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 11-28-2014, 07:53 PM
 
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,539 posts, read 2,462,348 times
Reputation: 1483

Advertisements

I guess when most of the US chose NOT to do block after block of Tight Row homes right along the sidewalks? They all made a HUGE Urban Planning mistake? Oh and then went with Suburban Sprawl. Even bigger front and side and back yards then CHICAGO'S way too big....25' wide x 125' deep standard city lots of front and back yards with alleys, even garages.....as if a total urban planning mistake?

But I like it for urban living that doesn't close you in too tight... so you can hear your neighbor walking up their stairs? And a nice vista to walk down the street and see some nice green spaces.
There are Rows and half doubles all around me in PA. I do not see them as a superior urban planning scheme? But surely some newer Rows in cities can be pleasant downtown. But not in every neighborhood.

I chose this block in a older Chicago neighborhood AT RANDOM.... This in the Humboldt Park Neighborhood...less brick example... though most are brick in Chicago, especially built in the Bungalow era. Standard city lot size grid again.

https://www.google.com/maps/search/c...c7ab3755394a24

Hope I'm not off topic to post non-Row Urban living in a America city?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-29-2014, 07:44 PM
 
8,328 posts, read 14,556,250 times
Reputation: 4048
Those are row houses too, they just aren't attached row houses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2014, 07:48 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
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg View Post
Those are row houses too, they just aren't attached row houses.
unattached rowhouses sounds like an oxymoron.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2014, 09:11 PM
 
Location: Philaburbia
32,364 posts, read 59,796,813 times
Reputation: 54006
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
unattached rowhouses sounds like an oxymoron.
LOL. In that case, you could call any string of houses row houses, right? Even rows of unattached McMansions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 10:46 AM
 
8,328 posts, read 14,556,250 times
Reputation: 4048
If they're on narrow urban lots with just a few feet between them, sure. Here's an example in my neighborhood, Tapestri Square--they're big and expensive (2000-2700 square feet, costing $500-700K) with about 2 feet between them. WalkScore in the 90s, 2 blocks from a light rail station, supermarket drugstore and restaurants within 2-3 blocks, and within a mile about 50,000 downtown jobs. They stalled during the housing crash like everything else but are selling like hotcakes.


(Linked via Newton Booth Blog, http://newtonboothblog.wordpress.com/)

Last edited by wburg; 11-30-2014 at 10:48 AM.. Reason: Fixed links
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 11:19 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,981 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81 View Post
LOL. In that case, you could call any string of houses row houses, right? Even rows of unattached McMansions.
Yep! It's just like the definition of "suburb". It's whatever you want it to be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg View Post
If they're on narrow urban lots with just a few feet between them, sure. Here's an example in my neighborhood, Tapestri Square--they're big and expensive (2000-2700 square feet, costing $500-700K) with about 2 feet between them. WalkScore in the 90s, 2 blocks from a light rail station, supermarket drugstore and restaurants within 2-3 blocks, and within a mile about 50,000 downtown jobs. They stalled during the housing crash like everything else but are selling like hotcakes.


(Linked via Newton Booth Blog, http://newtonboothblog.wordpress.com/)
No, those are not row houses. For one, they're missing the so-called advantage of attached walls, which do give some energy efficiency.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:23 PM
 
3,262 posts, read 3,001,812 times
Reputation: 1893
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg View Post
If they're on narrow urban lots with just a few feet between them, sure. Here's an example in my neighborhood, Tapestri Square--they're big and expensive (2000-2700 square feet, costing $500-700K) with about 2 feet between them. WalkScore in the 90s, 2 blocks from a light rail station, supermarket drugstore and restaurants within 2-3 blocks, and within a mile about 50,000 downtown jobs. They stalled during the housing crash like everything else but are selling like hotcakes.


(Linked via Newton Booth Blog, http://newtonboothblog.wordpress.com/)
Very pretty.

I lived at one point in a neighborhood that looked basically like this will after a century of wear, tear, and inconsistent maintenance. Even then it's still visually appealing, but less convenient to live in than somewhere with greater density allowing for more efficient public transit / walking, or somewhere more spread out where driving and parking is less of a bear.

Anyway, given the access to everything so close by and the new construction those are really nice and in my part of the country would probably clear a million dollars each, easy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2014, 09:36 AM
 
8,328 posts, read 14,556,250 times
Reputation: 4048
Greater density is a relative term, I suppose: these units work out to about 35 units/acre or 20,000 people per square mile, plus some of them (like the ones in the foreground) have an "in-law" apartment downstairs that can be used for utility/storage, office space, or an extra residential unit, plus they have parking in the ground level (1 car in the small units, 2 in the big units.) That's denser than much of the surrounding neighborhoods, where houses of comparable size (typically 100 year old Craftsman and revival-style foursquares) cost more like $500K-$1M+ these days (but you can still find apartments for around $800-1000/month.) Walkability in this neighborhood is very high.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2014, 09:36 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,414 posts, read 11,910,584 times
Reputation: 10533
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Not all old row houses are completely front against the street. Not much here, but there is a small space for landscaping:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6585...ZJvK21Ju6Q!2e0

There are better more set back examples if I searched.
Modestly set back rowhouses became a big thing around 1900 or so in many rowhouse cities - sort of a transitional step between the older-style, zero setback and later suburban models. Some in Pittsburgh from the 1920s have quite substantial (stupidly so, IMHO) front lawns, although these are not found in rowhouse neighborhoods, but interspersed in the predominantly detached neighborhoods of that era.

In my own opinion, while I like the look of zero setback the best, five foot setbacks look alright, given that's a good space for a small garden. Even setbacks of up to ten feet can be okay, if you're dealing with a sloped front yard and you also include a porch. But there's just no way to get an urban feel with the setback taken up by a flat patch of grass, or a 15-foot plus setback of any sort.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
No, those are not row houses. For one, they're missing the so-called advantage of attached walls, which do give some energy efficiency.
I'm not sure I'd call those rowhouses, but they are townhouses. As I've said, under the original definition, a townhouse was a zero-setback urban house, while a rowhouse meant a stand of attached housing. Cincinnati and Saint Louis both have more of this style than true rowhouses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2014, 10:12 AM
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
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
In my own opinion, while I like the look of zero setback the best, five foot setbacks look alright, given that's a good space for a small garden. Even setbacks of up to ten feet can be okay, if you're dealing with a sloped front yard and you also include a porch. But there's just no way to get an urban feel with the setback taken up by a flat patch of grass, or a 15-foot plus setback of any sort.
I prefer rowhouses with a setback of 5-10 feet the best, especially if there's a garden in the front. The zero setback does look the most urban, but can be a bit monotonous and rather lacking in any greenery.
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