Should there be any doubt that LA belongs among the big 6 urban US cities?

[DZH22]

Originally Posted by Quixote

The difference with Boston having Beacon Hill and SF the Tenderloin is that those are not representative neighborhoods.

Back Bay

DJI_0521-HDR by Phil, on Flickr

DJI_0500-HDR by Phil, on Flickr

North End

IMG_7940 by Phil, on Flickr

South End

DJI_0614-1 by Phil, on Flickr

DJI_0187-HDR by Phil, on Flickr

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I think that midrise Euro typology has pretty wide variability. Barcelona is a lot denser than Berlin, but they're both characterized by blocky midrise residentials with similar height. I don't think Barcelona would have larger household sizes, so the ground coverage must be much higher. Do the Club Med countries typically have the generous courtyards?

And there’s a great deal of variability when it comes to rowhouses and skyscrapers. For example, 432 Park Avenue has only 109 units. Meanwhile, there’s a proposal to replace in parking garage in Downtown LA’s Bunker Hill with a slender 480-foot tower with 570 units. There are townhouses and walk-ups (like the one in “You’ve Got Mail”) on the UWS.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Also interesting that the early 20th century Euro professional classes adopted apartment living, while it was generally rejected in the British Isles, Benelux, Northern Germany and the U.S. outside of NYC. Protestantism? Catholic Germany looks more like Central Europe.

Affluent Berliners rejected apartment living?

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by DZH22

Back Bay

…

Boston’s a triple-decker town.

[38 Geary]

SF is similar to Boston and Philly in that there's a lot of high density neighborhoods outside of the immediate core.

Density here is in the 40-60k ppsm range

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1810-Jackson-St-8-San-Francisco-CA-94109/15073578_zpid/

Density here is in the 30-60k ppsm range


And further out

Density here is in the 20-40k ppsm range

https://www.instagram.com/p/C12e0oNPqO9/

And even further out

Density here is in the 20-50k ppsm range

https://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/483-Paris-St-94112/home/777201

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by homebucket

The Sunset is also not a representative neighborhood either.

That's the beauty of SF. You can have varying degrees of urbanism.

No, but the bulk of the typologies and vernaculars of SF don't create busy sidewalks because they are primarily residential — anchored by a main retail strip with corner shops here and there.

It feels sparse. Dense, but sparse.

[38 Geary]

Originally Posted by Quixote

No, but the bulk of the typologies and vernaculars of SF don't create busy sidewalks because they are primarily residential — anchored by a main retail strip with corner shops here and there.

It feels sparse. Dense, but sparse.

What's your definition of bulk?

There are some quieter neighborhoods in SF but I disagree with sparse.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Docere

Affluent Berliners rejected apartment living?

Berlin is (or more accurately was; it's the least observant big German city) a Protestant town, and is definitely apartment-oriented. I guess it's an exception. Maybe that whole imperial capital thing. Still, the most affluent parts of Berlin are SFH, which isn't the case in Paris, Rome, Madrid, Prague, etc.

And I don't think Berlin is quite like a Vienna. It's hard to tell bc city was flattened, and East Germany basically just built apartment blocks. West Berlin had a ton of SFH neighborhoods, many not that far from city center. Postwar rebuilding, on both sides, might have scrambled the late 19th/early 20th century vernacular.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by homebucket

What's your definition of bulk?

There are some quieter neighborhoods in SF but I disagree with sparse.

He has a point, SF has a lot of garages which means less ground level retail and much of the activity is on busier streets; think California & Divisadero or Filmore in Pac Heights for example.

[38 Geary]

Originally Posted by JManc

He has a point, SF has a lot of garages which means less ground level retail and much of the activity is on busier streets; think California & Divisadero or Filmore in Pac Heights for example.

Even so, there's still a lot of people walking around usually.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by DZH22

I had a roommate who was completely obsessed with Natalie.

She came in a couple times with this same guy who was probably 60. He looked like a professor but I have no idea who he was. She's really small and soft-spoken. I got the sense that she has a tough time navigating the world because everyone's been telling her how great she is since she was 10 years old.

Working restaurants/retail in Boston is hilarious because you get all of these people who are famous in the arts, politics, academia, etc., coming through, but rarely someone who is a pop culture celebrity like Princess Amadala.

I dealt with a few of these people like Susan Sontag, Noam Chomsky, Cornell West, Joseph Kennedy, etc. I narrowly missed getting to wait on Al Gore.

When Facebook took off I had the vague memory of waiting on a guy that looked a lot like Mark Zuckerberg but it couldn't have been him because my memory was from 2001 and the Zuckster started at Harvard in the Fall of 2002.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Quixote

Boston’s a triple-decker town.

