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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-10-2014, 06:25 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,003 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by P London View Post
Interesting, so the arrival of streetcars sometime in the late 1800's aided the lack of rowhouse development.
Oh, not necessarily. Correlation does not always equal causation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-10-2014, 06:36 PM
 
Location: Richmond/Philadelphia/Brooklyn
1,263 posts, read 1,273,264 times
Reputation: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Well, I didn't say these cities had NO rowhouses, just that they're not noted for their rowhouses. Denver has rowhouses, FWIW.



Maybe we need to define "rowhouse" then. Denver has homes like that.
however, Denver houses tend to have a bit more space between them, than what we are talking about. Also, I do think the fact that a lot of Denver houses have their own yard, and gabled roofs contributes to their anti-rowhousnesss.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2014, 06:40 PM
 
Location: Richmond/Philadelphia/Brooklyn
1,263 posts, read 1,273,264 times
Reputation: 741
Actually, the streetcar either killed, or improved the state of the rowhouse. it really depends on the city. in places like Pittsburgh, Boston, Seattle, etc, it kind of killed it, but in places like NYC, Philli, Baltimore, DC, Chicago, and Richmond, it only accelerated trends. However, even these cities have your stereotypical early streetcar suburbs. Also, there are a number of cities which did not have rowhouses in the 1st place ( Denver, Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2014, 06:49 PM
 
Location: Richmond/Philadelphia/Brooklyn
1,263 posts, read 1,273,264 times
Reputation: 741
I tend to think of a row house as being attached, or no more than 3-4 feet between homes, and if detached, than usually with little/no front yard, and sort of proportioned with the other houses to give an impression of a wall with slits in it. .
yes:





No



Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2014, 08:06 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,003 posts, read 102,592,596 times
Reputation: 33059
Some of the houses in these pictures are pretty close together, and there are some duplexes and short rows.
Platte Valley & Highlands -- Photo Tour

Ditto:
West Highlands Neighborhood -- PHOTO TOUR
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2014, 09:07 PM
 
Location: Tucson for awhile longer
8,872 posts, read 13,552,358 times
Reputation: 29032
I live in Tucson, Arizona, and there are row houses here in the older parts of the city built from early days through the Great Depression. There are beautiful San Francisco-style row houses in Sacramento, CA, Seattle, WA, and Portland, OR. Albuquerque, Denver, Phoenix, and Austin, have old row house, too, although most are of a later date than Victorian times.

There wasn't a lot of need for row houses in many Western cities because there is plenty of room and many of the pioneers who moved West did it to escape the confining atmosphere of Eastern cities. In the more modern areas of the West, built post-WWII when the population of the West skyrocketed, there are PLENTY of "row houses," but today they are called "town houses." What's the difference, though, as they share a parti-wall with the next townhouse, just a row houses do? About the only difference is the old-fashioned row houses didn't have garages on the first floor as the plethora of town house complexes built in cities and suburbs all over America have today. Go to Las Vegas, the cities that surround Phoenix (Chandler, Mesa, Gilbert, Glendale, etc.), or any city in Texas and you'll find THOUSANDS of townhouses.

Last edited by Jukesgrrl; 11-10-2014 at 09:31 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2014, 09:37 PM
 
Location: Bay Area, California
118 posts, read 128,012 times
Reputation: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Off the top of my head, this is what I am thinking of when I refer to row houses in SF which are these double wide buildings. Or even the units you would find in Inner Sunset, though most are slightly detached, not sure if that is a fire code law or something but it is similar to Chicago where buildings resemble row houses but don't officially touch like they do in northeast cities.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sa...f076adff?hl=en

Or something like this would be a better example.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sa...f076adff?hl=en
I owned one of the San Francisco row houses, tho not as wide as these pictured. It was at the top of Market street in Diamond Heights. Great house, common walls with neighbors on both sides, and never heard a peep!

The surprise is that it is shaped like a (square) donut. The garage/basement is the ground floor. Upstairs in the living area you have rooms grouped around a tiny center patio that is open to the sky. This puts an entire wall of glass in most rooms and you can go out and have morning coffee at your tiny table in your PJ's! It is completely private & makes the house much lighter & brighter than you might think!

