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.
True, which is why it's the combination of the two. Are we talking about a street wall without people? We are talking about D.C. and Chicago which both are bustling cities. One just so happens to be defined by street walls across it while the other for no fault of its own was designed without it. NE cities were built different. They are more European in their design.
Nobody is saying that DC isn't bustling; the argument lies in the implication that the south and west sides of Chicago were suburban in nature, and that they got suburban very quickly. Normally, when one implies that some place is very suburban, the implication is that of low-density style, non transit-oriented sprawl. The data already show that, to a further extent from the city center, Chicago maintains density more than DC does, so it can't be a density issue. There are several extremely dense neighborhoods on the south and west sides. Furthermore, the south and west sides are serviced by 5 el lines, at least 8 metra lines, and a myriad of bus lines, so it can't be that the area isn't transit oriented. Big box stores and parking lots? Even the busiest and densest cities have them in locations. Chicago's industrial legacy and its subsequent loss of manufacturing has certainly left holes where once large buildings stood. But this doesn't make the area suburban, it just makes it more blighted. So, then, I don't think a number of us see the suburban nature that the previous poster commented on. In fact, several of the previous comments have reeked of provincialism with a failure to recognize that, perhaps, a city of 2.7 million people might have something different (and dare I say sometimes even better?) to offer than a city of 630,000.
Nobody is saying that DC isn't bustling; the argument lies in the implication that the south and west sides of Chicago were suburban in nature, and that they got suburban very quickly. Normally, when one implies that some place is very suburban, the implication is that of low-density style, non transit-oriented sprawl. The data already show that, to a further extent from the city center, Chicago maintains density more than DC does, so it can't be a density issue. There are several extremely dense neighborhoods on the south and west sides. Furthermore, the south and west sides are serviced by 5 el lines, at least 8 metra lines, and a myriad of bus lines, so it can't be that the area isn't transit oriented. Big box stores and parking lots? Even the busiest and densest cities have them in locations. Chicago's industrial legacy and its subsequent loss of manufacturing has certainly left holes where once large buildings stood. But this doesn't make the area suburban, it just makes it more blighted. So, then, I don't think a number of us see the suburban nature that the previous poster commented on. In fact, several of the previous comments have reeked of provincialism with a failure to recognize that, perhaps, a city of 2.7 million people might have something different (and dare I say sometimes even better?) to offer than a city of 630,000.
What kind of density are we talking about? Population density or structural density? Two polar opposite measures of density. Structural density can be calculated with the naked eye. Population density can't. In fact, how many people do you think actually know anything about the population density in their neighborhoods? They see structural density everyday though. It effects the feeling walking down the street. It effects a neighborhood sidewalk cafe. It effects the feeling at 3:00 a.m. on a Monday when nobody is out in a neighborhood.
Last edited by MDAllstar; 07-24-2013 at 10:30 AM..
Chicago is ahead at 1 mile and at 3 miles where DC drops off steeply. It's funny that the other poster said that Chicago turns suburban quickly when it's actually the opposite that's true. DC turns low density quickly. The core is very small. Even at 35 miles Chicago's weighted density is 15 times more than DC's.
At 35 miles out from the city center, you're in countryside outside DC, and Chicago is still exurban sprawl. Obviously it's a silly comparison to compare cities by going out to countryside.
In the core, however, the two cities have comparable density. If you look at the core 20 miles or so, they're rather similar. Certainly Chicago and DC are in the same general "weight class" of urbanity, along with Philly, Boston and SF.
At 35 miles out from the city center, you're in countryside outside DC, and Chicago is still exurban sprawl. Obviously it's a silly comparison to compare cities by going out to countryside.
In the core, however, the two cities have comparable density. If you look at the core 20 miles or so, they're rather similar. Certainly Chicago and DC are in the same general "weight class" of urbanity, along with Philly, Boston and SF.
At 1 mile Chicago and DC are similar. From 3 miles to 15 miles Chicago is twice as dense. It doesn't even up until 20 miles away. Chicago's weighted density 35 miles out is similar to DC's at 10 miles. That doesn't sound comparable to me.
Last edited by Chicago South Sider; 07-24-2013 at 10:59 AM..
I'm still trying to figure out what population density has to do with the structural built form? Aren't you guys talking about whether the Southside and Westside of Chicago is suburban or not? "Suburban" and "urban" is dictated by the built form of an area. It deals with urban guidelines as to the spatial relationship between buildings and their relationship with the street. Population density has more to do with building use. Does a building have a civic use, office use, residential use, retail use, or mixed use. This greatly effects the population density of an area. Population density is necessary for neighborhood vibrancy, but plays little role in the design of a neighborhood street to urban specifications. Los Angeles is the perfect example of sprawl and spaced out buildings that maintain extreme population density. I think you guys are all talking about different things. There is population density, but this conversation is about structural density.
