Cities with an undeserved bad rap

[Steely Dan]

chicago is also the only place left in the midwest where functional neighborhood urbansim still exists at any kind of large scale.

there are only 27 zip codes in the entire midwest with a population density greater than 15,000 ppsm.

26 of them are in chicago.

the other one is in minneapolis.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

chicago is also the only place left in the midwest where functional urbansim still exists at any kind of large scale.

there are only 27 zip codes in the entire midwest with a population density greater than 15,000 ppsm.

26 of them are in chicago.

the other one is in minneapolis.

Yeah, that's true now. It most certainly wasn't true 25 years ago.

Hamtramck, MI, is still the most densely populated municipality in the Midwest outside of Chicagoland.

[Chisouthside]

Core/downtown San Jose is actually pretty walkable, and most of the sprawly tech offices are on the north side of the city,

[edale]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

chicago is also the only place left in the midwest where functional neighborhood urbansim still exists at any kind of large scale.

there are only 27 zip codes in the entire midwest with a population density greater than 15,000 ppsm.

26 of them are in chicago.

the other one is in minneapolis.

I don't agree with this at all. Why did you pick 15,000 people per square mile? That seems arbitrary. And population density really doesn't guarantee functional neighborhood urbanism at all. This part of LA has a ton of residential density, but you'd be hard pressed to find much to walk to: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0605...7i16384!8i8192

You can find lively urban neighborhoods with solid business districts in a ton of midwestern cities. Cincinnati alone has 10+ such districts that immediately come to mind. High Street in Columbus is incredibly commercially vibrant for many miles, cutting across multiple neighborhoods. St. Louis and Kansas City both have multiple vibrant urban neighborhoods.

[LA21st]

That part of wilshire is a few blocks from Westwood Village/UCLA and Westwood Blvd, which is a decent walkable stretch for Iranian restaurants, markets etc etc.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by edale

I don't agree with this at all.

i'll use bold for emphasis this time.

chicago is also the only place left in the midwest where functional neighborhood urbansim still exists at any kind of large scale.

lots of other midwest cities still have pockets of functional urbansim, but chicago is really the only one where you still see over a dozen contiguous sq. miles of that kind of thing.

[edale]

Originally Posted by LA21st

That part of wilshire is a few blocks from Westwood Village/UCLA and Westwood Blvd, which is a decent walkable stretch for Iranian restaurants, markets etc etc.

I'm aware. I also HIGHLY doubt that many of the people who live in those high rises are walking to Westwood Village. If it was a walking neighborhood, there would be street level commercial on Wilshire. It's a high rise canyon but almost entirely devoid of street life. While LA in general has more pedestrian activity than a lot of people realize, West LA is still very auto centric and there isn't a lot of walking.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i'll use bold for emphasis this time.



lots of other midwest cities still have pockets of functional urbansim, but chicago is really the only one where you still see over a dozen contiguous sq. miles of that kind of thing.

Because it's flat and could uniformly develop. Columbus benefits from the same thing. You're not going to have a dozen contiguous miles of any sort of development in a city with any meaningful topographic change.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by edale

I'm aware. I also HIGHLY doubt that many of the people who live in those high rises are walking to Westwood Village. If it was a walking neighborhood, there would be street level commercial on Wilshire. It's a high rise canyon but almost entirely devoid of street life. While LA in general has more pedestrian activity than a lot of people realize, West LA is still very auto centric and there isn't a lot of walking.

That maybe true. But I was just saying there are things to walk to. The option is there. Edgewater in Chicago to me is somewhat similar. Very dense, full of highrises and midrises. But it doesn't show on the street either. And I lived in Rogers Park, to the north.

I've heard much of South Florida/Miami is like this too in their highrise areas.

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

it's also important to remember that, like most other US cities, the street violence/homicide problem in chicago is very concentrated.

yes, chicago has a shamefully high number of murders, but so far this year, ~70% of them have been concentrated in just 18 community areas (out of chicago's 77), 5 on the far west side, and 11 on the far south side.

not coincidentally, those are also the 2 of the 7 "cities" within chicago (from the recent "tale of 7 cities" thread) that are also currently losing population.

because the human mind is oriented toward easy categorization and not nuanced understanding, too often people think of chicago as this giant 200 sq. mile swath of out and out gun violence, when the problem is really more like 40 sq. miles of out and out gun violence.

that fact is still horrendous, but gun violence does not dominate life in all areas of chicago as trump/fox news would have the simple-minded rubes out in the sticks fear.

Most rational people, especially on this board, can probably figure that out. It doesn't stop it from being in the back of your mind if visiting. It's worse in places like LA where such statistics are skewed, as some suburbs have their share of violent crime.

And for me, as a minority who can blend into any scenario, I'd be a lot more likely to visit a high crime area (I'm assuming Chicago's are predominately minority) for friendship or business, so it definitely is something that'd I'd be thinking about.

