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.
Moderate and high is subjective. #3 and #4 are the same view. I agree #5 is low. #1 perhaps moderate, #3 maybe high, #2 moderate or high. Though since #1-#3 are well above typical American densities, you could argue they're high, but I would disagree.
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,279,693 times
Reputation: 1483
My hometown in PA Row homes and Half-double homes can built up a mountain too have that scrambled effect. I dislike Row styles because of it. A fuller shot would show more perspective.
The way they're on a mountainside makes it difficult to judge the average height of buildings, I'd say about 3-4 storeys? Also it's difficult to tell how much open space there is unless you're looking at a neighbourhood from pretty much directly above.
If that's Rocinha then it is indeed quite dense, in terms of built density, it's mostly 2-4 storey buildings (some 1 storey) and almost no space for yards and parks. Even space for streets is limited with only a few that are over 30ft wide and mostly just <10ft alleys. Highrise neighbourhoods are typically denser, especially American style CBDs and to a lesser extent some European style cores can be denser if the mid rises are tall enough and tightly packed enough, so with Paris and Barcelona it's probably a higher built density, but with Berlin the mid rises are more spaced out with wider streets and bigger courtyards and might be a bit less dense (built density).
Moderate and high is subjective. #3 and #4 are the same view. I agree #5 is low. #1 perhaps moderate, #3 maybe high, #2 moderate or high. Though since #1-#3 are well above typical American densities, you could argue they're high, but I would disagree.
Agree. These are from chicago. One of them is most definitely low density. The others really depend more upon how the structures are subdivided (or not). The others are basically narrow city lots with a single structure, all roughly 10 lots per acre. If all are single unit, you might only be looking at 8,000 people per square mile ( medium density). If they're subdivided into 3-4 units, there is a lot more to this than meets the eye. In Chicago, many 3 story plus gardens are subdivided into 4-8 units. The population density of these areas (including street/alley grid, parks, commercial watering residential density down) typically falls into a range of 20,000 to 30,000 ppsm. By national standards, anyone would be hard pressed to call them anything but high density. It's no 80,000+ high rise district, but it illustrates the point that visual inspection of the exterior of a few structures doesn't tell the whole story. Many of these streets are surrounded by miles of the same subdivided built environment with retail streets, rail transit, very little surface parking, etc. in these cases, that's high density.
It's difficult to really know the current status of any of these because many are being acquired and consolidated from 6 unit apt buildings to 3 unit condos or from 3 unit apt buildings to sfhs
#1 ........ 3100 SF
#2 .........3000 SF
#3-4 ......3100 SF same two
#5 .........5280 SF
#6 .........3800 SF
Basically;
#1 thru #3 #4 (my mistake the same) are on CHICAGO'S standard city lot size 24'-25' x 125'
#5 the last 1950s push of the city removing alleys with driveways between homes to garage.
#6 is the Bungalow belt era lot with garages, nearly half the city.
THANKS FOR THE RESPONSES AND SORRY FOR THE POORLY SET UP THREAD.
Last edited by steeps; 01-01-2015 at 02:24 PM..
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.