HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #241  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 8:35 PM
craigs's Avatar
craigs craigs is online now
Birds Aren't Real!
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,669
Detroit's street layout was not a product of France or French planners, it was the partially-enacted plan by one Augustus Woodward, who first envisioned the unusual design in 1805. According to this history of the plan:

"Woodward arrived in Detroit less than a month after the [1805] fire, the citizens in readiness to begin rebuilding the village. Woodward persuaded them to hold off, however, so officials could consider the best way to proceed. Preventing the spread of fire called for broad avenues and large lots, which Woodward ensured featured into his layout. Despite such practicalities, few could have probably imagined a plan more fantastic than the one he finally arrived at: a system of dividing land into triangles, allotting each landowner the same area but under the new configuration.

Woodward traveled to Washington that winter to obtain approval of the plan, then returned to Detroit to lay out an improved version of it over the summer of 1806."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #242  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 9:02 PM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 6,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigs View Post
Detroit's street layout was not a product of France or French planners, it was the partially-enacted plan by one Augustus Woodward, who first envisioned the unusual design in 1805. According to this history of the plan:

"Woodward arrived in Detroit less than a month after the [1805] fire, the citizens in readiness to begin rebuilding the village. Woodward persuaded them to hold off, however, so officials could consider the best way to proceed. Preventing the spread of fire called for broad avenues and large lots, which Woodward ensured featured into his layout. Despite such practicalities, few could have probably imagined a plan more fantastic than the one he finally arrived at: a system of dividing land into triangles, allotting each landowner the same area but under the new configuration.

Woodward traveled to Washington that winter to obtain approval of the plan, then returned to Detroit to lay out an improved version of it over the summer of 1806."
That's very interesting. I would think Detroit would have some vestiges in its street grid from when it was a French settlement.

In Los Angeles, for example, its downtown streets are not true north/south or east/west. When Felipe de Neve founded the Pueblo of Los Angeles in 1781, the Spanish "Laws of the Indies" dictated that the town's plaza be oriented at a 45 degree angle from true N/S/E/W. In reality, they were only able to do a 36 degree angle from the cardinal directions because of the constantly meandering LA River (before it was channelized in concrete). This is why LA has a clashing street grid; as the city expanded, the Yankees introduced true east/west and north south streets: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Do...4d-118.2467693

Notice to the west of downtown LA is Hoover Street, which is true north/south, and was LA's original western city boundary.
__________________
"I guess the only time people think about injustice is when it happens to them."

~ Charles Bukowski
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #243  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 9:07 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigs View Post
Detroit's street layout was not a product of France or French planners, it was the partially-enacted plan by one Augustus Woodward, who first envisioned the unusual design in 1805.
The Woodward plan was largely not fulfilled, as you noted. This link explains how the French farms gave way to part of Detroit's street grid:

http://detroiturbanism.blogspot.com/...ng-future.html

Further away from the river, Detroit is gridded according to the township system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #244  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 9:46 PM
mrnyc mrnyc is offline
cle/west village/shaolin
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11,589
yeah that is very interesting about detroit. i didnt think the french laid out modern detroit, but wasnt sure. so thats who woodward was.

cleveland had a much later major plan that wasnt completed either, the group plan of 1903 for government buildings. it was based on the earlier chicago exposition of 1893.

http://www.clevelandmemory.org/groupplan/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #245  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 2:33 AM
MPLS_Const_Watch MPLS_Const_Watch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 678
I've been pouring through local census data trying to make some comparisons, and I remembered some of the comparisons made in this thread, so I decided to go through the exercise of updating the numbers for Minneapolis and St. Paul to reflect the data just released today.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post

major midwest cities by total # of people in census tracts >10,000 ppsm (2010):

Chicago - 2,584,931
Milwaukee - 252,711
Minneapolis -183,441
Cleveland - 98,090
Detroit - 70,371
St. Louis - 64,143
Columbus - 38,613
Cincinnati - 34,703
Kansas City -2,998
Indianapolis - 0
Minneapolis: 244,134

