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.
Beyond being an exaggeration of the MAJORITY of East of the river DC, this entire post is moot because the same could be said about Chicago as well. I don't see people making excuses for Southside Chicago having similar differences than its downtown core. So why single out DC? And no there are not to quote you "many" streets without sidewalks in East of Anacostia that's just not true. The urbanity is much different from west of the river and yes single family homes do exist there, but there are still MANY row homes and apartments there too.
Please read carefully before you quote. I said some streets have no sidewalks which indeed is true including one of the homes I own. And not only is urban form part of being urban, but having amenities close by is also part of a place being urban. Many if not most parts east of the Anacostia River simply don't have these things so you really don't see throngs of people out and about. How many grocery stores or even movie theaters or coffee shops serve the community? Again parts of DC are urban but other parts look like Bowman SC. So DC 6th? I just don't think so.
Although, LA has a lot more arrgreate density, I will tend to argue that DC is functionally far more urban. A visitor to LA looking for a NYC/London urban city type experience would leave disappointed. Most stuff in those cities is located in the dense central core. That is pretty much how trips to Chicago, SF, Bos, Philly, Sea, and DC work (albeit on a much smaller scale). Most guest stay right in the downtown (and adjoining urban neighborhoods). Most the best hotels, tourist attractions, restaurants, nightlife, and shopping are all crammed together in an adjoining central area.
In LA it is a little different. DTLA (and it's adjoining neighborhoods) isn't really the center of LA in the same way. Stuff is spread all over the city. DTLA to Hollywood isn't as seamlessly integrated as going from Boston's North End to Back Bay or DT DC to Georgetown.
This also holds for living there. It's much easier to live a stereotypical "big city" (car free, walking/pub transit) life in the other cities. LA is just qualitatively different from the traditionally urban cities.
DC's downtown is completely urban from wall to wall, there is almost no surface parking in Downtown Washington, what are you talking about? Just because there aren't 50 story skyscraper buildings hovering over does not make downtown "underwhelming". DC is literally decking over a highway right now because there is not enough space to build a new office complex (with ground level retail btw). The only cities in the country that have equal or greater urbanity are the 5 aforementioned ones. It's really the "big 6" when people discuss this topic and after that is the discussion of LA/ Seattle and the rest.
When I say that DT is "underwhelming" I'm speaking from a mixed-use "urbanism" perspective. It is massively successful from an office district perspective. There may not be any parking lots, but there are blocks upon blocks of monotonous 10-story office buildings with very large footprints. Gallery Place is the exception. It does a nice job of mixing up the office buildings with vibrant small retail fronts and residential uses.
I would say Philly, Bos and SF all have more architecturally interesting and vibrant downtowns despite (or because of) not having as many office buildings. They obviously have 9-5 dead zones with bland modern office buildings, but they take up a lot less space given that most of theirs are in high-rises.
I would still say DC is the solid #6. But, DC's urban strength is in the commercial strips of it's core residential neighborhoods (Dupont, Logan, U Street, Georgetown, Columbia Heights, Adams-Morgan), not it's downtown (outside Galley Place).
The Los Angeles hate on here is total comedy at this point & it comes from pure envy & jealousy.
When there's threads with Denver vs Los Angeles, Dallas or D.c vs Los Angeles that clearly should explain things on here about L.A
But gladly in the real world Los Angeles is a top 3 metro in the world & top 5-6 world city .
I don't think anyone is hating on LA. There are some haters but with a great city also comes jealousy. I wouldn't say LA is a top 3 metro in the world though.... In the U.S..... yes it is. Globally no.
Please read carefully before you quote. I said some streets have no sidewalks which indeed is true including one of the homes I own. And not only is urban form part of being urban, but having amenities close by is also part of a place being urban. Many if not most parts east of the Anacostia River simply don't have these things so you really don't see throngs of people out and about. How many grocery stores or even movie theaters or coffee shops serve the community? Again parts of DC are urban but other parts look like Bowman SC. So DC 6th? I just don't think so.
No..... Nowhere in DC looks like Bowman, SC. Exaggerating a bit much there.
I would say Philly, Bos and SF all have more architecturally interesting and vibrant downtowns despite (or because of) not having as many office buildings. They obviously have 9-5 dead zones with bland modern office buildings, but they take up a lot less space given that most of theirs are in high-rises.
I would still say DC is the solid #6. But, DC's urban strength is in the commercial strips of it's core residential neighborhoods (Dupont, Logan, U Street, Georgetown, Columbia Heights, Adams-Morgan), not it's downtown (outside Galley Place).
I understand what you mean here, but at the same time, "Downtown" DC isn't really cut off from a lot of this first tier of residential neighborhoods. The 395 spur is mostly buried underground, and since DC was never really an industrial city, it didn't develop the "ring of blight" full of parking lots and low-slug warehouses between Downtown and the residential neighborhoods. It's easy to walk from Dupont Circle, Logan Circle, or Capital Hill to Downtown, for example.
R-1 = Detached single-family housing
R-2 = Semi-attached/Duplex housing
R-3 = Mixed residential areas including single family, semi-attached, and rowhouses
R-4 = Rowhouses
R-5A = Mixed density (can include apartments) with low building height
R-5B = Mixed density (can include apartments) with moderate building heights
Obviously it's subject to interpretation, but I'd argue that the R-1, R-2, and R-5A zones are not urban, and the R-3, R-4, and R-5B are urban.
Doing a quick and dirty black line around the urban core, this is the rough geography.
Still an exaggeration and inaccurate. Bowman has farm land and homes with over 10 acres of land and trailer parks. No DC doesn't have that. Even before gentrification.......
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.
