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.
The thing about comparing Queens and Philly which makes Queens so much more dense is the difference in housing stock. Queens is mostly made of apartment buildings and Philly is mostly single-family rowhomes. FWIW though, Queens does have a very diverse housing stock, I think it’s safe to say more than any other borough, but for the most part it has many more apartment buildings and multi-family homes compared to Philly where single-family rowhomes dominate.
However, someone else already mentioned that Philly has much smaller streets and Queens has a lot of very wide ones. I think that parts of Queens that are more densely populated than Philly can sometimes actually be less structurally dense and therefore may actually feel less urban than they are. Some wide streets do have urban benefits though. I always hated how wide Queens blvd was, though the reason for that is for the massive Queens blvd subway line that runs underneath it, which I cannot imagine Queens without.
I agree that population density is only one part of the full picture. One thing I like to look at is car ownership rates and method of commuting to work daily. I think that in a general sense, the amount of car use is inversely related to level of urbanness. Basically the more urban, the lower the car use.
Both Philly and Queens have very similar car ownership rates, with Queens slightly lower, with Queens around 36% of households car free and Philly at 33%. But one major difference is that in Philly, 50% of people commute to work by driving alone, and only 26% by public transit. In Queens, the majority of people (52%) commute by transit and only 32% drive alone.
I am from Queens and I have to agree with it ranking #4 in urbanness behind Manhattan, Brooklyn, and The Bronx. Only ahead of Staten Island. There seems to be a sizesble drop from BK/BX to Queens. Ignoring SI, Queens is the only borough where over 50% of households have a car, way higher than the other boroughs. Subway coverage in Queens, while fantastic for American standards, is weak compared to the other boroughs.
Though I will say that Queens is the most difficult borough to speak about as a collective unit, or to make generalizations about for 2 reasons. One is that it is so large. Is is the largest borough. The 2nd is that the built form of Queens is much more varied and can change drastically from neighborhood to neighborhood, or sometimes even within a single neighborhood. Queens built form follows no patterns and is not as predictable as other boroughs. It is not like BK/BX where you can generally expect farther from Manhattan to be less urban/dense and for it to increase the closer to Manhattan that you go. Flushing for example is one of the most intensely urban neighborhoods in Queens and is very far from Manhattan at the final stop on the 7.
It has to do with Queens’ history of development as a collection of separate towns and cities, unlike Brooklyn which was one unified city, and The Bronx which was essentially an extension of Manhattan. I think with Queens you cannot always look at all of it together as one, since it is so much less uniform than the other boroughs.
I am very familiar with Philly, but I do think that as far as this comparison goes that I lean towards Queens being more urban. The main thing that tips it in Queens’ favor for me other than the large difference in population density is the far superior transit coverage and ridership. I don’t think there is a wrong answer though. They are both different kinds of urban. Philly has more of a closer, tight knit feel while Queens has more of an active/busy and overall larger feeling. Also, as someone already mentioned, Queens definitely is more of a 24-hour/late night place than Philly. I’ve actually been going out in Queens a lot more lately despite the fact that I live in one of Brooklyn’s biggest nightlife areas.
I find Southern Brooklyn to be super urban too, though! The fact that Coney Island is that urban and very far from Manhattan is impressive.
Southern Brooklyn has subway service, high population density, and is structurally dense (even if less so than Northern BK).
The only parts of Brooklyn that come close to being suburban are those fringe areas like Mill Basin, but even that neighborhood is not 100% suburban.
As for your point about Queens having had been different towns, I don't know if I agree. Most of the housing stock and subway lines were built after the merger. And Brooklyn was also various towns at one point.
Also, parts of Philly are very blighted and not living up to their urban potential. North Philly looks like it has a lot of abandoned rowhouses and empty lots, you will not find much of that in Queens.
Queens and Staten Island are the only boroughs less urban than Philadelphia IMO
I think it’s questionable that Queens is less urban than Philadelphia. It matches pretty well overall. Since the overall population and population density of Queens are notably greater than that of Philadelphia even when adjusting for weekday daytime population differences.
