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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
