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 said they aren't as dense as DC's. But that doesn't mean they're not dense and walkable. You're just wrong about Seattle neighborhoods. Seattle densest tracts aren't even in Downtown (they're in Capitol Hill). Capitol Hill, Lower Queen Anne, U District, South Lake Union, Ballard, Greenwood, Fremont etc. are all very walkable and most of them are quite dense. You seem to be the one who is uninformed.
Most of those neighborhoods aren't urban in comparison to D.C.'s urban neighborhoods though. That's the problem here. Capitol Hill is not like DuPont Circle for instance. The urban neighborhood designs you get in NYC, SF, DC, Philly, Boston, and Chicago don't exist in Seattle outside of downtown Seattle which is tiny. That is the point people are making.
I said they aren't as dense as DC's. But that doesn't mean they're not dense and walkable. You're just wrong about Seattle neighborhoods. Seattle densest tracts aren't even in Downtown (they're in Capitol Hill). Capitol Hill, Lower Queen Anne, U District, South Lake Union, Ballard, Greenwood, Fremont etc. are all very walkable and most of them are quite dense. You seem to be the one who is uninformed.
They are still not comparable to Logan Circle, 14th Street, Columbia Heights, DuPont Circle, Adams Morgan, Georgetown, etc. I never said they weren't dense or walkable. I said they weren't as dense or walkable AS DC's. I never said Seattle densest area was in downtown neither, you're clearly misinformed because you're talking about stuff I didn't bring up in my argument. So I what I stated was true, but thanks for your response even though it wasn't relevant to what I was saying
Seattle neighborhoods resemble foggy bottom in DC. The one neighborhood that's not as densely or residentaly populated as the others.
Of course, Seattle is less dense than DC. But, density is a relative issue. Seattle is mostly a bungalow city with some apartment buildings mixed in. It obviously lacks the row houses of DC.
But, you could say the same thing about SF. You could easily argue that DC isn't in SF's tier because DC lacks the hyper-dense walkup apartment neighborhoods of inner-SF (Chinatown, Nob Hill, Tenderloin).
Sure DC is about a 1/3 denser than Seattle, but SF is roughly 70% denser than DC. So I stand by my statement, DC is more urban than Seattle, but in the grand scheme of things it is close. It is hard to argue that the density difference between DC and SF or Bos are meaningless, but the (similar sized) gaps in density between Seattle and DC are hugely important.
I don't think the characterization above is particularly accurate anymore. At this point about half the households in Seattle live in multi-family housing. (In fact the stats on apartments are not that hugely different between D.C. and Seattle if the following is to be believed: Quick Facts: Resident Demographics | nmhc.org) So we're a bit beyond a city of craftsman houses for better or worse. Likewise, the neighborhoods especially the inner ones are both walkable and full of pedestrians. As is typical for most cities its the outer edges that are most SFH dominated but these were built too late to have anything bungalow like on them.
They are still not comparable to Logan Circle, 14th Street, Columbia Heights, DuPont Circle, Adams Morgan, Georgetown, etc. I never said they weren't dense or walkable. I said they weren't as dense or walkable AS DC's.
Then you need to retract the above, because this is exactly what you said:
"Seattle neighborhoods are not dense. They are pretty sprawled, even Seattle posters even said that on this thread. It's not walkable and not even close in the same league as places such as DC neighborhoods."
I find it beyond amusing that you and MDAllstar are such experts and authorities on Seattle, when neither one of you HAS EVER BEEN THERE!!!!
Then you need to retract the above, because this is exactly what you said:
"Seattle neighborhoods are not dense. They are pretty sprawled, even Seattle posters even said that on this thread. It's not walkable and not even close in the same league as places such as DC neighborhoods."
I find it beyond amusing that you and MDAllstar are such experts and authorities on Seattle, when neither one of you HAS EVER BEEN THERE!!!!
You need to read. LOL you just quoted my proof. I said not as dense AS DC neighborhoods. It says it right there in your quote. You need to go back and read. Also, I've been to Seattle numerous times..... It's crazy how you know where I've been in my lifetime... Do I know you personally? Or are you psychic? That's insanely cool.
Seattle's ridership is good compared to what city? Looks awful compared to DC.
Oh, really? You must not have even looked, as Seattle's daily bus ridership is only 68,000 less than D.C.'s. Not much at all, considering the huge size difference.
The only cities with higher bus ridership are Chicago, D.C., L.A., NYC & Philly. Pretty damn impressive if you ask anyone without an agenda.
Another thing that must be taken into consideration is that over 78,000 people commute daily by Washington State ferries in Seattle, which is more than the combined ridership of MARC and VRE. Seattle also has commuter rail.
It's not black and white, it's about being "urban" which is clearly defined all across the world. What is your definition of urban design? What is your criteria? What are your intensity dynamics?
