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.
Does not count houses that are very close, but don't share a wall (common in St. Louis, San Francisco). Or where attached housing units are stacked above each other rather than just next to each other (most NYC brownstones).
Does it count semi-detached (called duplex in New England and elsewhere, twin in Philly?) Duplexes and rowhouses are quite different typologies. You'll see a lot of duplexes in parts of the country with no rowhouses, and they tended to be built much later than rowhouses (there are some duplex ranches in the Pittsburgh area even).
My guess on Pittsburgh's real number, counting in subdivided rowhouses, is more like 20%-25%. My own neighborhood is no more than 10% subdivided, but it's a rarity, since most of the other rowhouse portions of the city went through a period where they were at least zoned for two-unit houses.
Does it count semi-detached (called duplex in New England and elsewhere, twin in Philly?) Duplexes and rowhouses are quite different typologies. You'll see a lot of duplexes in parts of the country with no rowhouses, and they tended to be built much later than rowhouses (there are some duplex ranches in the Pittsburgh area even).
No clue how it treats semi-detached, the census didn't give much details. I could check.
Philly — 59%
Pittsburgh — 16%
Cincinnati — 5%
St. Louis — 4%
San Francisco: 15%
Baltimore: 53%
DC: 26%
Camden, NJ: 52%
Boston: 6%
Brooklyn: 8%
Does not count houses that are very close, but don't share a wall (common in St. Louis, San Francisco). Or where attached housing units are stacked above each other rather than just next to each other (most NYC brownstones).
Interesting -- thanks for posting.
I find Boston, SF, and DC intriguing, because they're much lower than I think many people would believe. Of course that doesn't mean their urbanity is not redeemed by plenty of apartment buildings.
For Boston especially, I think most people envision Beacon Hill defining the entire city, but the rowhouse neighborhoods there are such a small percentage of the city, as opposed to triple-deckers.
For Boston especially, I think most people envision Beacon Hill defining the entire city, but the rowhouse neighborhoods there are such a small percentage of the city, as opposed to triple-deckers.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that the row homes in the Back Bay and Beacon Hill aren't one-unit attached. A lot of those buildings are divided into smaller apartments. I know there are 1-unit attached homes in the South End that are different from apartments on Beacon Hill.
Your point still stands, unlike Philly and Baltimore, the majority of Boston isn't row homes, but I still don't think that a lot of Boston's "row homes" might not be included in that percentage.
True but alot of the architecture in SF is unattached but very close.
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.
