U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [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)
View Poll Results: What city or area is the hardest to approve new development?
New York City 9 13.64%
Los Angeles 6 9.09%
San Francisco 46 69.70%
Chicago 3 4.55%
Washington DC 8 12.12%
Boston 14 21.21%
Houston 1 1.52%
Dallas 0 0%
Philadelphia 1 1.52%
Austin 0 0%
Atlanta 0 0%
Miami 0 0%
Tampa 0 0%
Seattle 4 6.06%
San Diego 2 3.03%
Phoenix 1 1.52%
Northern NJ Area 3 4.55%
Raleigh/Durham Area 1 1.52%
Charlotte 1 1.52%
Denver 0 0%
Honolulu 3 4.55%
Baltimore 1 1.52%
Memphis 1 1.52%
Indianapolis 0 0%
Nashville 0 0%
Other 1 1.52%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 66. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-12-2021, 09:25 PM
 
126 posts, read 44,211 times
Reputation: 193

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by odurandina View Post
^^Incredibly.
Don't let Massachusetts become Jersey.
I'm not sure if NJ is the best example here. NJ as a state has a higher population density than Mass. No doubt it has its Mcmansion areas with lots of suburban sprawl, I'd say overall they do a better job at putting mid to high density homes closer to public transit than Mass does.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-12-2021, 09:33 PM
 
3,477 posts, read 2,009,571 times
Reputation: 2892
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDee12345 View Post
I think you're making everyone's point, while also making your point. If you take the cities that surround Boston, you have considerable density. These cities, if they had existed in many other regions, would be part of Boston city proper, but in Mass they're not.

If you go due north along the North Shore, you have a fair amount of density, but that doesn't apply for other regions. Outside of 128/95, the density drops in towns like Billerica, Tewksbury or Wilmington, only for the density to pick up again in some of the gateway cities like Lowell, Lawrence and Haverhill.

That exists on the South shore as well as density drops outside of Boston city limits, but then goes up again in Brockton.

I've always wondered why places like Lowell, Brockton and Lawrence don't have their own MSAs, because they often seem so disconnected from Boston. But remember, Boston's MSA extends pretty far and it's CSA is almost ridiculous. That contributes to the lower density of the region as a whole.
Whether they are towns, villages, or cities, those areas are not Boston. With the exception of Cambridge and Somerville, the rest operate as suburbs by the very definition of a suburb. They are very much residential, with downtown/walkable nodes in the center. Their urbanity makes you say that they should have been annexed. I’d argue that’s just the built form of the inner MSA.

People have done exercises manually to show pop densities within certain radius’, but I’m not sure I have it in me. But here are the inside-95 locales by population and population density:

Cambridge: 117k, 18.9k
Somerville: 81k, 19.8k
Everett: 46k, 11.2k
Chelsea: 40k, 16k
Malden: 61k, 11.9k
Lynn: 94k, 8.8k
Revere: 55k, 9.2k
Arlington: 43k, 8.2k
Brookline: 59k, 8.6
Medford: 57k, 7k
Watertown: 35k, 7.9k
Waltham: 63k, 6.9k
Quincy: 94k, 5.7k
Melrose: 28k, 6k
Newton: 89k, 4.9k
Belmont: 26k, 5.6k
Marblehead: 21k, 4.5k
Swampscott: 15k, 4.7k
Saugus: 27k, 2.3k
Peabody: 53k, 3.3k
Wakefield: 27k, 3.3k
Stoneham: 22k, 3.2k
Winchester: 22k, 3.5k
Woburn: 40k, 3.2k
Lexington: 34k, 2k
Dedham: 25k, 2.3k
Weymouth: 54k, 3.5k
Beverly: 42k, 2.7k

That’s ~1.4M in MSA population, all within a 15 mile radius (avg. across north south and west) to downtown Boston. The weighted density across that 1.4M, is remarkably high. Probably, what, 7.5 - 8k ppsqm. Including Boston, that’s 2.1M with a likely population density at maybe 10k ppsqm?

Idk about you guys, but I’m not prepared to say that Boston is the second least dense major metro. Again, MSA density figures will show that’s not true, and that it is in fact the 6th most dense metro.

The eye test will also very quickly back this up. If you’ve spent enough time in place like ATL, Seattle, Portland, Denver, I think you quickly understand how dense Greater Boston is relative to other cities of its size.

Yes, absolutely, NIMBYism prevents Greater Boston high density suburbs expanding beyond 95. We all agree that there is a steep decline. So as it relates to this thread, Greater Boston is a premier candidate for zoning and building restrictions.