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
midwest cities by number of census tracts >15,000 ppsm:

chicago: ~500
milwaukee: 33
minneapolis: 18
madison: 7
columbus: 5
aurora, IL: 4
detroit: 3
ann arbor: 3
cleveland: 2
cincinnati: 1
indy: 0
KC: 0
st. louis: 0
Minneapolis: 21
St. Paul: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
those numbers are by MSA, so st. paul's total was included in minneapolis' figure.

here's how it breaks down for the twin cities:

183,441 total in the MSA

141,639 in Minneapolis

37,304 in St. Paul

4,498 in Brooklyn Park
Minneapolis 10k+: 196,462
St. Paul 10k+: 43,094
Brooklyn Park 10k+: 4,578


A few other 2010 vs. 2020 comparisons that I made to help quantify local growth for myself:

-At 20k ppsm+, Minneapolis went from 5 census tracts and 16,828 people to 11 tracts and 47,277 people.
-At 30k ppsm+, Minneapolis went from 0 tracts and 0 people to 2 tracts and 8,638 people.
-At 40k ppsm+, Minneapolis went from 0 tracts and 0 people to 1 tract and 4,320 people.

-At 20k ppsm+ St. Paul went from 0 tracts and 0 people to 2 tracts and 5,721 people.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #246  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 3:13 AM
jbermingham123's Avatar
jbermingham123 jbermingham123 is offline
Registered (Nimby Ab)User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: At a computer, wasting my life on a skyscraper website
Posts: 742
^^As someone who lives in STL, those figures reveal the truth. I remember being very confused as to why so many people in this thread were mentioning St. Louis.. I've been to almost every city over 1 million in the midwest (havent been to KC or columbus except driving through) and STL is by far the least "urban" ive seen. There are only a few small patches here that feel remotely urban, and it is only "walkable" if you feel like walking past miles of abandoned buildings on those walkable streets

Cherokee street is ok, the loop is ok, south grand is ok, midtown is ok, the grove is ok. I wouldnt consider any of them really urban. you can find individual streets like that in montana where i grew up, where the moment you take a right or left turn off the street, boom, urbanity gone. Clayton has tall buildings but the streets are empty after 11pm, and in downtown the streets are nearly empty all day every day. The only place in this entire damn metro that feels like a city is the central west end, and only for a 4x5 block area. Soulard is fairly well preserved and urban, but its surrounded on 2 sides by interstates, and on the east side by industrial land... its like a sort of fucked up museum that people from other parts of the "city" visit when they want to feel like they live in a real city for a few hours (myself included)

I would even go so far as to say there is not a single neighborhood in the st louis metro area (with the possible exception of the CWE, but thats a stretch) where you can live a middle class life comfortably without a car (i.e. you walk to one place to get groceries, walk another place to get shoes, another couple places for clothes, another for ice cream, etc) the way you can in many areas of chicago and vast swaths of new york. People in the city of stl usually drive out to the suburbs to shop at malls, rather than go to a favorite street or neighborhood
__________________
You guys are laughing now but Jacksonville will soon assume its rightful place as the largest and most important city on Earth.

I heard the UN is moving its HQ there. The eiffel tower is moving there soon as well. Elon Musk even decided he didnt want to go to mars anymore after visiting.

Last edited by jbermingham123; Aug 13, 2021 at 3:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #247  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 4:20 AM
goat314's Avatar
goat314 goat314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St. Louis - Tampa
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbermingham123 View Post
^^As someone who lives in STL, those figures reveal the truth. I remember being very confused as to why so many people in this thread were mentioning St. Louis.. I've been to almost every city over 1 million in the midwest (havent been to KC or columbus except driving through) and STL is by far the least "urban" ive seen. There are only a few small patches here that feel remotely urban, and it is only "walkable" if you feel like walking past miles of abandoned buildings on those walkable streets

