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 12-23-2014, 10:09 PM
 
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,539 posts, read 2,464,047 times
Reputation: 1483

Advertisements

#1
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9571...Zg1nWZ2-Yg!2e0

#2
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9482...x5jeYPxTPQ!2e0

#3
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9227...exMrVJ0MAw!2e0

#4
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9227...exMrVJ0MAw!2e0

#5
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9714...415qsfZ4kQ!2e0
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-23-2014, 10:29 PM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,714,506 times
Reputation: 2538
1-4 are moderate density. 5 looks to be fairly low density.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-23-2014, 10:44 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
45,987 posts, read 41,947,535 times
Reputation: 14804
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2014, 10:14 AM
 
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,539 posts, read 2,464,047 times
Reputation: 1483
#6 should have been #4
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9380...pE8tP60DhA!2e0
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-28-2014, 07:51 PM
 
Location: Michigan
4,571 posts, read 7,032,489 times
Reputation: 3599
I would consider them all moderate density. They all roughly look like single-family or a low number of separate apartments per building.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-28-2014, 09:07 PM
 
28,441 posts, read 71,029,142 times
Reputation: 18396
Everything is relative.

Try Rio --
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2014, 09:43 AM
 
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,539 posts, read 2,464,047 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.


Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2014, 12:40 PM
 
Location: Thunder Bay, ON
2,610 posts, read 3,760,961 times
Reputation: 1616
Quote:
Originally Posted by chet everett View Post
Everything is relative.

Try Rio --
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).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2014, 12:43 PM
 
1,478 posts, read 2,001,789 times
Reputation: 1579
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
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
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2015, 01:57 PM
 
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,539 posts, read 2,464,047 times
Reputation: 1483
Answers; lot size

#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..
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