[LA21st]

You're kidding right? Chicago has suburbs that are pretty violent. So does NYC, DC, etc. LA isn't different in this at all. This isn't the 1990s anymore. "Scary" Long Beach has one of the lowest murder rates for cities over 400,000. Meanwhile, Prince Georges County's murder rate is among the worst in the country.

Your city is much more violent and crime ridden than what LA is. Skew your facts all you want. Seems weird a guy from Houston is calling LA's crime out.

That said, I love Chicago, but there is def a issue going on with the redline. I follow Chicago news, and there is a disturbing pattern of random people getting attacked/mugged
more frequently than they should around red line stations.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by edale

I don't agree with this at all. Why did you pick 15,000 people per square mile? That seems arbitrary. And population density really doesn't guarantee functional neighborhood urbanism at all. This part of LA has a ton of residential density, but you'd be hard pressed to find much to walk to: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0605...7i16384!8i8192

You can find lively urban neighborhoods with solid business districts in a ton of midwestern cities. Cincinnati alone has 10+ such districts that immediately come to mind. High Street in Columbus is incredibly commercially vibrant for many miles, cutting across multiple neighborhoods. St. Louis and Kansas City both have multiple vibrant urban neighborhoods.

I get your point about the condo corridor along Wilshire, but Westwood Village does anchor the western end of this stretch. It's a five or 10 minute walk, not that anybody is walking it. https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0607...7i13312!8i6656

Ooop! I see this topic is already covered.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

And for me, as a minority who can blend into any scenario, I'd be a lot more likely to visit a high crime area (I'm assuming Chicago's are predominately minority) for friendship or business, so it definitely is something that'd I'd be thinking about.

yeah, if you're an african american male between 15 and 35, then chicago's gang violence would be much more concerning if you came for a visit, especially if you were visiting family/friends on the far west or south sides.

every year there are a couple stories of someone's cousin from michigan or texas or wherever being shot and killed while visiting chicago, either from mistaken identity or being at the wrong party at the wrong time.

as a white middle-aged man who spends precious little time in chicago's most violent quarters, those scenarios don't weigh too heavily on my mind. yet another form of white privilege.

[202_Cyclist]

Bridgeport, CT, has and undeserved bad rap. Bridgeport certainly has its challenges with crime and municipal corruption but there are parts of the city, especially by Fairfield, that are nice. There are good connections to New York and destinations elsewhere along the Northeast Corridor via Metro North and Amtrak. Housing is also far more affordable than most other suburbs and cities in the NJ-NY-CT area.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by edale

I'm aware. I also HIGHLY doubt that many of the people who live in those high rises are walking to Westwood Village. If it was a walking neighborhood, there would be street level commercial on Wilshire. It's a high rise canyon but almost entirely devoid of street life. While LA in general has more pedestrian activity than a lot of people realize, West LA is still very auto centric and there isn't a lot of walking.

Wilshire is very dense/urban, but generally not pedestrian friendly and poor public realm. It isn't classic urbanity.

Even in prime Beverly Hills, there are relatively few pedestrians.

[LouisianaRush]

Mexico City. Most Americans are too afraid to visit. It has world class museums, architecture, and an amazing night life and food scene. It is one of my favorite cities in the world.

[LA21st]

In the Golden Triangle, there's few pedestrians?
I honestly have to doubt many of you have actually gone to these places
or just like to exaggerate.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by LA21st

In the Golden Triangle, there's few pedestrians?
I honestly have to doubt many of you have actually gone to these places
or just like to exaggerate.

For a city as large/important as LA, and a street as important/iconic as Wilshire, I'd say there are very few pedestrians on Wilshire in BH.

There are few pedestrians because it isn't a particularly pleasant walking experience, and the big department stores all have parking in the back, so the back becomes the main entrance.

[LA21st]

Wilshire lacks the restaurants and shops the other streets in the Golden Triangle have. I dont know what your experience is, but there's always a good amount of people strolling
around those areas.

Again, if you want to say Wilshire is quieter, I guess. But that's not what you initially said.

Wilshire might be the grandest street in LA, but its not always the most interesting/vibrant. For much of it, its really a business address and connects vibrant areas together. This might change when the subway opens, who knows.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by LA21st

You're kidding right? Chicago has suburbs that are pretty violent. So does NYC, DC, etc. LA isn't different in this at all. This isn't the 1990s anymore. "Scary" Long Beach has one of the lowest murder rates for cities over 400,000. Meanwhile, Prince Georges County's murder rate is among the worst in the country.

Your city is much more violent and crime ridden than what LA is. Skew your facts all you want. Seems weird a guy from Houston is calling LA's crime out.

That said, I love Chicago, but there is def a issue going on with the redline. I follow Chicago news, and there is a disturbing pattern of random people getting attacked/mugged
more frequently than they should around red line stations.

Does it? I’ve tried looking into the numbers for the Chicagoland area and outside of the city, there are very few murders. Will County has had 30 since 2018. That seems to be the highest outside of Cook. The vast majority of homicides in Cook County are in the city.