Cherokee street is ok, the loop is ok, south grand is ok, midtown is ok, the grove is ok. I wouldnt consider any of them really urban. you can find individual streets like that in montana where i grew up, where the moment you take a right or left turn off the street, boom, urbanity gone. Clayton has tall buildings but the streets are empty after 11pm, and in downtown the streets are nearly empty all day every day. The only place in this entire damn metro that feels like a city is the central west end, and only for a 4x5 block area. Soulard is fairly well preserved and urban, but its surrounded on 2 sides by interstates, and on the east side by industrial land... its like a sort of fucked up museum that people from other parts of the "city" visit when they want to feel like they live in a real city for a few hours (myself included)

I would even go so far as to say there is not a single neighborhood in the st louis metro area (with the possible exception of the CWE, but thats a stretch) where you can live a middle class life comfortably without a car (i.e. you walk to one place to get groceries, walk another place to get shoes, another couple places for clothes, another for ice cream, etc) the way you can in many areas of chicago and vast swaths of new york. People in the city of stl usually drive out to the suburbs to shop at malls, rather than go to a favorite street or neighborhood
I get where you're going with this and I agree with many of your points. Although I do think a lot of this is laced with a bit of exaggeration and definitely a general disdain for the city. St. Louis is definitely not a cohesive city at all and is rather disjointed. It doesn't hide it's urban renewal scars well, and it's very evident. What I will say is that St. Louis probably scores high on the list because of it's large swaths of Gilded Age architecture and prewar building stock in a large area relative to it's regional stature. It's typical residential vernacular definitely the 2nd most urban outside of Chicago, the Metrolink system, legacy infrastructure gives it a bigger feel relative to it's true size. Unfortunately, I would say that is a blessing and a curse, because there is definitely a mismatch between the cool urban hoods and the actual demand for them. If St. Louis was able to somehow condense it's coolest neighborhoods where you wouldn't have those dead zones in between it would definitely help with the perception and overall livability of the city in my opinion. Could you imagine St. Louis with the robust economy and vibrancy of the Twin Cities? It would be a national treasure and major tourist destination overnight.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #248  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 2:30 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbermingham123 View Post

I would even go so far as to say there is not a single neighborhood in the st louis metro area (with the possible exception of the CWE, but thats a stretch) where you can live a middle class life comfortably without a car (i.e. you walk to one place to get groceries, walk another place to get shoes, another couple places for clothes, another for ice cream, etc) the way you can in many areas of chicago and vast swaths of new york. People in the city of stl usually drive out to the suburbs to shop at malls, rather than go to a favorite street or neighborhood
I don't really understand your STL observations.

First, outside of NYC, there's really no city in the U.S. where regular middle class families normally live car-free. Non-poor families in SF and Chicago and DC will almost always have a vehicle. In the Cincys and Atlantas of the world, they'll likely have at least two, even if living in the urban core.

Second, St. Louis has pretty good urban fabric for U.S. standards. The CWE has outstanding fabric. STL probably has better fabric than all but a dozen or so U.S. cities. The five NE corridor cities, Chicago, LA, SF, Seattle, and that's about it. Portland, Cincy, Miami, New Orleans are probably at the same level.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #249  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 3:30 PM
Antares41's Avatar
Antares41 Antares41 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bflo/Pgh/Msn/NYC
Posts: 2,145
I been to Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Detroit, Cleveland, Columbus (where I have an office) Cincinnati and Kansas City. To me Cleveland, Detroit and St. Louis all have the feel of once begin significant (even grand) urban centers that have passed their heydays. Some remnants can still be found, but abandonment and hollowing-out of neighborhoods have taken their toll. Minneapolis which I last visit in 2018 was the most urban (outside of Chicago) especially the stretch from downtown Minneapolis to downtown St. Paul. Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Indianapolis and Kansas City have some solid urban environments but I consider their footprints to be small. I'm in Columbus a lot and in my opinion its just too spread out to translate any real urban feel. However, as the population continue to rocket pass 900K and with some densification, via hi-rise residential construction along High street, it will eventually achieve some semblance of a small urban footprint.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #250  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 3:46 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPLS_Const_Watch View Post

Twin cities 10k+: 244,134
Minneapolis 10k+: 196,462
St. Paul 10k+: 43,094
Brooklyn Park 10k+: 4,578


-At 20k ppsm+, Minneapolis went from 5 census tracts and 16,828 people to 11 tracts and 47,277 people.
-At 30k ppsm+, Minneapolis went from 0 tracts and 0 people to 2 tracts and 8,638 people.
-At 40k ppsm+, Minneapolis went from 0 tracts and 0 people to 1 tract and 4,320 people.

