U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-21-2013, 01:19 PM
 
3,944 posts, read 4,037,693 times
Reputation: 4395

Advertisements

Quote:
Here in Colorado, the older areas, both urban and suburban, have the grass strip between the sidewalk and the road, while the newer areas do not have said strip in residential areas, in general.
The grass strip is there because people perceive the sidewalk to be an unsafe place to walk if it directly touches a lane of moving traffic. You can fight this fear by making the sidewalk wider (6+ feet), which is pretty common in downtown areas. If the sidewalk is still the standard 3-4 feet wide, then people won't walk on it without a sense of dread. And will generally walk single file-ish away from traffic.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-21-2013, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Thunder Bay, ON
2,610 posts, read 3,760,401 times
Reputation: 1616
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOverdog View Post
The grass strip is there because people perceive the sidewalk to be an unsafe place to walk if it directly touches a lane of moving traffic. You can fight this fear by making the sidewalk wider (6+ feet), which is pretty common in downtown areas. If the sidewalk is still the standard 3-4 feet wide, then people won't walk on it without a sense of dread. And will generally walk single file-ish away from traffic.
The older parts of Toronto that don't have the grass strip generally have on-street parking though, so that acts as a buffer against traffic already. Commercial streets usually have on-street parking too, and wider sidewalks (10-15ft maybe?).
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2013, 05:08 PM
 
9,520 posts, read 14,819,994 times
Reputation: 9769
Quote:
Originally Posted by memph View Post
D: They're actually semi-detached houses (I think that's what you mean by duplexes). One give away is the different coloured garages. Another give away is that the garages are arranged symmetrically, in this case in the middle of the building with front doors on either side, in other developments, the garages would be on either side with the two front doors in the middle. A single family home would have the garage(s) on one side of the house, and front door and maybe porch or window on the other side.
Ah, that's somewhat unusual around my area; new suburban development tends to be either attached (townhouse) or single family, though there are some duplexes. And to make things confusing, the term "semi-detached" is sometimes used for a detached house which is very close to its neighbor, e.g. Bing Maps - Driving Directions, Traffic and Road Conditions -- there's a small wedge-shaped space (with a wooden deck attached to both houses) between those.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 05:37 PM
 
1,015 posts, read 1,541,509 times
Reputation: 746
Is this a development from the 80's or 90's? I'm guessing that because it seems to be large houses on small lots, which was common then.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 07:46 PM
 
Location: SoCal
1,243 posts, read 1,569,855 times
Reputation: 848
Not looking exactly like NYC.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 08:40 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,987 posts, read 41,937,844 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by nybbler View Post

Do traditional distinctions matter? People talk about Hoboken, NJ as opposed to "the suburbs", despite Hoboken being basically a bedroom community nowadays. On the other hand, Norristown and Conshohocken PA (both with a similarly urban form) are typically considered suburbs.
Agree with the rest of your post, but...

Hoboken doesn't have a similar urban form to those PA towns. Hoboken is much denser, the gridded areas west of Washington St, average around a density of nearly 50,000 per square mile. This denser than almost but a handful of tracts in Philly, mostly in Center City. Hoboken blocks would fit right in (though with different architecture but similar sized 4-5 story buildings) with Center City except business district-like blocks. Hoboken is also adjacent to the core of its metro, right across the river from the business district portions of Manhattan. Norristown and Conshohocken are much more distant from Center City besides being lower density (higher than other suburbs nearby but nowhere near the level of Hoboken).

The density of Hoboken as well as the urban form would well with the denser parts of Inner London (see my graphs on the end of page 16 on the Urban Density Comparisons thread). Calling with that high of a density a "suburb" just doesn't fit well in my mind. While memph mentioned some areas of the world where outlying districts are very high density and similar to their center cities, they're completely different from the concept of suburbs most of us have.

