HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 2:00 AM
park123 park123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 148
Any American cities moving up a tier?

Most people would agree that in the USA, the top 6 urban, pedestrian-friendly cities would be NYC, Chicago, SF, DC, Boston, and Philadelphia. With a big drop off after that. I've heard that Seattle is best poised to move into that group. I haven't been to Seattle in ages. Is it close to pulling even to or overtaking any of the weaker of those 6 cities?

I suppose NYC, Chicago and SF are unquestionably the top three. With in my opinion Boston (compact/small), DC (sparse), and Philadelphia (relatively unhealthy) at the bottom of the 6.

Any other American cities with a chance to join that group in the near future (say 15 years)?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 4:03 AM
SFBruin SFBruin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,189
I don't think that Seattle is quite there yet. It is nowhere near as dense as the other six cities in your list.
__________________
Pretend Seattleite.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 4:08 AM
uaarkson's Avatar
uaarkson uaarkson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Back in Flint
Posts: 2,079
In the last decade Detroit moved into its own tier; the very bottom.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 4:13 AM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,270
LA and Dallas come to mind. I think both cities have been undertaking some pretty big transit projects. I don’t know about being dense per se, but maybe moving on from being completely auto-centric.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 4:25 AM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,789
Not exactly pedestrian friendly but DFW and Houston are growing fast and denser. Dallas a little further along.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 4:44 AM
Chef's Avatar
Chef Chef is offline
Paradise Island
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 2,444
Parts of Minneapolis are significantly more urban than they were 20 years ago. I wouldn't say that it has gone up a level but it is in the process of it. That is probably true for most of the growing metros in the two to four million range that had moderately urban cores. If you add a couple hundred midrises to the gaps in the existing fabric in a city that size it goes a long way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 4:47 AM
liat91 liat91 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Metropolis
Posts: 728
Seattle and LA are closest.

Next rung would be; Denver, Minneapolis and Portland.

Third rung: San Diego, Dallas, Atlanta, Miami, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Nashville, Baltimore, Cincinnati.

Btw looking at cities with metros > 2 million.
__________________
WATCH OUT!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 7:51 AM
JAYNYC JAYNYC is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 914
Quote:
Originally Posted by liat91 View Post
Seattle and LA are closest.

Next rung would be; Denver, Minneapolis and Portland.

Third rung: San Diego, Dallas, Atlanta, Miami, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Nashville, Baltimore, Cincinnati.

Btw looking at cities with metros > 2 million.
Can't speak for Minneapolis or Portland but I was in Denver last month and there's no way it's more dense than Dallas or Houston, let alone Austin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 10:43 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by uaarkson View Post
In the last decade Detroit moved into its own tier; the very bottom.
North One will have words with you in 1...2...3...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 1:22 PM
thoughtcriminal thoughtcriminal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: philadelphia
Posts: 467
Philly "relatively unhealthy"-? WTF does that mean?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 2:17 PM
Shawn Shawn is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 5,935
I'd say the Tier 2 candidates are LA, Seattle, Dallas, Houston, and Miami.

You could make the argument that portions of LA will join the bottom of the Big 6 first: isn't it the only one of all the Tier 2 candidates really building out light and heavy rail?

Seattle has the bones and the culture to do it, but the transit situation isn't being addressed as seriously as LA is doing. And you'll never see Tier 1 urbanity without a real subway network.

Houston and Dallas won't be joining that Tier 1 list anytime soon, regardless of how much denser they get. I guess Dallas is set up for a closer approach (DART, which has to be the coolest transit authority name in the country), but Houston as a city seems more culturally inclined to try, even without any real transit upgrades. Either way though, there's only so much a city can hope to achieve in a Red State.

Miami, I just don't see it happening either. Too many tower-in-the-parks on top of parking podiums with minimal street activation. South Beach though, South Beach.