Take downtown DC, it's one of the most urban areas in the nation with streetwall canyons for days. If all those buildings were converted to residential, it would have a downtown density over 100,000 people per square mile. It's not residential though, it's mainly office like the loop, therefore it doesn't have a high population density. Structural density is the only way to really design and gauge urbanity. You can't see population density. Without the nerdy websites we use on here, nobody would know the difference except for the naked eye.
I'm still trying to figure out what population density has to do with the structural built form? Aren't you guys talking about whether the Southside and Westside of Chicago is suburban or not? "Suburban" and "urban" is dictated by the built form of an area. It deals with urban guidelines as to the spatial relationship between buildings and their relationship with the street. Population density has more to do with building use. Does a building have a civic use, office use, residential use, retail use, or mixed use. This greatly effects the population density of an area. Population density is necessary for neighborhood vibrancy, but plays little role in the design of a neighborhood street to urban specifications. Los Angeles is the perfect example of sprawl and spaced out buildings that maintain extreme population density. I think you guys are all talking about different things. There is population density, but this conversation is about structural density.
Take downtown DC, it's one of the most urban areas in the nation with streetwall canyons for days. If all those buildings were converted to residential, it would have a downtown density over 100,000 people per square mile. It's not residential though, it's mainly office like the loop, therefore it doesn't have a high population density. Structural density is the only way to really design and gauge urbanity. You can't see population density. Without the nerdy websites we use on here, nobody would know the difference except for the naked eye.
Well, in not all cases does structural density = urbanity, in my opinion. China is full of super cities that have been built virtually overnight that have tons of highrises and buildings clustered strongly but have no people in them or that occupy them at even any point in the day. That example, to me, is faux urbanity. In any event, I think you're assuming something about the original comment that elicited all these responses (i.e. that the unspecified original comment was only referring to structural density). In reality, the only thing the quip referred to were street lots, so I think we are making a mountain out of a molehill here.
Well, in not all cases does structural density = urbanity, in my opinion. China is full of super cities that have been built virtually overnight that have tons of highrises and buildings clustered strongly but have no people in them or that occupy them at even any point in the day. That example, to me, is faux urbanity. In any event, I think you're assuming something about the original comment that elicited all these responses (i.e. that the unspecified original comment was only referring to structural density). In reality, the only thing the quip referred to were street lots, so I think we are making a mountain out of a molehill here.
I agree, however, we are talking about occupied buildings. Would the loop be urban if nobody was there? My point is tons of people living in a suburban built form is still suburban which I beleive is what DCFinest was trying to say. It doesn't matter how many people live in the neighborhood if the neighborhood is not built urban.
At 35 miles out from the city center, you're in countryside outside DC, and Chicago is still exurban sprawl. Obviously it's a silly comparison to compare cities by going out to countryside.
In the core, however, the two cities have comparable density. If you look at the core 20 miles or so, they're rather similar. Certainly Chicago and DC are in the same general "weight class" of urbanity, along with Philly, Boston and SF.
I would wager at core 20 sq miles, Chicago is roughly 25% denser, it's clear as day the core of Chicago is more urban than DC.
I would wager at core 20 sq miles, Chicago is roughly 25% denser, it's clear as day the core of Chicago is more urban than DC.
Only in population density.
The following are immediate areas surrounding downtown (Loop/Near North Side)
DC seems to have less structural gaps. Chicago in total has more urban areas but there are pockets that break this feel up. Moving due southwest in Chicago you run into this.
The field you see there is not a park. It's owned by CSX I believe, there are other areas like that.
I know exactly what they are talking about and Chicago def should fill these in.
The Atlantic Cities.
Here,
The top of the map is only 5 blocks from the Sears (willis) Tower. Feel free to move around. http://goo.gl/maps/4vRQp
There are also field like gaps in the near North Side. Then you have lots of parking lot retail going along North Avenue, Clybourn, etc.
Here is the begining of Clybourn corridor, it is filled with strip malls and less than 1 mile from DT. http://goo.gl/maps/92hvo
Here is North Ave/Clybourn Shopping area. It is basically suburban big box stores and massive parking lots. It is only about 14 blocks (1.6 miles) from the Hancock building and Michigan avenue. http://goo.gl/maps/6M4Uv
Many of the stores look like this, large Home Depot right in prime area. http://goo.gl/maps/rdMrj
Another big box area on Clybourn with tons of suburbanesque built retail: http://goo.gl/maps/JujM6
Zoomed in aerial: http://goo.gl/maps/3doVx
A large industrial area further breaks up the prime neighborhoods of Lincoln Park and Wicker Park/Bucktown areas and the river. http://goo.gl/maps/AQWtG
Strip malls in Lincoln Park: http://goo.gl/maps/tDMZu
There are also other features Chicago has on the north side that you don't see, which are often mention such as having drive through fast food places.