Boston + Cambridge and the rest. Yes, Boston has a lot more intact stuff from the 1700s-late 1800s than pretty much anywhere else, but you can bike through these areas really fast. They're dense and loom large in the mind but their footprints are pretty small. You could bike from Charleston, through the North End, through Beacon Hill, and down Commonwealth to Kenmore Square in like 20 minutes.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Density here is in the 30-60k ppsm range

This shot includes parts of the Tenderloin, Nob Hill, and Chinatown, which are the densest parts of SF. I don't think it includes the densest tract though, which is just beyond the upper edge of the frame.

So it's in the 30k-100k+ range, assuming you're measuring by census tract. And if you're measuring it by neighborhood, it tops out at 70k.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by JManc

He has a point, SF has a lot of garages which means less ground level retail

"less ground level retail" is not a complaint that I've ever heard anyone make about SF, in comparison to other US cities. Maybe in comparison to NYC, I guess. Yes there are many ground-level garages, especially on residential streets with a lower density. Maybe there's too many. But there is also a ton of retail, on commercial strips (mostly, just like anywhere else) with a level of activity that any US city could be envious of (except for NYC, as always), and also in "random" locations (like corner stores).

The ground-floor garages don't exist in a vacuum. The city is still extremely dense and walkable, with amenities everywhere. Also, half of those garages have apartments in the back, and are also at times used for hanging out (with the door open, kinda like a front porch), having garage sales (SF garages often are used like a basement, and plenty of them never hold cars), etc. IMO they don't really hurt street life, as one might expect. Maybe a little bit, but SF is very dense, and hurting pedestrian activity is hard, even for a bunch of garages.

[Segun]

For a physically small area, Boston has a diverse typology of residential architecture.

Some of it looks the most similar to San Francisco of any city outside the West Coast.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/wydziJFAKhWuSBJM8

[DZH22]

Originally Posted by Segun

For a physically small area, Boston has a diverse typology of residential architecture.

Some of it looks the most similar to San Francisco of any city outside the West Coast.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/wydziJFAKhWuSBJM8

That's South Boston, aka "Southie" not to be confused with the South End. This pic is a bit old but it's the best aerial view I have seen of that neighborhood. This neighborhood is hilly too, so even more like SF in that regard.

You're right that there is a massive variety, kind of a little bit of every urban typology across Boston/Cambridge/Somerville.

Views of Boston from a plane by Jessica D, on Flickr

[Prahaboheme]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

Boston + Cambridge and the rest. Yes, Boston has a lot more intact stuff from the 1700s-late 1800s than pretty much anywhere else, but you can bike through these areas really fast. They're dense and loom large in the mind but their footprints are pretty small. You could bike from Charleston, through the North End, through Beacon Hill, and down Commonwealth to Kenmore Square in like 20 minutes.

You can bike from Central Park to Lower Manhattan in 20 minutes as well. It is the fastest way of getting around the city on most days.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by tech12

"less ground level retail" is not a complaint that I've ever heard anyone make about SF, in comparison to other US cities. Maybe in comparison to NYC, I guess. Yes there are many ground-level garages, especially on residential streets with a lower density. Maybe there's too many. But there is also a ton of retail, on commercial strips (mostly, just like anywhere else) with a level of activity that any US city could be envious of (except for NYC, as always), and also in "random" locations (like corner stores).

The ground-floor garages don't exist in a vacuum. The city is still extremely dense and walkable, with amenities everywhere. Also, half of those garages have apartments in the back, and are also at times used for hanging out (with the door open, kinda like a front porch), having garage sales (SF garages often are used like a basement, and plenty of them never hold cars), etc. IMO they don't really hurt street life, as one might expect. Maybe a little bit, but SF is very dense, and hurting pedestrian activity is hard, even for a bunch of garages.

I love New York but it is noisy. SF is fairly quiet in comparison which to me is a good thing even if it doesn't sacrifice density and street activity. You're never far from a commercial area but more often than not, you don't have to live above it like a lot of New York.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by JManc

I love New York but it is noisy. SF is fairly quiet in comparison which to me is a good thing even if it doesn't sacrifice density and street activity. You're never far from a commercial area but more often than not, you don't have to live above it like a lot of New York.

i vastly prefer living above it and any noise vs having to get your coat and all that to go down the block to the high street.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Segun

For a physically small area, Boston has a diverse typology of residential architecture.

Some of it looks the most similar to San Francisco of any city outside the West Coast.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/wydziJFAKhWuSBJM8

I'd say Boston has basically four urban typologies.

1. The brick core (North End, South End, Bay Village, Beacon Hill, Back Bay). There's some variance here between the tenement housing in the North End, and the rowhouse areas like Bay Village.

2. The wood rowhouse zones, like Charlestown, the inner part of South Boston, and the inner part of East Boston.

3. The triple-decker zone, which encompasses most of the late 19th/early 20th century city.

4. The brick walkup apartment areas like Fenway-Kenmore that were built out around the turn of the 20th century.