No it is not clearly defined all across the world. You have your very own, very convenient definition and I refuse to get into a debate with you over something you very narrowly define on your terms only.
To hear you tell it. D.C. is wall-to-wall rowhomes and mixed-use developments across every inch of the District. That is nowhere near the reality on the ground, and everyone else seems to realize this.
Quote:
I think if we both get a mutual definition for what the most urban and intense design of any building and street relationship can be, we can rate neighborhoods from 1-10 with 10 being the most urban by the urban design criteria and 1 being the least urban. This will allow neighborhoods to be rated in their entirety.
Have fun.
Quote:
Have you ever stopped to ask yourself why all the urban cities are designed the same way? What do you think the reason is?
LOL! They aren't at all, but keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better about where you live. D.C. has as much in common with NYC and Philadelphia as it has with Key West and Fresno.
You need to read. LOL you just quoted my proof. I said not as dense AS DC neighborhoods. It says it right there in your quote. You need to go back and read.
If I need to read, then you need to sharpen up on your reading comprehension skills. Perhaps if it was bolded it might jog your memory?
Ahem: "Seattle neighborhoods are not dense. They are pretty sprawled, even Seattle posters even said that on this thread"
Care to retract now? You can't erase past posts, they are there for all to see.
Quote:
Also, I've been to Seattle numerous times....
I don't believe you. If you had actually been there, you wouldn't be repeating the same ridiculous claims over and over.
Quote:
It's crazy how you know where I've been in my lifetime... Do I know you personally? Or are you psychic? That's insanely cool.
How totally juvenile, not to mention completely off topic.
Oh, really? You must not have even looked, as Seattle's daily bus ridership is only 68,000 less than D.C.'s. Not much at all, considering the huge size difference.
The only cities with higher bus ridership are Chicago, D.C., L.A., NYC & Philly. Pretty damn impressive if you ask anyone without an agenda.
Another thing that must be taken into consideration is that over 78,000 people commute daily by Washington State ferries in Seattle, which is more than the combined ridership of MARC and VRE. Seattle also has commuter rail.
No it is not clearly defined all across the world. You have your very own, very convenient definition and I refuse to get into a debate with you over something you very narrowly define on your terms only.
To hear you tell it. D.C. is wall-to-wall rowhomes and mixed-use developments across every inch of the District. That is nowhere near the reality on the ground, and everyone else seems to realize this.
Have fun.
LOL! They aren't at all, but keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better about where you live. D.C. has as much in common with NYC and Philadelphia as it has with Key West and Fresno.
Just a little education for you on transit in DC. We have multiple bus agencies. Infact, Montgomery County has a ridership around 90,000 a day. Most of the others are 20,000-30,000 etc. Also, DC has one of the largest circulator bus networks in the country which is also not run by WMATA.
Your last comment about Fresno tells me you have no formal training in urban planning or design which makes this a pointless discussion to begin with. I don't assume people work in this field on this website, but I do expect them to have some minimal background in these subjects. You clearly do not.
Just a little education for you on transit in DC. We have multiple bus agencies. Infact, Montgomery County has a ridership around 90,000 a day. Most of the others are 20,000-30,000 etc. Also, DC has one of the largest circulator bus networks in the country which is also not run by WMATA.
Your last comment about Fresno tells me you have no formal training in urban planning or design which makes this a pointless discussion to begin with. I don't assume people work in this field on this website, but I do expect them to have some minimal background in these subjects. You clearly do not.
Seattle ranks 7th (18.1%) in the country for major cities (500K) in terms of transit ridership. DC ranks 5th (26.5%).
1. New York City, New York - 55.66%
2. Jersey City, New Jersey - 45.82% 3. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - 39.19% 4. San Francisco, California - 34.05% 5. Boston, Massachusetts - 32.82%
6. Arlington, Virginia - 28.54% 7. Washington, D.C. - 26.61%
8. Cambridge, Massachusetts - 26.60%
9. Newark, New Jersey - 26.50% 10. Chicago, Illinois - 26.50%
11. Yonkers, New York - 24.95%
12. Daly City, California - 21.45%
13. Hartford, Connecticut - 21.19%
14. Alexandria, Virginia - 21.12% 15. Seattle, Washington - 18.19%
Most of those neighborhoods aren't urban in comparison to D.C.'s urban neighborhoods though. That's the problem here. Capitol Hill is not like DuPont Circle for instance. The urban neighborhood designs you get in NYC, SF, DC, Philly, Boston, and Chicago don't exist in Seattle outside of downtown Seattle which is tiny. That is the point people are making.
The urban core of Seattle is not tiny and extends significantly beyond downtown proper. All of the areas below (and several outside the boundary of the map) are urban and walkable.
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.
