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.
Pittsburg struggles with continuity. Walking for neighborhood to neighborhood typically requires traversing a could mostly undeveloped steep hillsides. And because roads wind it’s not uncommon to walk a mile to go 1/2 a mile. Places like South Side Flats or Shadyside are pretty much unmatched outside the Big 5 they’re also not very well connected to things. The Strip is cool, but it’s called the strip cause well, it’s a strip
I think you're overestimating the impact of geography in Pittsburgh on urban continuity; it's why there's seemingly countless streets like this, with some of the highest grades in the country. Feasibility of walkability is different topic altogether, but how else do you think Pittsburgh developed if not on the existing hills, where there are entire neighborhoods?
The biggest impediment to urban continuity in Pittsburgh is honestly its rivers, but you'd be holding Pittsburgh to a higher/inconsistent standard if that precluded continuity, since any city's urbanism that's bisected or interrupted by a river/highway/other natural feature of some kind, would be disqualified rom this discussion, which would be effectively all of them to some degree.
A simple radius makes it much "cleaner" in my book.
I think you're overestimating the impact of geography in Pittsburgh on urban continuity; it's why there's seemingly countless streets like this, with some of the highest grades in the country. Feasibility of walkability is different topic altogether, but how else do you think Pittsburgh developed if not on the existing hills, where there are entire neighborhoods?
The biggest impediment to urban continuity in Pittsburgh is honestly its rivers, but you'd be holding Pittsburgh to a higher/inconsistent standard if that precluded continuity, since any city's urbanism that's bisected or interrupted by a river/highway/other natural feature of some kind, would be disqualified rom this discussion, which would be effectively all of them to some degree.
A simple radius makes it much "cleaner" in my book.
I’m really not. Pittsburgh has a density of ~5400 open largely because a huge part of the city is chopped up by steep hillsides that are lightly developed.
In 27 sq miles Providence, Pawtucket and Central Falls have 289,000. In Pittsburgh’s 55 sq miles there are 302,000. That’s a huge difference. Largely attributed to the fact Pittsburgh has pretty poor continuity between neighborhoods.
That first picture is my point. You got dense housing then an undeveloped hillside which brings down the overall urbanity of the continuous area
I think you're overestimating the impact of geography in Pittsburgh on urban continuity; it's why there's seemingly countless streets like this, with some of the highest grades in the country. Feasibility of walkability is different topic altogether, but how else do you think Pittsburgh developed if not on the existing hills, where there are entire neighborhoods?
The biggest impediment to urban continuity in Pittsburgh is honestly its rivers, but you'd be holding Pittsburgh to a higher/inconsistent standard if that precluded continuity, since any city's urbanism that's bisected or interrupted by a river/highway/other natural feature of some kind, would be disqualified rom this discussion, which would be effectively all of them to some degree.
A simple radius makes it much "cleaner" in my book.
at the end of the day, it doesn't have 50 contiguous miles as urban as Providence. it's just not there, we cant type it into existence. The map thing jsut makes it even more apparent its an L for Pittsburgh.
I’m really not. Pittsburgh has a density of ~5400 open largely because a huge part of the city is chopped up by steep hillsides that are lightly developed.
In 27 sq miles Providence, Pawtucket and Central Falls have 289,000. In Pittsburgh’s 55 sq miles there are 302,000. That’s a huge difference. Largely attributed to the fact Pittsburgh has pretty poor continuity between neighborhoods.
Naw, it's largely attributed to abandonment. Pittsburgh once held 676,000 people. Its had a precipitous decline in population.
Pittsburg struggles with continuity. Walking for neighborhood to neighborhood typically requires traversing a could mostly undeveloped steep hillsides. And because roads wind it’s not uncommon to walk a mile to go 1/2 a mile. Places like South Side Flats or Shadyside are pretty much unmatched outside the Big 5 they’re also not very well connected to things. The Strip is cool, but it’s called the strip cause well, it’s a strip
I think it makes sense for someone to first make a collection of 50 contiguous square miles and then we argue about the continuity. I think Shadyside for sure is part of the continuous expanse as it's surrounded by other, densely populated neighborhoods without clear breaks in continuity. South Side Flats I'd argue is also pretty contiguous with multiple short crossings that pedestrians, vehicles, and bicyclists can cross the Monongahela (save for the Liberty Bridge which is only vehicles) and because of Pittsburgh's hilly nature, they are fairy level on both sides with urban development. I think the large number of short, walkable crossings then also through South Side Flats brings in the collection of denser neighborhoods uphill from South Side Flats. I'd assume that some of the Pittsburgh neighborhoods I mentioned would be dropped from the count while several small, nearby municipalities get included. I don't know if that would then add to
I guess some people think that a city with a consistent build-out of predominantly moderate density suburban development is more urban than a city with patchy development but much higher structural density. Which is kinda bizarre. By this logic Providence has more urban contiguous 50 sq miles than Hong Kong.
