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)
View Poll Results: Which city is more Urban
Chicago 114 79.17%
Los Angeles 30 20.83%
Voters: 144. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-20-2013, 10:10 AM
 
1,750 posts, read 2,893,491 times
Reputation: 764

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by PA Born View Post
Totally disagree. I would say that Chicago has a much higher proportion of suburban looking parts.

LA is dense sprawl, and not very typical suburban looking. Chicago has a dense core, but 90% of Chicagoland is typical Midwest suburban, which is much more sprawling than West Coast suburban.

the poster you quoted specifically said city limits of Chicago, and you "disagree" by stating Chicagoland is 90% suburban. Apple meet Orange.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-20-2013, 10:27 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,107,696 times
Reputation: 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by prelude91 View Post
If one was to add all of the suburbs of Chicago that surround the city limits, it would look like this:

Population: 803,300
Area: 122.17 sq miles
Density: 6,575 / ppsm

if you add those figures to Chicago, you get:

Population: 3,503,000
Area: 349 sq miles
Density: 10,037

That area is still significantly less than Los Angeles, but the suburbs beyond the inner ring suburbs of Chicago tend to be less dense, so I think LA and Chicago both at the same area, would probably be very very close in population, which make sense; it is just that the population is spread out differently.

Obviously, LA pulls away beyond that as their suburbs tend to be more densely populated than the outer ring suburbs of Chicagoland.
I think the biggest difference is that, in addition to having slightly more dense suburbs, many of those suburbs in LA are actually independent cities. As far as I know the only real answer Chicago has for places like Pasadena, Long Beach, Santa Monica, Glendale, even Burbank - is Evanston (which looks very nice btw). As the cliche goes, the Los Angeles area is "72 suburbs in search of a city" - except those suburbs have become the cities themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2013, 10:32 AM
 
1,750 posts, read 2,893,491 times
Reputation: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
I think the biggest difference is that, in addition to having slightly more dense suburbs, many of those suburbs in LA are actually independent cities. As far as I know the only real answer Chicago has for places like Pasadena, Long Beach, Santa Monica, Glendale, even Burbank - is Evanston (which looks very nice btw). As the cliche goes, the Los Angeles area is "72 suburbs in search of a city" - except those suburbs have become the cities themselves.
agree, though I would add Elgin, Joliet, Aurora (maybe Naperville) to the mix of independent cities in suburban Chicagoland.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2013, 11:42 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,107,696 times
Reputation: 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by prelude91 View Post
agree, though I would add Elgin, Joliet, Aurora (maybe Naperville) to the mix of independent cities in suburban Chicagoland.
There are two differences I see with those vs. the independent suburbs of the Los Angeles area

1. They are much further out from the core than Glendale / Pasadena / Santa Monica / Burbank / Long Beach are -
  • Loop to Naperville: 27 miles
  • Loop to Aurora: 35 miles
  • Loop to Joliet: 33.7 miles
  • Loop to Elgin: 36 miles
vs.
  • DTLA to Santa Monica: 15 miles
  • DTLA to Pasadena: 10 miles
  • DTLA to Glendale: 6 miles
  • DTLA to Long Beach: 19 miles
2. While all four Chicagoland suburb/cities have very nice downtown areas, the residential density is basically the same as the rest of the suburbs around them. Only Aurora has tracts over 10k, with 5 tracts in the 15k-20k ppsm range. (Elgin has one tract right at 10k ppsm).



The LA area suburb/cities all have much higher densities.
  • Glendale's core census tracts range from 15k-35k ppsm (17 tracts)
  • Long Beach is in the 15k-45k range between 4th street and Pacific Coast Highway (27 tracts)
  • Pasadena just north of the 210 freeway ranges between 15k-20k ppsm (6 tracts)
  • Santa Monica ranges between 20k-25k ppsm between Wilshire Blvd and Montana (5 tracts)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2013, 11:45 AM
 
465 posts, read 737,333 times
Reputation: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by prelude91 View Post
the poster you quoted specifically said city limits of Chicago, and you "disagree" by stating Chicagoland is 90% suburban. Apple meet Orange.
Ok, I missed that, but then it's a silly question. City limits are arbitrary.

