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.
FriendlyGod, you're right about Philly and Pittsburgh, the argument can be made either way, I guess I was thinking areas with less trees typically feel more "urban" (kinda contradicts Dupont, but then again it's hard to find a neighborhood in D.C. outside of downtown that isn't leafy). Perhaps parts of the Atlas District...
In terms of built environment, aren't West Hollywood and Westlake kinda similar (especially in regards to architectural diversity)?
I'm still a little confused by your definition of "urban." You say you're talking only about the built environment, but then you say that SoHo is the quintessential "urban" neighborhood. In NYC, the Upper East Side, for instance, is built way more densely than SoHo, with apartment towers you'd never find in the suburbs. SoHo has a lot of mere brownstone blocks and even empty park spaces. Thinking about Brooklyn, I can't tell if you're looking for someplace like DUMBO, someplace like Williamsburg, someplace like Bed-Stuy, or someplace like East Flatbush.
You're absolutely right about the Upper East Side being urban in terms of density. Any area where the population density comes close to 100,000 ppl/sq.mile (in certain UES census tracts) is definitely urban. But I wasn't really thinking in terms of density (although the "urban" neighborhoods I listed are quite dense too).
What I'm more interested in is finding neighborhoods that would be next to impossible to create in a suburban community. So the physical characteristics of SoHo which are so unique and difficult to duplicate are typically historic in nature like the architectural detailing (no recent developments, in terms of construction, I can think of have the level of unique architecturally detailing SoHo cast-iron buildings do). Craftsmanship of that kind died with the evolution of modern architecture. Another characteristic is the street-widths, while not completely uncommon to lower Manhattan, those narrow streets are nonexistent in suburban settings (most municipalities I know of rarely allow the R.O.W. to be under 66 feet). Finally, the streetscaping in SoHo is very distinctive. Cobble stone streets with no trees or benches. While some suburbs put in a cobble stone street or two, it's just too expensive and difficult to maintain for them to do that on every street in the neighborhood. And too, most suburbs have landscape ordinances requiring benches and trees in their downtown areas.
Yes it would be very difficult for most suburbs to replicate the UES in their towns, but some tried. I'm thinking about places like Bethesda, MD and West New York, NJ and Arlington, VA which replicated broad boulevards, tree lined sidestreets, and mid-century highrise architecture which can be found (and to some degree originated) on the UES and UWS.
And places like Westlake in L.A. are not terribly unique neighborhoods (not more so than the UES), but for L.A., that's a very unique neighborhood.
I hope that helps to clarify and I guess for Brooklyn, although I hate to say it, I think Billyburg and DUMBO are pretty unique "urban neighborhoods". I think.
Where I live, Lakewood Ohio, is pretty urban and it's a suburb. You would definitely not think you are in a suburb. More urban than many big cities I've been to.
What is the most "urban" neighborhood in your city?
Choose the neighborhood which would best represent the most "urban" neighborhood in your city. By "urban" I'm talking about a neighborhood (strictly in terms of the built environment, so architecture, streetscaping, street widths, etc) that could NOT be found in a suburb. The quintessential "urban" neighborhood in the U.S. is SoHo in New York because it has narrow, cobblestone streets, with old, cast iron buildings.
Here's what I was thinking so far, please feel free to edit or add to my list.
New York- SoHo
Boston- North End Philadelphia- Passyunk Square
D.C.- Dupont Circle
Pittsburgh- Southside Flats
Cincinnati- Over-the-Rhine
Detroit- Mexicantown
Chicago- Fulton Market
NoLa- French Quarter
St. Louis- Downtown West
L.A.- Westlake
San Francisco- Tenderloin
Seattle- Pioneer Square
I would not consider West Hollywood to be particularly "urban," at least not when compared to other neighborhoods like Koreatown. I don't really think of West Hollywood and Westlake as having much in common, although I suppose they do both share grand old 1920s apartment buildings, among other things.
For DC I'd put in a vote for Georgetown.
I'm not sure what my choice for SF would be, but it wouldn't be the Tenderloin. The Tenderloin is very urban, of course, but if you're looking for very unique I think there are plenty of other urban neighborhoods in the city with a more distinctive and unique SF (and urban) feeling. I think I'd put Chinatown or Nob Hill at the top of the list. The Tenderloin feels more like what you'd find in other big cities.
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.
