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.
Rowhomes are single-family, but they're in attached form.
Spacially, they have no setbacks from abutting properties. By default they are indeed more urban in form than any single-family home with setbacks.
Not "indeed" to me. You're describing aesthetics and your opinion. And that's fine. Most here do prefer that this discussion be about aesthetics and even feelings. But from a numbers standpoint for me it's about the density of residents and amenities. Aesthetics matter to me when discussing the quality of an urban neighborhood.
Also lots of row home neighborhoods do have setbacks. Especially the relatively newer ones built in the last 90 years.
Row houses were built in a specific time and they worked for the needs of that time. In the end, they're still single family homes. My position was that a row home neighborhood isn't necessarily more urban than a neighborhood of apartments and single family homes. Row homes can be part of a very urban environment and they often are, which is why so many consider them urban full stop.
Rowhomes, like all homes, were built in a specific time and they worked for the needs of the time but existing ones are often either still fulfilling the same similar need or adapted to other needs. Rowhomes of the pre-early 20th century period were often built for families that were often quite large and multigenerational living together and sometimes with waitstaff. They could also be built to be flexible like where the bottom "garden" unit or units are used by relatives, wait staff, or rented out as a stranger. Some started out with the bottom floor as retail or office or were later converted to such. In later time periods, many of the larger rowhomes have been cut up into multiple households. Modern rowhomes are generally similar like that and they are still being built though not in as much quantity given that zoning often makes this quite difficult or even illegal.
I agree a rowhome neighborhoods isn't necessarily more urban than a neighborhood that has apartments and detached single family homes. I think it should be clarified though that rowhome developments are quite intense land use, so you really need to have things swing strongly towards the apartments side of things and strongly away from detached single family homes in order to be dense and more bustling than a rowhome neighborhood. Remember, you're listing a mix of two different things with one being much denser than the other. Apartments as in multistory, larger lot, multifamily housing that may or may not have commercial or retail component to it are denser and then you're mixing it with a completely separate category of detached single family homes which are far, far less dense. Those are two forms that can exist together in a neighborhood, but so can rowhomes / detached single family homes. There are certainly large swaths of Brooklyn that are mostly rowhomes, but with plenty of large apartment buildings. The same goes with neighborhoods with rowhomes that also have sections of detached single family units. The mix of these three separate types among others does matter a lot, and the intact, rowhome-dominant neighborhoods *is* a very urban form factor and does create quite dense and bustling neighborhoods, but I don't think anyone claiming that this is *exclusive* to rowhomes.
Baltimore is all over the map: w/ vast tracts of under-utilized/ fading/ warehouse/ industrial parks.... and some extensive/ fairly-dense residential zones.
it's not dense in a roundish circular core like (Philadelphia).
i didn't even realize i had Denver #10; evidently/ mindlessly stuck it there.
wasn't thinking of 'what' after Miami.
Quote:
Originally Posted by odurandina
imo:
1. NYC
2. Chicago
3. SF
4. LA
5. DC
6T. Philadelphia
6T. Boston
sizable drop
8. Baltimore
9. Miami
10. Denver
*Boston is 4th densest out to 1,000,000 in the US equating to 66 sq mi.
I added up a large group of mid-sized metros 5k+ contiguous tracts out of curiosity. The one rule was there could only be a maximum of a one census tract gap of less than 5k people per sq mi for it to count as contiguous. I don't know if it's truly a great measure of a cities on the ground "urban feel" but it led to some interesting results nonetheless.
There are clearly a couple of separate tiers in this group and some surprising cities that punched well above their weight in population density (Milwaukee and Providence specifically). The ratio of 10k+ to 5K+ tracts varies wildly between cities and there is definitely some overlap between tiers which I think would complicate trying to group them.
Detroit is a noticeable outlier due to how hollowed out the city is, it has the most contiguous tracts above 5k+ by far but it's 10k+ tracts are less than 1/3 of Baltimore's, so Baltimore would probably feel and operate like a denser city at ground level. The same could probably be said with Providence having the same number of 5k+ tracts overall as Cincinnati but it also has 3 times as many 10k+ tracts in it's urban area.
City: 10k+ 5-10k Total:
Detroit 27 310 337
Twin Cities 64 163 227
Baltimore 105 117 222
Denver 65 158 223
Portland 45 169 214
Milwaukee 77 117 194
Cleveland 27 157 184
Pittsburgh 33 100 133
Atlanta 34 79 113
Buffalo 42 64 106
Providence 44 35 79
Columbus 17 87 104
Cincinnati 15 63 78
St. Louis 13 70 83
Richmond 11 23 34
Louisville 3 51 54
Kansas City 3 42 45
Indianapolis 1 35 36
Charlotte 5 20 25
Last edited by airwave09; 06-18-2023 at 01:49 PM..
I added up a large group of mid-sized metros 5k+ contiguous tracts out of curiosity. The one rule was there could only be a maximum of a one census tract gap of less than 5k people per sq mi for it to count as contiguous. I don't know if it's truly a great measure of a cities on the ground "urban feel" but it led to some interesting results nonetheless.
There are clearly a couple of separate tiers in this group and some surprising cities that punched well above their weight in population density (Milwaukee and Providence specifically). The ratio of 10k+ to 5K+ tracts varies wildly between cities and there is definitely some overlap between tiers which I think would complicate trying to group them.
Detroit is a noticeable outlier due to how hollowed out the city is, it has the most contiguous tracts above 5k+ by far but it's 10k+ tracts are less than 1/3 of Baltimore's, so Baltimore would probably feel and operate like a denser city at ground level. The same could probably be said with Providence having the same number of 5k+ tracts overall as Cincinnati but it also has 3 times as many 10k+ tracts in it's urban area.
City: 10k+ 5-10k Total:
Detroit 27 310 337
Twin Cities 64 163 227
Baltimore 105 117 222
Denver 65 158 223
Portland 45 169 214
Milwaukee 77 117 194
Cleveland 27 157 184
Pittsburgh 33 100 133
Atlanta 34 79 113
Buffalo 42 64 106
Providence 44 35 79
Columbus 17 87 104
Cincinnati 15 63 78
St. Louis 13 70 83
Richmond 11 23 34
Louisville 3 51 54
Kansas City 3 42 45
Indianapolis 1 35 36
Charlotte 5 20 25
Providence, Baltimore and Pittsburgh are the only two with significant 15k+ tracts though.
Providence, Baltimore and Pittsburgh are the only two with significant 15k+ tracts though.
Pretty sure Cincy and Cleveland have 0
Yeah, not that the poster was necessarily trying to argue the point, but 5kppsm densities aren't exactly urban, even 10k is still on the low side if we are talking about sustaining walkable mixed use urbanism.
Yeah, not that the poster was necessarily trying to argue the point, but 5kppsm densities aren't exactly urban, even 10k is still on the low side if we are talking about sustaining walkable mixed use urbanism.
Well to counter your point of 10k being on the low side for sustaining walkable urbanism, some of the densest and most vibrant walkable neighborhoods with thriving commercial areas in Pittsburgh are ones that are right at or below 10k ppl per sq mi. (Downtown, Southside, Strip District, and Lawrenceville being the most obvious examples.
I don’t think any of those cities go beyond 25k or so.
Portland has 5 tracts above 25k and 11 tracts above 20k. Not a lot but it’s something.
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.
