. However, Philadelphia is definitely following its own development path.
While DC is building almost exclusively mid-rise buildings that tend to have a mix of uses -- which is a key feature for a successful city -- Philadelphia is building with much more variety (ranging from one-off single rowhouse developments to what will be its the city's first supertall skyscraper, slated to break ground later this year). To this end, Philly is looking toward filling in gaps where it is sorely needed, and it's clear that the city will continue to see impressive increases in density, both in built form and population, over the coming years.
Basically, I don't necessarily follow what you're saying. Again, I will concede that DC currently has a more consistent urban core and continues to develop with a mix of uses. However, due to its height limits and sprawling, mid-rise downtown, and much smaller city limits, there literally is only so far that DC can go. That's not to say that taller buildings will never make it to DC, but I suppose I'm looking at future trends/potential here.
Philadelphia's increasingly high-rise core, with far narrower streets to boot, give it a much stronger urban edge.
Well, if the 2 mile X 1 mile boundary of Center City where there is room to build skyscrapers is enough for you, then I guess that will work. I need a much larger urban core in the 6-15 story range. A mix of row houses is fine, however, they should be the exception, not the norm. D.C.'s urban core will be sitting at 5 miles X 4 miles at full build out of 6-15 story buildings with row house's mixed in here and there and no city outside NYC can say that. I mean, many of our row house's are popping up to as many as 6 stories now as they convert to condo and apartments.
That's completely subjective though, not by any means do those areas in DC "lack urbanity," just because the streets aren't as tight as Boston or Philly? I don't get it.
You cherry picked the pic of Adams Morgan but did not show the side streets around 18th street which is the main corridor through Adams Morgan. Those side streets are as "urban" as anywhere you will find in Boston/Philly etc.
How is it subjective. I think many people will agree wide streets and back spacing will take away from the urban and intimate feel. And what are you talking about, I DID post 18th street, you think the side streets are *more* urban?
There are a few better streets, but walking more around it there are also a lot of less urban ones also to be sure, I explored the area for about 3 hours thinking it would be cool but was disappointed with it.
Chicago has the same problem in a lot of areas, but I think DC has that issue to a greater extent.
I personally think DC's "urban model" is too spread out. The wide spaces take away from the urban environment, as does the lack of mixed residential/retail at street level b/c of government zoning codes/large museums, etc.
That's largely true of Downtown south of Pennsylvania Avenue. Independence and Constitution are two very boring stretches from a vibrancy standpoint, particularly at night, but actually feel rather busy on weekends when people are on the Mall. I agree that the wider street design does not feel as urban as Center City or Boston's Financial District.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico
There are many areas where one must travel monotonous long distances, or in areas that feel kind of suburban residentially.
With regard to the first part of your statement, that's true of the Mall. Here's an example below.
I personally don't mind it because the city was planned that way. The Mall is supposed to be a solemn place. In the past, I was in favor of putting more amenities around it, but I honestly think that would ruin it.
As to the second part of your statement, there really are no suburban parts of the core.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico
How often do residents actually go in these areas to go out?
To places like Tenleytown and Cleveland Park? There are good restaurants there so I would imagine so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico
Also the neighborhoods in DC do not seem that urban to me, they are kind of spread out feeling. My gf thinks DC has a suburban feeling over the whole area, just to add another opinion.
That's an interesting opinion. What does she think about Chicago, which has more surface parking, larger setbacks and a less consistent streetwall than DC (outside of the CBD)?
The core of DC is most similar to Fort Greene/Clinton Hill from a built environment perspective. That's why I like DC's built environment so much. It reminds me of Brooklyn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico
As far as urban dense design and walkability goes, I'd put them probably Philly/Boston tie, then NYC, then SF, then Chicago, then DC.
I'll rank the ones I've lived in (four of them). I'm judging based on the OP.
NYC (obviously) - I still think Manhattan leaves something to be desired compared to Barcelona or Paris. Those cities are "dense" in a way NYC is not. I can get bored walking in Manhattan whereas that never happens in Paris.
Boston - I'll walk much farther and for longer than in any U.S. city that's not NYC. The Freedom Trail was something I really enjoyed and I seriously doubt too many cities could pull off a 2.5 mile walking tour like Boston. I don't care much about Boston's size because all of the best walking cities are small cities compared to most American cities anyway.
DC - I'll walk a good distance here. I lived about two miles from work and would walk on nice days. And that's a lot coming from me because I'm not a big walker. There was enough pedestrian traffic and interesting architecture to keep me entertained.
Philly - Center City is great, but the drop off in intensity is very steep once you leave it.
This is what I was thinking for Philly. I am no Philly expert.
A shape more or less like that... that is 8.6 sq miles.
Exactly-and you can even go down further than Snyder East of Broad to Oregon Ave as the development doesn't change at all.
And as Kp said, you can go North to at least Girard. That would be more than 10 sq miles.
This is 1.7 miles straight down NY Ave from the White House Lawn, there are other intersections like that also.
Below is what a lot of DC looks like, to me, it's too spread out. It's 37k ppsm, but doesn't really look like it. Certainly a nice neighborhood and fantastic architecture but a bit too suburban vibe for what I like.
Adams Morgan is often touted on the boards as one of the coolest neighborhoods, but even then has sideways street parking and such in the main commercial area. I know they were redoing the area or something though, plus the area isn't that large.
Here is Evanston area that reminds me of some of DC design elements with the side parking one way, spaced out areas, and then street parking on other sides.
Furthermore, every single link except one doesn't even look that way anymore which tells me one MAJOR thing. You have not been to D.C. in years. I mean, Adams's Morgan hasn't looked like that for three years and neither has NOMA. Also, did you really show a picture of downtown Evanston IL with highrise's and try to compare it to a regular non-downtown neighborhood in D.C.? You're kidding right?
Furthermore, every single link except one doesn't even look that way anymore which tells me one MAJOR thing. You have not been to D.C. in years. I mean, Adams's Morgan hasn't looked like that for three years and neighther has NOMA. Also, did you really show a picture of downtown Evanston IL with highrise's and try to compare it to a regular non-downtown neighborhood in D.C.? You're kidding right?
Adams-Morgan still looks that way (minus the construction). I don't think it looks like Evanston, however. On the whole, I think DC's residential areas are more compact than Chicago's.
Adams-Morgan still looks that way (minus the construction). I don't think it looks like Evanston, however. On the whole, I think DC's residential areas are more compact than Chicago's.
I guess I don't really understand what was being said. I thought he/she was talking about the street and sidewalk which has been fixed above.
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.