I don't know where to put Baltimore, which is a whole tier smaller than the Big 6, but offers walkable urbanity over large stretches just under what you can find in Boston, Philly, and DC. Pound for pound, a lot more than you'd find in all the Tier 2 candidates I listed maybe except for LA. People undersell LA's walkability; it's not continuous like you get in Tier 1 cities, but many of its islands of true urbanity are about the same size as Boston's or DC's or Philly's, just not as intense or high-grain.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 2:24 PM
IrishIllini IrishIllini is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Handro View Post
LA and Dallas come to mind. I think both cities have been undertaking some pretty big transit projects. I don’t know about being dense per se, but maybe moving on from being completely auto-centric.
Idk about Dallas...Even LA is spotty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 2:59 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
You seem be ranking urbanity and nothing else. In that case, no, there will probably be no changes in our lifetime.

60 years ago, the most urban cities were NYC, Boston, Philly, DC, Chicago and SF. Nothing has changed, which makes sense, because relative urbanity is basically relative share of intact pre-auto form and corresponding pre-auto functionality.

In 60 years, do you think another European city will become equally as historic as Venice or Florence or Bruges? Doesn't make sense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 3:09 PM
park123 park123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
You seem be ranking urbanity and nothing else. In that case, no, there will probably be no changes in our lifetime.

60 years ago, the most urban cities were NYC, Boston, Philly, DC, Chicago and SF. Nothing has changed, which makes sense, because relative urbanity is basically relative share of intact pre-auto form and corresponding pre-auto functionality.

In 60 years, do you think another European city will become equally as historic as Venice or Florence or Bruges? Doesn't make sense.
Implicit in your post is the supposition that Americans can't build pedestrian-friendly urbanity from scratch anymore. That is probably a fair supposition. But it does seem like Americans can densify existing cities. Is that not possible in Seattle for example? Vancouver seems to be a successful example of that. Is Vancouver far off the bottom of America's top 6?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 3:19 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,992
La for sure.
People don't realize the impact the purple line will have. And that's just one thing.

Seattle is after that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 3:28 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,635
if we're talking about the scale of walkable urbanism, then NYC is alone in its own tier, full stop.

no other US city is currently anywhere remotely close to touching that tier.



# of zip codes over 20,000 ppsm:

NYC - 155

chicago - 17
SF - 14
LA - 14
boston - 14
philly - 11
DC - 7

seattle - 2
miami - 2




that's it.

NYC alone has 66% of all US zip codes above 20,000 ppsm.

then the "second six" (CHI, SF, LA, BOS, PHL & DC), round out the rest, with a couple each in miami and seattle.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 3:32 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by park123 View Post
Implicit in your post is the supposition that Americans can't build pedestrian-friendly urbanity from scratch anymore. That is probably a fair supposition. But it does seem like Americans can densify existing cities.
But given contemporary building codes and requirements plus modern demands, we can never reproduce the organic density of the pre-war era. We can come close.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 3:33 PM
park123 park123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
if we're talking about the scale of walkable urbanism, then NYC is alone in its own tier, full stop. with no US city currently anywhere remotely close to touching that tier.



# of zip codes over 20,000 ppsm:

NYC - 155

chicago - 17
SF - 14
LA - 14
boston - 14
philly - 11
DC - 7

seattle - 2
miami - 2




that's it.

NYC alone has 66% of all US zip codes above 20,000 ppsm.

then the "second six" (CHI, SF, LA, BOS, PHL & DC), round out the rest, with a couple each in miami and seattle.
Doesn't northern NJ have quite a few? Or are they already included in your NYC number?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 3:35 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 park123 View Post
Doesn't northern NJ have quite a few? Or are they already included in your NYC number?
the list is by metro area, so yeah, jersey's zip codes are in that NYC number.

my apologies for not clarifying.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2020, 3:36 PM
park123 park123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
But given contemporary building codes and requirements plus modern demands, we can never reproduce the organic density of the pre-war era. We can come close.
Yeah the central areas of Vancouver aren't the North End of Boston, but they're not too bad. I presume that sort of thing can happen for example in Seattle (and has been happening).
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 1:19 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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