Another major grocery store with massive parking lot in River North on Division right next to DT and 5-6 blocks from Michigan Avenue. http://goo.gl/maps/LvYCQ
Surface parking lots on both sides of street in River North, again about 4-5 blocks from Michigan Avenue. These are all over the place, this is prime downtown commercial area and 30k density. http://goo.gl/maps/ys7iu
Parking lot at tourist restaurant in River North http://goo.gl/maps/pVveM
Drive through very popular rock n roll mcdonalds directly next to prime River North High rise area, large parking lots on both sides. http://goo.gl/maps/zsjfJ
Just up street, walgreens with parking lot, on other side, another parking lot, right next to shopping areas, prime tourist areas. http://goo.gl/maps/s2oYr
Drive through mcdonalds on state street in prime area next to State/Chicago Subway stops. http://goo.gl/maps/XxSSX
Plenty of parking lots like this right next to the loop in west loop http://goo.gl/maps/CJIX5
Aerial so you can see the others, interstate breaking up flow to the area as well. http://goo.gl/maps/yhokM
Even on major areas of the premiere neighborhoods you can find for instance drive through McDonald's This one is in Lincoln Park on the main drag. http://goo.gl/maps/LFiHS
If you go up to the next neighborhood in uptown on same street, you will run into something like this that can be found in other places as well, big box store with parking lot, randomly placed. http://goo.gl/maps/Bq8lP
Here's another mcdonalds on same street, in Rogers Park that runs 30k density. http://goo.gl/maps/UWTNj
Small strip malls like this are in numerous areas, this is in 30k density area once again. http://goo.gl/maps/lnMIY
In totality, Chicago will still have more urban areas than DC, but there are significant break up zones in Chicago near the immediate downtown area.
Only in population density.
The following are immediate areas surrounding downtown (Loop/Near North Side)
DC seems to have less structural gaps. Chicago in total has more urban areas but there are pockets that break this feel up. Moving due southwest in Chicago you run into this.
The field you see there is not a park. It's owned by CSX I believe, there are other areas like that.
I know exactly what they are talking about and Chicago def should fill these in.
The Atlantic Cities.
Here,
The top of the map is only 5 blocks from the Sears (willis) Tower. Feel free to move around. http://goo.gl/maps/4vRQp
There are also field like gaps in the near North Side. Then you have lots of parking lot retail going along North Avenue, Clybourn, etc.
Here is the begining of Clybourn corridor, it is filled with strip malls and less than 1 mile from DT. http://goo.gl/maps/92hvo
Here is North Ave/Clybourn Shopping area. It is basically suburban big box stores and massive parking lots. It is only about 14 blocks (1.6 miles) from the Hancock building and Michigan avenue. http://goo.gl/maps/6M4Uv
Many of the stores look like this, large Home Depot right in prime area. http://goo.gl/maps/rdMrj
Another big box area on Clybourn with tons of suburbanesque built retail: http://goo.gl/maps/JujM6
Zoomed in aerial: http://goo.gl/maps/3doVx
A large industrial area further breaks up the prime neighborhoods of Lincoln Park and Wicker Park/Bucktown areas and the river. http://goo.gl/maps/AQWtG
Strip malls in Lincoln Park: http://goo.gl/maps/tDMZu
There are also other features Chicago has on the north side that you don't see, which are often mention such as having drive through fast food places.
Another major grocery store with massive parking lot in River North on Division right next to DT and 5-6 blocks from Michigan Avenue. http://goo.gl/maps/LvYCQ
Surface parking lots on both sides of street in River North, again about 4-5 blocks from Michigan Avenue. These are all over the place, this is prime downtown commercial area and 30k density. http://goo.gl/maps/ys7iu
Parking lot at tourist restaurant in River North http://goo.gl/maps/pVveM
Drive through very popular rock n roll mcdonalds directly next to prime River North High rise area, large parking lots on both sides. http://goo.gl/maps/zsjfJ
Just up street, walgreens with parking lot, on other side, another parking lot, right next to shopping areas, prime tourist areas. http://goo.gl/maps/s2oYr
Drive through mcdonalds on state street in prime area next to State/Chicago Subway stops. http://goo.gl/maps/XxSSX
Plenty of parking lots like this right next to the loop in west loop http://goo.gl/maps/CJIX5
Aerial so you can see the others, interstate breaking up flow to the area as well. http://goo.gl/maps/yhokM
Even on major areas of the premiere neighborhoods you can find for instance drive through McDonald's This one is in Lincoln Park on the main drag. http://goo.gl/maps/LFiHS
If you go up to the next neighborhood in uptown on same street, you will run into something like this that can be found in other places as well, big box store with parking lot, randomly placed. http://goo.gl/maps/Bq8lP
Here's another mcdonalds on same street, in Rogers Park that runs 30k density. http://goo.gl/maps/UWTNj
Small strip malls like this are in numerous areas, this is in 30k density area once again. http://goo.gl/maps/lnMIY
In totality, Chicago will still have more urban areas than DC, but there are significant break up zones in Chicago near the immediate downtown area.
This is spot on. The cities were designed with different purposes. They are built very different.
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.