-At 20k ppsm+ St. Paul went from 0 tracts and 0 people to 2 tracts and 5,721 people.

wow, that's some very solid urban growth in the twin cities.

up until this census, the #2 most urban in the midwest, at least in terms of hard data, was a 2-way contest between the twin cities and milwaukee, but with the TC's strong urban growth and milwaukee's population slide this past decade, i think we now have a definitive front runner, especially when you combine that with the strong investment in transit infrastructure that the twin cities have been making, and continue to make.

thanks for crunching all those numbers!
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #251  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 3:48 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antares41 View Post
I been to Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Detroit, Cleveland, Columbus (where I have an office) Cincinnati and Kansas City. To me Cleveland, Detroit and St. Louis all have the feel of once begin significant (even grand) urban centers that have passed their heydays. Some remnants can still be found, but abandonment and hollowing-out of neighborhoods have taken their toll. Minneapolis which I last visit in 2018 was the most urban (outside of Chicago) especially the stretch from downtown Minneapolis to downtown St. Paul. Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Indianapolis and Kansas City have some solid urban environments but I consider their footprints to be small. I'm in Columbus a lot and in my opinion its just too spread out to translate any real urban feel. However, as the population continue to rocket pass 900K and with some densification, via hi-rise residential construction along High street, it will eventually achieve some semblance of a small urban footprint.
So, "urban" to me implies a lot about the built form. I used to travel to Minneapolis for work almost weekly around 2016 - 2018, and it didn't really seem more urban than Detroit to me (although there are quite a lot of similarities between the two cities). Minneapolis IS urban, and it's definitely more intact and stable. But Detroit seems like it has (or had) a more comprehensive urban form that just happens to be extremely deteriorated.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #252  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 3:56 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I don't really understand your STL observations.

First, outside of NYC, there's really no city in the U.S. where regular middle class families normally live car-free. Non-poor families in SF and Chicago and DC will almost always have a vehicle. In the Cincys and Atlantas of the world, they'll likely have at least two, even if living in the urban core.

Second, St. Louis has pretty good urban fabric for U.S. standards. The CWE has outstanding fabric. STL probably has better fabric than all but a dozen or so U.S. cities. The five NE corridor cities, Chicago, LA, SF, Seattle, and that's about it. Portland, Cincy, Miami, New Orleans are probably at the same level.

Not to be that kind of hometowner, but the lack of a mention of Pittsburgh in the St. Louis tier feels like a serious oversight.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #253  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 3:58 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Not to be that kind of hometowner, but the lack of a mention of Pittsburgh in the St. Louis tier feels like a serious oversight.
You're right, totally forgot about Pittsburgh, which I would probably put a half-tier ahead of STL, Cincy, etc.

Pittsburgh has really strong urbanity for U.S. standards.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #254  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 4:01 PM
Segun's Avatar
Segun Segun is offline
<-- Chicago's roots.
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,929
The area around downtown and over the Rhine in Cincinnati is becoming very vibrant. In the years to come, the experience of being there is going to be comparable to a Chicago, Boston, SF, Philly.

