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.
Here is a clip of downtown Seattle in the peak of COVID, so it is completely empty. But imagine this with hustle and bustle of people. I have been to downtown Seattle and it is extremely urban in the core. And it spreads out a good distance.
Again, I will agree that DC's urban area is more continuous than Seattle's, but in the peak of downtown, I would put Seattle slightly above DC. That is why I said, I would consider DC, LA, and Seattle about even.
Seattle clearly has a solidly built and structurally dense downtown no doubt, with a lot of street-level retail frontage which is great. It's also noticeably taller than downtown DC, which every other major city is of course. But what statistics do you have on hand to support your assertion that Seattle trumps DC in urbanity, even in the peak of downtown? Not only is downtown DC just as walkable, but it supports a much larger population of mass transit commuters and has a larger daytime population than Seattle (thanks to 18Montclair for his effort in mining those statistics). And that doesn't even include the hordes of tourists that are a constant presence on and near the National Mall. Also the transition from downtown DC to surrounding residential neighborhoods is about as seamless as it gets.
I could see Seattle's daytime population catching up to DC's at some point in the near future, but it's not catching up with DC in commuter population anytime soon IMO.
Again I know LA pretty well. You can make statements like that if you want to, but then we all have to face the reality. In that 50 sq mi area, there's obvious density, a lot of it hidden, yet this is too prevalent in the urban format throughout. When I think of LA's residential streets across that "dense" area you're referring to, I'm often reminded of this:
I've never seen such diverse, even haphazard streetscape foliage/landscape architecture along a single street and yet it absolutely works for LA. It's the weirdest thing.
Seattle clearly has a solidly built and structurally dense downtown no doubt, with a lot of street-level retail frontage which is great. It's also noticeably taller than downtown DC, which every other major city is of course. But what statistics do you have on hand to support your assertion that Seattle trumps DC in urbanity, even in the peak of downtown? Not only is downtown DC just as walkable, but it supports a much larger population of mass transit commuters and has a larger daytime population than Seattle (thanks to 18Montclair for his effort in mining those statistics). And that doesn't even include the hordes of tourists that are a constant presence on and near the National Mall. Also the transition from downtown DC to surrounding residential neighborhoods is about as seamless as it gets.
I could see Seattle's daytime population catching up to DC's at some point in the near future, but it's not catching up with DC in commuter population anytime soon IMO.
I don't see Seattle catching D.C. in daytime population unless D.C. stops building new buildings. Does anybody think D.C. will stop developing the city?
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,547,924 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77
I could see Seattle's daytime population catching up to DC's at some point in the near future, but it's not catching up with DC in commuter population anytime soon IMO.
I hope it was 2020, on a long holiday weekend. Those streets were empty.
I don't see Seattle catching D.C. in daytime population unless D.C. stops building new buildings. Does anybody think D.C. will stop developing the city?
Of course not, but Seattle most certainly isn't pressing the pause button on development either and unlike DC, it doesn't have the artificial ceiling of citywide height restrictions to contend with. Seattle already has more residents that also work in the city than DC for what it's worth.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,547,924 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDAllstar
I don't see Seattle catching D.C. in daytime population unless D.C. stops building new buildings. Does anybody think D.C. will stop developing the city?
Yes, in the last two threads alone, there are posters claiming that LA will pass DC in rail commuters, and Seattle will pass DC in daytime population.
I don't think the news has spread to the West Coast that DC's been the fastest growing major city on the EC, and gained the 4th or 5th most residents in the nation by MSA since 2010. It gives them hope though.
Of course not, but Seattle most certainly isn't pressing the pause button on development either and unlike DC, it doesn't have the artificial ceiling of citywide height restrictions to contend with.
Actually, from a development and urban planning standpoint, height limits will allow D.C. to build more housing across the city than almost any cities except Seattle which did the same thing. The height limits force the community to allow additional height. Without height limits, cities usually only build high-rise's in their urban core for the most part. Everything gets tied up in litigation. D.C. had the same problem, but the city is changing the comprehensive plan and up-zoning so residents will have no way to fight it. The city would not have the will to do that without the height limit. People would say concentrate the development downtown. What other city does that outside of NYC?
San Fran = No
Boston = No
Philly = Absolutely No
etc.
etc.
etc.
Yes, in the last two threads alone, there are posters claiming that LA will pass DC in rail commuters, and Seattle will pass DC in daytime population.
I don't think the news has spread to the West Coast that DC's been the fastest growing major city on the EC, and gained the 4th or 5th most residents in the nation by MSA since 2010. It gives them hope though.
DC already had peak density that is tied or denser than Philadelphia in certain parts of the city. We talked about that on here for years using the radius tool for all cities. DC has and continues to add so much density in new areas that the core of DC will actually be denser than Philadelphia apples to apples. Boston too when the dust settles. Philadelphia and Boston have way too many historic structures and rowhomes in the core to build up like DC is doing. A 1-mile radius in that radius tool showed that.
Urban renewal didn’t create a blank slate in those cities. There are census tracts in Navy Yard and NOMA that will surpass 120k-150k people per sq. mile.
DC is not more dense, nor will be more dense than Philly in the near future. DC has plenty of nice leafy rowhome blocks in its core that will stay put because its ingrained into DC's fabric. Because the inner 61 square miles (apples to apples) of Philadelphia is already significantly more dense than DC, and Philadelphia has plenty of urban infill currently under construction and in its pipeline (DC probably has more though) with also other plenty of potential space for infill, I think its fair to say that there is a good chance that Philly will continue to be more dense than DC. For a rundown of some examples of the large amount of projects being built in Philly, you can take a look here Philadelphia Real Estate News - Rising Real Estate
DC is not more dense, nor will be more dense than Philly in the near future. DC has plenty of nice leafy rowhome blocks in its core that will stay put because its ingrained into DC's fabric. Because the inner 61 square miles (apples to apples) of Philadelphia is already significantly more dense than DC, and Philadelphia has plenty of urban infill currently under construction and in its pipeline (DC probably has more though) with also other plenty of potential space for infill, I think its fair to say that there is a good chance that Philly will continue to be more dense than DC. For a rundown of some examples of the large amount of projects being built in Philly, you can take a look here Philadelphia Real Estate News - Rising Real Estate
I was talking about the urban core, not the entire city. The 20 sq. mile urban cores of all these cities. Using the 20009 zip code with the radius tool put D.C. ahead of Philadelphia in the thread I was referring too. That's the Dupont Circle/Logan Circle/U Street zip code. My urban core comment referred to the development of NOMA, Union Market, Navy Yard, Buzzard Point, SW, Federal Center, Old Soldiers Home, Shaw/U Street, Northwest One, H Street/Atlas District, RIA, Bryant Street, Ivy City, New City, and the downtown DC office conversions.
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.
