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.
Its clear from those photos Chicago is not nearly as dense as SF.
NYC, Tokyo, Osaka, by a long shot...definitely. But not Boston, Chicago, or Philly. No way. Ive spent time in all of them. None of those cities are as dense as SF. Philly definitely does not feel as much like a big city as SF. Boston in some parts. Chicago has the tall buildings, but not the urban vibrancy SF has.
Who really cares how dense San Fran is anyway? I dont think a single person, besides yourself, loses sleep over that.
New York, almost any city in Europe or Asia. Lots of areas of Boston, Chicago, Philly, etc. San Fran is certainly dense though. It helps that it's such a small area. If you take only 49 of the 237 square miles of Chicago along the north side of the city you're going to have density around 25,000 per square mile.
Do you have any evidence to back this up? I remember seeing a thread somewhere comparing various cities densest 21sq mi (comparing to manhattan 70k sq mi) and Chicago was like 27k/sq mi for 21 sq mi, SF was like 25k, LA was 22k... I dont think Chicago carries that type of density for another 28sq mi.
Do you have any evidence to back this up? I remember seeing a thread somewhere comparing various cities densest 21sq mi (comparing to manhattan 70k sq mi) and Chicago was like 27k/sq mi for 21 sq mi, SF was like 25k, LA was 22k... I dont think Chicago carries that type of density for another 28sq mi.
it isn't true... because most of the density in chicago is non residential not so many live in high rises compared to say nyc. these areas are generally down the lake along lsd, river north/goldcoast/streeterville/south loop/west loop. outside of that not many high rise residentials.mostly row houses and 3 flats
chicago street traffic in the loop or in the summer is definitely dense though, but not where people actually live.
it isn't true... because most of the density in chicago is non residential not so many live in high rises compared to say nyc. these areas are generally down the lake along lsd, river north/goldcoast/streeterville/south loop/west loop. outside of that not many high rise residentials.mostly row houses and 3 flats
chicago street traffic in the loop or in the summer is definitely dense though, but not where people actually live.
keep in mind that highrises don't always equal higher density. The densest hood in Chicago is the Near North Side (River North, Streeterville,gold coast), but the next densest hoods are Albany Park and Rogers Park, both of which have few highrises.
it isn't true... because most of the density in chicago is non residential not so many live in high rises compared to say nyc. these areas are generally down the lake along lsd, river north/goldcoast/streeterville/south loop/west loop. outside of that not many high rise residentials.mostly row houses and 3 flats
chicago street traffic in the loop or in the summer is definitely dense though, but not where people actually live.
It's true, most of the density in Chicago isn't highrises. Where people live IS where the density in Chicago lies. People live in tightly packed 3 flats and row houses.
Do you have any evidence to back this up? I remember seeing a thread somewhere comparing various cities densest 21sq mi (comparing to manhattan 70k sq mi) and Chicago was like 27k/sq mi for 21 sq mi, SF was like 25k, LA was 22k... I dont think Chicago carries that type of density for another 28sq mi.
Here are stats from 2000 for neighborhoods along the north side, northwest and over to west/southwest.
This is where most of the people in the city live. The southside has huge swaths of industrial areas, and O'hare is massive as well with no one living there:
Neighborhood / Population / Size
Rogers Park - 63,484 - 1.85
Edgewater - 62,198 - 2.73
Uptown - 63,551 - 2.31
Lakeview - 94,817 - 3.16
Lincoln Park - 64,320 - 3.19
Near North - 72,811 - 2.72
Near West - 87,435 - 4.57
Logan Square - 82,715 - 3.23
Avondale - 43,083 - 2.00
West Ridge - 73,199 - 3.53
Lincoln Square - 44,574 - 2.57
North Center - 31,895 - 2.07
Lower West - 44,031 - 2.80
south lawndale - 91,071 - 4.44
humbolt park - 100,236 - 3.62
hermosa - 26,908 - 1.17
belmont craigin - 78,144 - 3.94
49.9 square miles, roughly equal to San Fran, 1,124,472 people
22,534 per square mile.
I don't know if those are the densest neighborhoods in the city, but they're all in areas where there's a ton of residential.
It's true, most of the density in Chicago isn't highrises. Where people live IS where the density in Chicago lies. People live in tightly packed 3 flats and row houses.
Yes I know that...where people in Manhattan live is in highrises. While it is dense, nyc is quite a bit denser, hence my post.
^ cool stats 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.
not so many live in high rises compared to say nyc. these areas are generally down the lake along lsd, river north/goldcoast/streeterville/south loop/west loop. outside of that not many high rise residentials.mostly row houses and 3 flats