I agree that Minneapolis is #2 Downtown is easily the second most vibrant downtown in the Midwest outside Chicago. It reminds me of Seattle.
__________________
Songs of the minute - Flavour - Ijele (Feat. Zoro)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjEFGpnkL38

Common - Resurrection (Video Mix)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmOd0GKuztE
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #255  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 4:23 PM
aderwent aderwent is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post

midwest cities by number of census tracts >15,000 ppsm:

chicago: ~500
milwaukee: 33
minneapolis: 18
madison: 7
columbus: 5
aurora, IL: 4
detroit: 3
ann arbor: 3
cleveland: 2
cincinnati: 1
indy: 0
KC: 0
st. louis: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post

major midwest cities by total # of people in census tracts >10,000 ppsm (2010):

Chicago - 2,584,931
Milwaukee - 252,711
Minneapolis -183,441
Cleveland - 98,090
Detroit - 70,371
St. Louis - 64,143
Columbus - 38,613
Cincinnati - 34,703
Kansas City -2,998
Indianapolis - 0
Columbus now has 82,785 86,236 in tracts >10,000ppsm; an increase of 44,172 47,923 (114 124%). It also added two three tracts >15,000ppsm for a total of seven eight.

Last edited by aderwent; Aug 13, 2021 at 4:47 PM. Reason: missed tract # 11.10
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #256  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 4:26 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by aderwent View Post
Columbus now has 82,785 in tracts >10,000ppsm; an increase of 44,172 (114%). It also added two tracts >15,000ppsm for a total of seven.
How much of that is Ohio State?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #257  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 4:51 PM
aderwent aderwent is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
How much of that is Ohio State?
Approximately 8/19 10,000ppsm tracts containing 40,801 people can be attributed to Ohio State. I don't have time to go back to 2010, but I'd imagine almost the entirety of the 38,613 were attributable to Ohio State.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #258  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 5:11 PM
jmecklenborg jmecklenborg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
yeah, what could've been.......

another planning mistake might have been allowing downtown clayton to steal so much of downtown's thunder. st. louis is more pulled apart than boston, where the center has never been challenged.

a century old subway system along with a more robust and sustained commuter rail system like boston's probably would have gone a long way toward keeping downtown st. louis the one and only true center.
Many people comment that the emergence of CVG as the Cincinnati area's airport in the 1950s helped keep DT Cincinnati as the region's unchallenged business center.

Yes, having an airport in another state is ridiculous. Moreover, the airport, which is in Boone County, KY, is owned and overseen by Kenton County - itself a curious wrinkle. And yes, the ensuing 50+ years of growth in Kenton and Boone Counties has been a loss for Ohio's tax base and has put a lot of stress on the river crossings.

Cincinnati's original airport is too close to wealthy neighborhoods. It's still there but primarily serves private jets. The second airport in suburban Blue Ash failed to purchase enough land thanks to draconian bond issue regulations enacted by the Ohio state legislature after WWII.

The funding of the interstate highway system in 1956 meant a new Ohio River bridge and superhighway was going to be built to the existing but tiny Boone County Airport, and the rest is history.

Many have wondered why the state of Ohio didn't step in and build a super-regional airport between Cincinnati and Dayton. I have never read a good explanation, but I sense that Cincinnati's city fathers new DT Cincinnati would fall if it ended up on the edge of the metro region.

It's funny to even type these words, but DT St. Louis is on the extreme edge of St. Louis's metro area, plus the city/county divergence, considered progressive at the time, completely backfired.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #259  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 5:30 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by aderwent View Post
Approximately 8/19 10,000ppsm tracts containing 40,801 people can be attributed to Ohio State. I don't have time to go back to 2010, but I'd imagine almost the entirety of the 38,613 were attributable to Ohio State.
Yeah, Ann Arbor has 26,580, in +10,000 ppsm tracts, which is more than 1/5 of the city's population. About 10,000 of that is campus housing.

East Lansing has 20,787, which is 43% of East Lansing's population. I'm guessing that all of that population is due to campus housing, as off-campus housing in East Lansing isn't really that dense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #260  
Old Posted Aug 13, 2021, 5:47 PM
aderwent aderwent is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Yeah, Ann Arbor has 26,580, in +10,000 ppsm tracts, which is more than 1/5 of the city's population. About 10,000 of that is campus housing.

East Lansing has 20,787, which is 43% of East Lansing's population. I'm guessing that all of that population is due to campus housing, as off-campus housing in East Lansing isn't really that dense.
I wonder how much of an effect the 100% remote school had?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:08 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.