While I agree suburbs can be of varying densities, a suburb that is as high of a density as typical of Inner London can't be considered a suburb in any normal sense. Of course, the density has to stretch on for some distance. This is quite dense, but it's just an unusually large apartment block for a train suburb (next to Scarsdale station) not a city-sized place. But again, for all the reasons you've given in the thread, I don't care much for trying to draw classification lines for this.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 09:08 PM
 
9,520 posts, read 14,819,994 times
Reputation: 9769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlite View Post
Is this a development from the 80's or 90's? I'm guessing that because it seems to be large houses on small lots, which was common then.
The Clarken houses are somewhat deceptive; they're not as large as they look. They're two bedrooms and ~1700 square feet (probably including the finished basement, which doesn't have a full-height ceiling -- I looked at these when I moved last). It is a 90s development. They basically feel like townhouses despite being fully detached.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 11:32 PM
 
1,015 posts, read 1,541,509 times
Reputation: 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by nybbler View Post
The Clarken houses are somewhat deceptive; they're not as large as they look. They're two bedrooms and ~1700 square feet (probably including the finished basement, which doesn't have a full-height ceiling -- I looked at these when I moved last). It is a 90s development. They basically feel like townhouses despite being fully detached.
Must be tall but narrow. I understand why people want large separations between their house and the adjoining buildings, even though I also understand the problems that causes. But I don't understand these little separations, unless the point is to put those decks in there. The little separations don't get you privacy or relief from noise, but they get you more exterior walls, and more energy consumption. If they just attached them, the houses would have a little more usable interior space and a little better energy use. Some jurisdictions won't allow attached houses to be built.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2015, 05:09 PM
 
Location: Illinois
963 posts, read 444,353 times
Reputation: 266
Is there a limit on how big a suburb can grow to (in terms of population) before it's a city of its own despite it still being close to a major city?



What is the definition of a satellite city? I thought it was a mid-sized suburb that's somewhat close to a major city, but also has its own miniature suburbs. what determines whether or not it's a satellite city or a twin city? I figured I'd post here instead of creating another thread.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:24 PM
 
Location: Jersey City
6,488 posts, read 16,150,620 times
Reputation: 5637
Quote:
Originally Posted by It is 57 below zero View Post
Is there a limit on how big a suburb can grow to (in terms of population) before it's a city of its own despite it still being close to a major city?

What is the definition of a satellite city? I thought it was a mid-sized suburb that's somewhat close to a major city, but also has its own miniature suburbs. what determines whether or not it's a satellite city or a twin city? I figured I'd post here instead of creating another thread.
I think if it eclipses the population of the central city itself, maybe, maybe not. The classic case is Virginia Beach. Prior to the 1950s, Virginia Beach was a county (Princess Anne County). Norfolk was the largest city in the state. As Norfolk grew it annexed parts of Princess Anne and other counties, one small piece at a time. In the 50s, Princess Anne County incorporated itself into a city, the City of Virginia Beach. Over the decades, suburban sprawl developed much of Virginia Beach's 250 square miles. In most metro areas this suburban development would be manifest in a dozen or more suburban towns, but the entire eastern flank of 'burbs were within the same city jurisdiction in Virginia Beach. By 1990, Virginia Beach was more populous than Norfolk (which had declined during the same period). Virginia Beach has a very suburban form (suburban tract housing, shopping centers, etc.), but the Census Bureau changed the name of the metro area from Norfolk-Virginia Beach to Virginia Beach.

So the question is, is Virginia Beach really the central city? It's 400,000 people in a suburban setting next to a more urban city of 250,000. Norfolk has an urban downtown, Virginia Beach has a "towne centre"

Think about a hypothetical case. What if Fairfax County, VA (population over a million) incorporated itself into Fairfax County City, VA. Would the Census Bureau rename the Washington, DC metro area to Fairfax County because FFX has nearly twice as many people as Washington? Would FFX be the central city and Washington a "suburb" because it has fewer people?
Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top