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.
Where I live, the city is the inner city no matter what part it is.
I would say that is unusual. Most cities have far-out, less-dense neighborhoods that have a much more suburban character than an urban one. We've got a number of them here in DC, and most cities I have visited or lived in do as well.
I would say that is unusual. Most cities have far-out, less-dense neighborhoods that have a much more suburban character than an urban one. We've got a number of them here in DC, and most cities I have visited or lived in do as well.
I guess it's since all of the inhabited space here is wall to wall, in both the city and the suburbs. You don't get to traditional low density development until after driving almost 30 miles over water.
Americans are always looking for a way to fit a nice label to everything, as evidenced by this thread and many others. Why? Give it up friends, "cities" have different meanings for different folks, I really don't care if you think my city is real or fake. The perception of "my" cities and the many others I've visited is formed by my own experiences and interactions in those places...we are all (including myself at this point) wasting our breath...
Huh? Are you suggesting that this tread should be erased? OF COURSE the word city has different meanings for different people. And that is just the point of this thread! There's no right or wrong answer, it's just interesting to see what others think, even if it is at odds with what we think. And it's fun to argue our points. If you are not interested, why read this? Just move on.
I don't think many people would define "inner city" that way. It typically means a neighborhood within the central portion of the city...the city limits can stretch outward for miles and encompass significant amounts of low-density, sprawl-type developments...in other words, certainly *not* inner city neighborhoods.
You are correct. The term "inner city" was coined by a sociologist (in the 50s, I think) who come up with "concentric ring" theory of American cities. At the heart of the city is the Central Business District. The CBD was surrounded by industrial zones, slums and in some cities, high income enclaves (e.g. Chicago's Gold Coast, adjacent to the Loop, which was Chicago's CBD). This he called the inner city. Surrounding the inner city is the outer city, which is the area between the inner city and the city limits. Beyond the city limits are the Suburbs.
This theory worked pretty well before urban renewal, freeway construction, demise of mass transit, growth of the suburbs, decentralization of retail and commercial activity, etc., but doesn't apply so well in 2009. Meanwhile, the term "inner city" lives on. Some use it to mean everywhere within the city limits (i.e., the Central City), some use it to apply to low income neighborhoods, some use it synonomously with black ghettoes, same even include low income suburbs.
I would say that is unusual. Most cities have far-out, less-dense neighborhoods that have a much more suburban character than an urban one. We've got a number of them here in DC, and most cities I have visited or lived in do as well.
I don't understand what criteria you are using, you seemed to differentiate D.C. by saying its more dense and urban than compared to the suburbs, although D.C. does have middle-management housing (which you concede), if you are trying to make a point about inner suburbs vs. suburbs outside of city limits then I am not saying a clear on point argument.
I don't think many people would define "inner city" that way. It typically means a neighborhood within the central portion of the city...the city limits can stretch outward for miles and encompass significant amounts of low-density, sprawl-type developments...in other words, certainly *not* inner city neighborhoods.
As 14th pointed out, there could be suburbs that have the same character that border outside city limits.
I think the more proper definition is "inner suburb" although there is no clear-cut definition is falls somewhat under that line.
when I thinl of cities places like nyc chicago philly boston jersey detroit come to mind...they have that city life feel about them..everywhere else just feels like a big burb
when I thinl of cities places like nyc chicago philly boston jersey detroit come to mind...they have that city life feel about them..everywhere else just feels like a big burb
so san francisco, baltimore, washington dc, st.louis, pittsburgh, seattle, and afew more are like big burbs? That's rediculous.
And there is no way that those suburban photos were average suburbs. There is plenty of low-density sprawl around both of those cities that you could have posted.
I think it was average for Houston's inner loop. But for Houston as a whole, probably not. But Houston's suburbs are denser than Atlanta's and that's mostly because Texas and the Western US in particular build their homes on smaller lots than cities in the Eastern part of the nation.
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.
