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.
I think over 20,000 in the neighborhood is pretty good. Remember Manhattan is around 70k with neighborhoods over 100k. Near North chicago Near North Side including Cabrini-Green, Dearborn Pkwy, Gold Coast, Goose Island, Old Town, River North, River West, State Pkwy, Streeterville) is over 50k with certain tracts even higher.
In Chicago all of these hoods would approximately make that cut...
Albany Park including Mayfair, North Mayfair, Ravenswood Manor
Avondale
Belmont Cragin including Brickyard, Hanson Park
Edgewater including Andersonville, Edgewater Glen, Epic, Lakewood/Balmoral
Hermosa including Belmont Gardens, Kelvyn Park
Humboldt Park
Hyde Park
Irving Park including Kilbourn Park, Old Irving Park, The Villa
Lake View including Wrigleyville
Lincoln Park including DePaul, Old Town Triangle, Park West, Ranch Triangle, Sheffield Neighbors, Wrightwood Neighbors
Lincoln Square including Bowmanville, Budlong Woods, Ravenswood, Ravenswood Gardens
Logan Square including Bucktown
Near North Side including Cabrini-Green, Dearborn Pkwy, Gold Coast, Goose Island, Old Town, River North, River West, State Pkwy, Streeterville
Rogers Park including Loyola
South Lawndale including Little Village
South Shore including Jackson Park Highlands
Uptown including Buena Park, Sheridan Park
West Ridge including Nortown, Peterson Park, Rosehill, West Rogers Park
West Town including East Village, Noble Square, Ukrainian Village, Wicker Park
Why didn't you take advantage of the 24 hour bus service in London? The night bus routes mimic the routes of the subways usually...
We lived northwest of the city. No bus service to that area. I did take the bus sometimes when I stayed with friends who lived in the central part of the city but it was hard to get used to unless you are familiar with the routes. The street signs are hard to read and if you don't know where you are going then the bus rides can be quite an adventure
My guess is that it has to do with when it was built which determines how dense it is. You have to build out enough in order to build up, it is just in the past building up was sooner due to transportation reasons.
True to a certain extent, but many older cities have been retrofitted for the automobile. Neighborhoods have been razed for freeway construction, entire blocks have been demolished for parking lots, public transit systems have been dismantled. When you compare the densities of many NE and Midwest cities in the 1950 census (pre-freeway era) and today, it's amazing how much density they have lost. (Decreasing average family size is another factor).
True to a certain extent, but many older cities have been retrofitted for the automobile. Neighborhoods have been razed for freeway construction, entire blocks have been demolished for parking lots, public transit systems have been dismantled. When you compare the densities of many NE and Midwest cities in the 1950 census (pre-freeway era) and today, it's amazing how much density they have lost. (Decreasing average family size is another factor).
This does tend to apply even in stable areas without abandonment which is a whole another issue. I do notice trends that are making these areas reverse in density. Basically things such as parking lots converted to garages freeing up space and allowing denser buildings, areas above freeways being covered if it can be to free up land elsewhere for development, and redeveolping old industrial areas freeing up significant areas of land for development. Also average family size can't decrease much more or if it will long-term so you can't lose density by that. Actually on that how much of cities population losses between 1950-2000 is a result of shrinking family sizes? It would be interesting to see it compared to total number of households in a city to see if some population declines are not as drastic in reality as commonly percieved.
This does tend to apply even in stable areas without abandonment which is a whole another issue. I do notice trends that are making these areas reverse in density. Basically things such as parking lots converted to garages freeing up space and allowing denser buildings, areas above freeways being covered if it can be to free up land elsewhere for development, and redeveolping old industrial areas freeing up significant areas of land for development. Also average family size can't decrease much more or if it will long-term so you can't lose density by that. Actually on that how much of cities population losses between 1950-2000 is a result of shrinking family sizes? It would be interesting to see it compared to total number of households in a city to see if some population declines are not as drastic in reality as commonly percieved.
I know the number of households is almost even in Philly 1950 to 2000
I know the number of households is almost even in Philly 1950 to 2000
I am thinking that might be the case. Even in places that lost more than half of its population in that timeframe, my guess is households declined by much smaller numbers if at all. Also some of these cities likely had very little new residental development as well at this point since everything might of been developed by then. I picture large areas of cities only lost population because of family size issues but the number of households are the same.
This is a pattern that is prevalent in older stable suburbs as well where there is population decline tied to aging populations and smaller household size. Although many of these places could have increases in the future if the older people move one and are replaced by younger people.
It isn't density itself that's attractive, but what comes with density such as a concentration of activities, retail, restaurants, transportation options, possibility of meeting like-minded or wildly diverse people etc.
It isn't density itself that's attractive, but what comes with density such as a concentration of activities, retail, restaurants, transportation options, possibility of meeting like-minded or wildly diverse people etc.
you get that without being overly dense though. I get all of that in my sprawling city
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.