Overall, Queens is more urban than Chicago in the residential areas, but Chicago's built environment is very different in different sections of the city. The residential areas of the north side and parts of the west side visually more resemble an east coast city. While I still think Queens is more urban than these areas, I don't know that the difference is "especially" different than Chicago.
However, when you look at residential parts of the south side or southwest side of Chicago, you can find houses with full lawns. If you were comparing Queens to those areas, the difference in "urbanity" would be extreme.
I think the North Side of Chicago is pretty comparable in terms of urban form and density to Queens as they run a similar gamut of neighborhood densities. It’s just that North Side Chicago also serves as the fancier part of the city whereas Queens doesn’t really serve that purpose in NYC
...the housing stock is mainly barely detached houses, semidetached, 2-4 family houses, and rowhomes.
Only in NYC could that be considered suburban in the US. On a world level that’s suburban in many international cities. Those cities may be NYC’s peers on this issue, not Chicago and LA. Philadelphia is an interesting comparison though. It really brings home just how urban NYC is that a borough like queens which is semi-suburban by NYC standards is potentially more urban than US cities that are known to be very urban.
NYC’s true suburbs are LI, northern NJ, westchester, CN, and similar. Queens doesn’t look like those for the most part, but it does have some suburban elements. I don’t consider it “the suburbs” in the way that I would places like Orange County, CA or Fairfax, VA.
Are those neighborhoods adjacent to downtown Chicago?
No. West Town (which consists of a few neighborhoods: Wicker Park, Ukranian Village, Bucktown, and some more), is separated from downtown by the river. Lincoln Park, Lakeview (just two example neighborhoods on north side) are also separated by the river from downtown proper. The Gold Coast is a residential neighborhood, although many consider it part of downtown. It is mostly residential high rises and some upscale row homes. Lincoln Park does border Gold Coast at the very south part of the actual park.
I think it’s questionable that Queens is less urban than Philadelphia. It matches pretty well overall. Since the overall population and population density of Queens are notably greater than that of Philadelphia even when adjusting for weekday daytime population differences.
Population and density are pretty important but I think people often discount the built form and structural density. Philly is so human scaled and with blocks and blocks of connected buildings on narrow streets while Queens often has huge boulevards and many detached homes-even though these homes are often multi-family it gives the appearance of a less urban form. The transit is pretty comparable when you consider Septa's regional rail and trolleys.
It's a very good comparison either way. I spent more time in Queens than Brooklyn when I lived in NYC and think it's pretty underrated. Though, just like Philly there can be huge differences from neighborhood to neighborhood.
Anybody know what Queens' neighborhood George's parents lived on Seinfeld? Love those homes.
Only in NYC could that be considered suburban in the US. On a world level that’s suburban in many international cities. Those cities may be NYC’s peers on this issue, not Chicago and LA. Philadelphia is an interesting comparison though. It really brings home just how urban NYC is that a borough like queens which is semi-suburban by NYC standards is potentially more urban than US cities that are known to be very urban.
NYC’s true suburbs are LI, northern NJ, westchester, CN, and similar. Queens doesn’t look like those for the most part, but it does have some suburban elements. I don’t consider it “the suburbs” in the way that I would places like Orange County, CA or Fairfax, VA.
I agree 100%. Even the supposedly suburban parts of Queens are more urban than most sunbelt city neighborhoods.
I work in Springfield Gardens, Queens which is supposedly "suburban", but there are 24 hour hood delis everywhere, there's heavy public transportation usage, small apartment buildings everywhere, lots of pedestrian activity, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by personone
No. West Town (which consists of a few neighborhoods: Wicker Park, Ukranian Village, Bucktown, and some more), is separated from downtown by the river. Lincoln Park, Lakeview (just two example neighborhoods on north side) are also separated by the river from downtown proper. The Gold Coast is a residential neighborhood, although many consider it part of downtown. It is mostly residential high rises and some upscale row homes. Lincoln Park does border Gold Coast at the very south part of the actual park.