Last edited by mwj119; 04-12-2021 at 09:53 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2021, 09:51 PM
 
870 posts, read 585,059 times
Reputation: 472
^^It's easy:
Boston
+Cambridge
+Somerville
+Everett
+Chelsea
+Malden = 15,000/sq mi out to 1M people (i might have left out 1)
not big, not small, third densest in USA, a bit smaller than SF,
a bit less dense.
w/ an iconic, unbelievably snotty suburbia,
w/ people of all colors sizes and shapes from Roxbury to Beacon Hill, Westford to Duxbury, and Newburyport to Sturbridge making damn sure it all stays that way.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2021, 09:59 PM
 
3,477 posts, read 2,009,571 times
Reputation: 2892
Quote:
Originally Posted by odurandina View Post
^^It's easy:
Boston
+Cambridge
+Somerville
+Everett
+Chelsea
+Malden = 15,000/sq mi out to 1M people (i might have left out 1)
not big, not small, third densest in USA, a bit smaller than SF,
a bit less dense.
w/ an iconic, unbelievably snotty suburbia,
w/ people of all colors sizes and shapes from Roxbury to Beacon Hill, Westford to Duxbury, and Newburyport to Sturbridge making damn sure it all stays that way.
As it relates to this back and forth about the density of the inner ring, including Boston doesn’t make sense.

Instead, I’d add up Cambridge, Somerville, Brookline, Malden, Everett, Chelsea, Quincy, Malden, Medford, Arlington, Watertown, Waltham, Lynn. Those are really the standout, high density areas outside of the city.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2021, 05:22 AM
 
Location: Rahway, NJ
5,780 posts, read 2,112,051 times
Reputation: 4616
Quote:
Originally Posted by odurandina View Post
^^Incredibly.
Don't let Massachusetts become Jersey.
MA would need a lot more highways, strip malls and sprawl to ever become anything remotely close to NJ.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2021, 09:58 AM
 
1,746 posts, read 1,354,497 times
Reputation: 1836
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDee12345 View Post
I'm not sure if NJ is the best example here. NJ as a state has a higher population density than Mass. No doubt it has its Mcmansion areas with lots of suburban sprawl, I'd say overall they do a better job at putting mid to high density homes closer to public transit than Mass does.
Yeah I agree, is NJ considered the epitome of sprawl? If so, not really an accurate description. NJ has sprawl but also lots of density, public transportation options and walkable small towns.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2021, 10:15 AM
 
3,477 posts, read 2,009,571 times
Reputation: 2892
Quote:
Originally Posted by 908Boi View Post
Yeah I agree, is NJ considered the epitome of sprawl? If so, not really an accurate description. NJ has sprawl but also lots of density, public transportation options and walkable small towns.
I’d say that’s definitely true, as NJ scaled earlier and far more ferociously than MA ever did post WWII.

MA has stayed uniquely true to its grand plan. For better, and for worse.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2021, 10:18 AM
 
Location: Rahway, NJ
5,780 posts, read 2,112,051 times
Reputation: 4616
Quote:
Originally Posted by 908Boi View Post
Yeah I agree, is NJ considered the epitome of sprawl? If so, not really an accurate description. NJ has sprawl but also lots of density, public transportation options and walkable small towns.
NJ Has a 50s sprawl vibe, over modern day sprawl feel like FL or TX.

Its dense with grid-ish roads in spots, places of hyperdensity.. but the lot of it is single use zoning, single family homes, malls, etc. Its very cluttered and lots of highways. Outside of Hoboken/JC a lot of it is not walkable.. but there usually is a short drive to a train stop into Manhattan or PHL. Its different, not bad.. just very different.

NJ I like to think of as Mature Urban Sprawl lol
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2021, 10:37 AM
 
870 posts, read 585,059 times
Reputation: 472
^^to the above posts, for sure, the towns along the New Jersey Transit Coast Line,
are magnificent. The Shore is great, food, parties, music scene, bars.
I attended a fine outdoor music event at the All New McCann's in Brick Township,
or whatever that less thickly settled village is called where the new venue is located--a couple of weekends ago.
Make sure you all get out and see/support this place!!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2021, 10:46 AM
 
1,746 posts, read 1,354,497 times
Reputation: 1836
Quote:
Originally Posted by masssachoicetts View Post
NJ Has a 50s sprawl vibe, over modern day sprawl feel like FL or TX.

Its dense with grid-ish roads in spots, places of hyperdensity.. but the lot of it is single use zoning, single family homes, malls, etc. Its very cluttered and lots of highways. Outside of Hoboken/JC a lot of it is not walkable.. but there usually is a short drive to a train stop into Manhattan or PHL. Its different, not bad.. just very different.

NJ I like to think of as Mature Urban Sprawl lol
1950s sprawl is not at all the NJ I grew up in. What parts of NJ are you familiar with ? Because there is much more to NJ than the turnpike, Hoboken, Newark, and JC.
Rate this post positively 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

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 > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top