Pittsburgh has a whole ring of neighborhoods up to 4 miles from downtown, like Lawrenceville, Shadyside and Bloomfield, filled with rowhomes and highly developed urban retail corridors, that are more urban than any neighborhood in Providence outside of downtown. Not to mention Oakland, Pittsburgh’s second downtown.
Naw, it's largely attributed to abandonment. Pittsburgh once held 676,000 people. Its had a precipitous decline in population.
Excellent point. Again, I fully understand and acknowledge that Providence has more baseline consistency in its development, and yes, depopulation is obviously more evident in Pittsburgh.
But despite immense hilliness, there's actually very little land within a 5-mile radius of the Golden Triangle that's not been touched by development.
I guess some people think that a city with a consistent build-out of predominantly moderate density suburban development is more urban than a city with patchy development but much higher structural density. Which is kinda bizarre. By this logic Providence has more urban contiguous 50 sq miles than Hong Kong.
Pittsburgh has a whole ring of neighborhoods up to 4 miles from downtown, like Lawrenceville, Shadyside and Bloomfield, filled with rowhomes and highly developed urban retail corridors, that are more urban than any neighborhood in Providence outside of downtown. Not to mention Oakland, Pittsburgh’s second downtown.
I think it depends on how much higher *much higher* structural density is. Hong Kong even if Hong Kong Island is deemed not contiguous, which I think there is a reasonable argument for, would still have the Kowloon region and some of the adjacent and contiguously built up New Territories as an expanse that's going to be several times the population (and businesses) of that of Providence even if that 50 contiguous square miles isn't all urban, or you trim it down to effectively just 20 to 30 contiguous square miles for Hong Kong versus 50 for Providence. If you do break up Hong Kong by lack of continuity though, it'll probably make a few of the top 10 entries on this hybrid US + HK list with at least three from Kowloon and adjacent parts, an area around the Tuen Mun River, and Hong Kong Island, respectively.
I guess some people think that a city with a consistent build-out of predominantly moderate density suburban development is more urban than a city with patchy development but much higher structural density. Which is kinda bizarre. By this logic Providence has more urban contiguous 50 sq miles than Hong Kong.
Pittsburgh has a whole ring of neighborhoods up to 4 miles from downtown, like Lawrenceville, Shadyside and Bloomfield, filled with rowhomes and highly developed urban retail corridors, that are more urban than any neighborhood in Providence outside of downtown. Not to mention Oakland, Pittsburgh’s second downtown.
This is a good point. Density itself isn't going to be the only qualifier for urbanity. So while say Providence may be more dense within 50 sq contiguous miles, as you said it doesn't necessarily mean it is more urban than Pittsburgh's more patchy urbanity.
Some places may have more parks and green spaces intermixed within the 50 contiguous sq miles and for the urban patches within, these are a great respite from the concrete jungle. Some places may also have more entertainment and retail venues etc, so while they may naw at residential density numbers, they are still very urban spaces.
I think it depends on how much higher *much higher* structural density is. Hong Kong even if Hong Kong Island is deemed not contiguous, which I think there is a reasonable argument for, would still have the Kowloon region and some of the adjacent and contiguously built up New Territories as an expanse that's going to be several times the population (and businesses) of that of Providence even if that 50 contiguous square miles isn't all urban, or you trim it down to effectively just 20 to 30 contiguous square miles for Hong Kong versus 50 for Providence. If you do break up Hong Kong by lack of continuity though, it'll probably make a few of the top 10 entries on this hybrid US + HK list with at least three from Kowloon and adjacent parts, an area around the Tuen Mun River, and Hong Kong Island, respectively.
Yeah Hong King could be like 5 blocks of “Hong King” and 48.8 Sq miles of forest and Would average out ahead of Providence. The thing in Providence hits Pittsburghs 50 sq mile population in 28sq miles. So I feel like the burden is on Pittsburgher to prove Pittsburgh is in fact more urban.
So while density isn’t everything. Providence was built as a walkable city and is still filled out (peak population of Central Falls/Pawtucket/Providence is 356,000 vs 289,000 today.
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.