Interesting. I do admit that Chicago overall is more urban than I previously thought.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2e1m5a
Population and density are pretty important but I think people often discount the built form and structural density. Philly is so human scaled and with blocks and blocks of connected buildings on narrow streets while Queens often has huge boulevards and many detached homes-even though these homes are often multi-family it gives the appearance of a less urban form. The transit is pretty comparable when you consider Septa's regional rail and trolleys.
It's a very good comparison either way. I spent more time in Queens than Brooklyn when I lived in NYC and think it's pretty underrated. Though, just like Philly there can be huge differences from neighborhood to neighborhood.
Anybody know what Queens' neighborhood George's parents lived on Seinfeld? Love those homes.
But I don't think a block "looking" more urban (brick rowhomes instead of vinyl multifamily houses) actually makes it more urban.
And I would argue that the large Boulevards in Queens aide in urbanity in a way, since they allow more buses. And for Philly, there's a lot of blight in some areas which I think it loses points for. More blight=lower density, and less pedestrian activity.
But Philly is the 2nd most urban place in the country I've been to so far that's not in NY/NJ. I haven't been to SF as an adult yet, I wonder how it compares.
Population and density are pretty important but I think people often discount the built form and structural density. Philly is so human scaled and with blocks and blocks of connected buildings on narrow streets while Queens often has huge boulevards and many detached homes-even though these homes are often multi-family it gives the appearance of a less urban form. The transit is pretty comparable when you consider Septa's regional rail and trolleys.
It's a very good comparison either way. I spent more time in Queens than Brooklyn when I lived in NYC and think it's pretty underrated. Though, just like Philly there can be huge differences from neighborhood to neighborhood.
Anybody know what Queens' neighborhood George's parents lived on Seinfeld? Love those homes.
As far as an equal transit comparison, then LIRR regional rail should also be included for Queens. I still think that Queens’ transit is a level above Philly’s, in terms of intra-city rapid transit. I think that ridership numbers and much higher % of people not driving reflects that, despite similar car ownership rates. It can be argued that Philly has better regional rail transit for suburbanites coming into Philly than suburbanites in NY/NJ/CT getting to Queens. The only suburbanites with simple single-seat trips to Queens are Long Islanders. People coming into Queens from NJ, CT, or Hudson Valley will need to switch from NJT/MetroNorth over to the subway. I do think that Queens’ much larger rapid transit coverage gives it a very strong advantage. I’ve always thought of rapid transit to be the backbone + most important part of an urban transit system. The subway in Queens is also fully 24/7 unlike Philly where it’s only 24 hours on weekends.
As far as an equal transit comparison, then LIRR regional rail should also be included for Queens. I still think that Queens’ transit is a level above Philly’s, in terms of intra-city rapid transit. I think that ridership numbers and much higher % of people not driving reflects that, despite similar car ownership rates. It can be argued that Philly has better regional rail transit for suburbanites coming into Philly than suburbanites in NY/NJ/CT getting to Queens. The only suburbanites with simple single-seat trips to Queens are Long Islanders. People coming into Queens from NJ, CT, or Hudson Valley will need to switch from NJT/MetroNorth over to the subway. I do think that Queens’ much larger rapid transit coverage gives it a very strong advantage. I’ve always thought of rapid transit to be the backbone + most important part of an urban transit system. The subway in Queens is also fully 24/7 unlike Philly where it’s only 24 hours on weekends.
The buses in Queens also get heavy usage and are 24/7 as well
I get off work at midnight in Springfield Gardens and I take the Q3, it's always packed. And there are still people walking around on Guy Brewer Blvd, and still lined up at the 24 hour hood delis to buy sandwiches.
That's part of why I'll always stand by my opinion that Springfield Gardens and similar neighborhoods are not the suburbs.
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.