Those houses are unbelievably expensive now! The ones pictured are well over a million dollars!

I loved that house, Except for carrying groceries up those stairs!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2014, 10:12 PM
 
3,460 posts, read 2,199,734 times
Reputation: 6130
Quote:
Originally Posted by P London View Post
Why are there Row houses in San Francisco but not in the rest of the Western USA?

I've always wondered why there Row houses in SF but not in say, Denver or Seattle.

Was SF settled very early, yet that doesn't make sense either because wasn't the US colonised first in the east then slowly westward?

Maybe SF was settled by Spanish settlers first..?

If there are no windows on either side of a building, and there is no air space between them, those are not houses, those are town homes in my opinion.

Why do they do it? So they can pack as many people in there to pay millions of dollars to have a 25 foot wide lot, because the weather there is just so great all year-round.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2014, 07:52 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,419 posts, read 11,926,143 times
Reputation: 10539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osito View Post
Some of the southwest was influenced a lot by Spanish architecture. Maybe that's why? How interesting though, I didn't realize there weren't rowhouses in Seattle and San Diego and places like that.
A lot of traditional Spanish/Latin American housing styles were attached, although it's more common in the modern era to have detached but small-plot houses (strangely enough, similar in layout, but less ornate, to California).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jukesgrrl View Post
In the more modern areas of the West, built post-WWII when the population of the West skyrocketed, there are PLENTY of "row houses," but today they are called "town houses." What's the difference, though, as they share a parti-wall with the next townhouse, just a row houses do? About the only difference is the old-fashioned row houses didn't have garages on the first floor as the plethora of town house complexes built in cities and suburbs all over America have today. Go to Las Vegas, the cities that surround Phoenix (Chandler, Mesa, Gilbert, Glendale, etc.), or any city in Texas and you'll find THOUSANDS of townhouses.
Of course you're correct that, semantically speaking, there's little difference between rowhouses (which is now a term used for old historic attached housing) and townhouses (which is now a term used for new construction).

Historically, though, there was a difference. A "townhouse" was a house built in urban style - which meant it had zero or a small (say five foot) setback. Hence examples like the Cincinnatti picture I showed upthread, which are townhouses, but not rowhouses. In contrast, you could have rowhouses which weren't townhouses, if they were built attached, but were otherwise not built in urban style (e.g., set back on the property, far from their unattached neighbors, and in a rural area at the time. In the modern era the terms have been inverted, where rowhouse is associated with cities (unless you live in the Mid-Atlantic, where they are found in small towns too), and townhouse is mostly associated with suburban apartments and condos.

In my own personal opinion though, the difference between rowhouse and townhouse in the modern era has nothing to do with garages. I don't like how this infill looks at all, but I am fine with calling it a rowhouse. Nobody would call these townhouses rowhouses however.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2014, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,483 posts, read 10,467,331 times
Reputation: 5401
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
A lot of traditional Spanish/Latin American housing styles were attached, although it's more common in the modern era to have detached but small-plot houses (strangely enough, similar in layout, but less ornate, to California).



Of course you're correct that, semantically speaking, there's little difference between rowhouses (which is now a term used for old historic attached housing) and townhouses (which is now a term used for new construction).

Historically, though, there was a difference. A "townhouse" was a house built in urban style - which meant it had zero or a small (say five foot) setback. Hence examples like the Cincinnatti picture I showed upthread, which are townhouses, but not rowhouses. In contrast, you could have rowhouses which weren't townhouses, if they were built attached, but were otherwise not built in urban style (e.g., set back on the property, far from their unattached neighbors, and in a rural area at the time. In the modern era the terms have been inverted, where rowhouse is associated with cities (unless you live in the Mid-Atlantic, where they are found in small towns too), and townhouse is mostly associated with suburban apartments and condos.

In my own personal opinion though, the difference between rowhouse and townhouse in the modern era has nothing to do with garages. I don't like how this infill looks at all, but I am fine with calling it a rowhouse. Nobody would call these townhouses rowhouses however.
I agree that townhouses and rowhouses are two different things. They are not the same.

Townhouses
https://www.google.com/maps/place/So...63bbda!6m1!1e1

Rowhouses
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0551...5NcJ1pGXlg!2e0
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