It would be ridiculous to judge an area's relative urbanity by looking at city limits alone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2013, 11:57 AM
 
1,750 posts, read 2,893,491 times
Reputation: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
There are two differences I see with those vs. the independent suburbs of the Los Angeles area

1. They are much further out from the core than Glendale / Pasadena / Santa Monica / Burbank / Long Beach are -
  • Loop to Naperville: 27 miles
  • Loop to Aurora: 35 miles
  • Loop to Joliet: 33.7 miles
  • Loop to Elgin: 36 miles
vs.
  • DTLA to Santa Monica: 15 miles
  • DTLA to Pasadena: 10 miles
  • DTLA to Glendale: 6 miles
  • DTLA to Long Beach: 19 miles
2. While all four Chicagoland suburb/cities have very nice downtown areas, the residential density is basically the same as the rest of the suburbs around them. Only Aurora has tracts over 10k, with 5 tracts in the 15k-20k ppsm range. (Elgin has one tract right at 10k ppsm).



The LA area suburb/cities all have much higher densities.
  • Glendale's core census tracts range from 15k-35k ppsm (17 tracts)
  • Long Beach is in the 15k-45k range between 4th street and Pacific Coast Highway (27 tracts)
  • Pasadena just north of the 210 freeway ranges between 15k-20k ppsm (6 tracts)
  • Santa Monica ranges between 20k-25k ppsm between Wilshire Blvd and Montana (5 tracts)
Agree 100%. Greater Los Angeles is really a beast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2013, 11:59 AM
 
1,750 posts, read 2,893,491 times
Reputation: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by PA Born View Post

It would be ridiculous to judge an area's relative urbanity by looking at city limits alone.
While I don't necessary disagree, I think it can be very telling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2013, 01:25 PM
 
201 posts, read 377,572 times
Reputation: 198
Here are some other examples of dense walkable neighborhoods far from the core of Los Angeles in the city of Long Beach which is about 20 miles away from downtown LA.

4th street and cherry avenue long beach ca - Google Maps
2nd Street and Park Avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
2nd Street and Park Avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
2nd Street and Park Avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
2nd Street and Park Avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
ocean avenue and orange ave Long Beach CA - Google Maps
ocean avenue and orange ave Long Beach CA - Google Maps
pine avenue and ocean avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
broadway avenue and redondo avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
anaheim avenue and redondo avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
san antonio avenue and atlantic avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
magnolia avenue and 6th street Long Beach CA - Google Maps
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2013, 01:53 PM
 
7,596 posts, read 9,448,275 times
Reputation: 8955
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Fan View Post
Here are some other examples of dense walkable neighborhoods far from the core of Los Angeles in the city of Long Beach which is about 20 miles away from downtown LA.

4th street and cherry avenue long beach ca - Google Maps
2nd Street and Park Avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
2nd Street and Park Avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
2nd Street and Park Avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
2nd Street and Park Avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
ocean avenue and orange ave Long Beach CA - Google Maps
ocean avenue and orange ave Long Beach CA - Google Maps
pine avenue and ocean avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
broadway avenue and redondo avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
anaheim avenue and redondo avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
san antonio avenue and atlantic avenue Long Beach CA - Google Maps
magnolia avenue and 6th street Long Beach CA - Google Maps
Nice pictures---they certainly make you want to board a plane to LAX immediately..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2013, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Hollywood, CA
1,576 posts, read 2,536,238 times
Reputation: 1119
Quote:
Originally Posted by PA Born View Post
Totally disagree. I would say that Chicago has a much higher proportion of suburban looking parts.

LA is dense sprawl, and not very typical suburban looking. Chicago has a dense core, but 90% of Chicagoland is typical Midwest suburban, which is much more sprawling than West Coast suburban.
I said this on the OP

Quote:
Originally Posted by hipcat
Its the battle of the dense core versus sprawled density. So which city feels more urban?
Reply With Quote 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.


Reply
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
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