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.
None of them look suburban to me. Homes are all close together, especially the last. They're even closer together than urban neighbourhoods in Minneapolis and Saint Paul.
This. In reality, it's all a matter of perspective. I'll never forget when I lived in Ardmore, PA (Philly burb, about 12 miles from Center City), and a few native Philadelphian business associates came out to visit me from CC and mentioned how nice it was to be out in the "country." Country? Granted, it has some areas that look classic suburban, including one of the oldest outdoor/lifestyle-center type shopping centers in the country, but it still puts some legit downtowns to shame.
Interesting question. I don't think it can be determined on a block-by-block basis, but by looking at the larger area. If the single family homes are among a more mixed use neighborhood, apartments, or multi-family homes, I wouldn't strictly call it suburban, either. When there are continuous blocks, or larger subdivisions, where single family homes are segregated from non-SFH use areas, that IMO represents suburban development.
Personally, I use the term "urban" to differentiate areas which can support a pedestrian-based lifestyle, and "suburban" where it must exclusively require use of an automobile.
Since all of the examples from the OP are roughly in the same area, and are close to walkable business district and public transit, I would define them as all urban (in my American-based definition).
I agree with your analysis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands
Number three and four are clearly urban, but I agree with the other poster who said we have to look at the whole neighborhood. Are used to think of Eastern Queens as almost universally suburban, but I have moderated that stance, as of late.
I do agree that 3 and 4 are clearly urban, and you're right that the big picture is important. It seems like most streets in Southeast Queens, are walking distance from things like 24 hour bodegas, which is atypical of true suburbia in my opinion.
I'm glad you have moderated that stance. Keep in mind South Jamaica has a population density of 27k per 100,000, that's not even remotely suburban in my opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borntoolate85
Here's my take:
Photo 1 is the one photo that's closest to a city boundary, but the traffic light and little businesses up the street suggests that you're still, though barely, in an urban environment.
Photo 2 is the most suburban feeling of them all, but of course the narrow setbacks from the street and architecture give the feeling that in most of the car-dependent cities, you're clearly in an urban environment. In a place like Atlanta, this is level of density that is common just outside the downtown/midtown core. To a northeasterner though, its first-ring suburban. It's classic "line between urban and suburban" IMO by American standards.
Photo 3 is clearly urban, even by NE standards. Lots of attached rowhomes and some dense SFH close to the street are part of a neighborhood with a few businesses, including a couple grocery stores nearby, a library, and a few restaurants.
Photo 4 almost reminds me of San Francisco-style architecture and i common among neighborhoods bordering downtown in cities like Cleveland, Buffalo, Detroit (before and where it hasn't been demolished) and Minneapolis. The truth is cities like NYC, Boston, Philadelphia, and Baltimore are a small fraction of what typical city development is. Photo 4 is clearly urban by non-NE corridor standards based on the density of development. It's in the same neighborhood as photo 3 though, and by general US standards is urban.
I’m not sure that number three qualifies as New York suburban. It’s not typical New York City architecture, but it’s 100 percent row houses. If that was brownstone instead of siding, you wouldn’t call it New York suburban.
That's Flatbush, which is overall a very urban neighborhood. Even though that street is filled with big houses, I bet there are many delis and other sorts of businesses within walking distance.
I think that because those houses are so nice, there was never an incentive to tear them down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by That_One_Guy
Good question/topic.
I’ve always felt like the neighborhood that I grew up in (Forest Hills, Queens) is a good middle ground between urban and suburban.
Which is similar to what you’ve posted. I would definitely call those more suburban than urban, though a tiny step up for not having giant Yards in front. And a little less suburban if they are apartments instead of single homes, which is what I grew up in, and many of these homes in Queens have been converted into apartments although they appear on the outside as a SFH.
Yeah Forest Hills is an interesting case, it has a wide range. I think the case can be made that it's an urban neighborhood overall even though it has many suburban and suburbanish blocks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by That_One_Guy
Me too. I work not that far from here in Kensington/Borough Park area and I’ve always thought this. It’s weird because it’s surrounded by neighborhoods much more urban and typical of Brooklyn. If you look on Google maps on Satellite view you can actually see a clear break in urbanity around this area.
And I don’t even wanna think about how much homes of these size go for in Brooklyn today. An insane amount of $$$$$$ im sure.
Kensington does have a lot of detached houses, but I'm under the impression that a big chunk of them are multifamily. Kensington is still a very urban neighborhood though, the population density is 64.7k per square mile.
Do you think these houses are single family or multifamily? I've been walking down that block for years and got the vibe that these houses are multi-family, but I could be wrong.
Yes, by my standards, the first is streetcar suburban, and the last three are all just suburbs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by l1995
That's Flatbush, which is overall a very urban neighborhood. Even though that street is filled with big houses, I bet there are many delis and other sorts of businesses within walking distance.
I think that because those houses are so nice, there was never an incentive to tear them down.
I would consider all of them Urban, although a few are on the border of "Streetcar Suburb" which I consider to be a type of Urban neighborhood.
Of course context is important and NYC is kind of weird in that in pretty much any other city, there wouldn't be a question as to if these are urban neighborhoods. They are (actually very) dense, have walk-able grids and you could, without a doubt, get everything you need without owning a car.
Obviously they are a lower tier on the Urban Transect model than other parts of the city, but I still think they are urban.
There are a few streets in NYC that are suburban in form, but in their greater context they are still in Urban neighborhoods.
Which is similar to what you’ve posted. I would definitely call those more suburban than urban, though a tiny step up for not having giant Yards in front. And a little less suburban if they are apartments instead of single homes, which is what I grew up in, and many of these homes in Queens have been converted into apartments although they appear on the outside as a SFH.
That's a very nice area. Reminds me a little of Bromley in London. Very charming.
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.
