Picture 3 looked nice.
Erica-- I posted something over at my blog last week you may (or may not) like to take a look at. It's just a little blurb about the history of urban density with some maps of Seattle from 1894 to the present, looking at trends in density based on transportation. The first part's a little history lesson that you might want to skip-- the maps are at the bottom of the post.
"Large multi-family developments with street-facing parking and no ground-floor amenities are not a good way to build density—one reason I feel a bit lost in the suburbs when I walk through Rainier Vista."
umm... most of Rainier Vista is Townhomes with Alley Parking.
Do the homes in North Capitol Hill count as "density"?
You forgot a combination of sprawl and density, Broadacre City:http://www.arch.columbia.edu/DDL/projects/usonia/ddl.mov
Watch the movie and then stay at the hotel:
So Density Pic #2 would not count as good density, due to its compound-like similarity?
I was expecting photos of Kirstie Alley.
densest neighborhood in north america:
And also, just by way of contrasting to the images you've shown here, this is a block of fairly typical London terranced housing, which has amazing population density.
I actually quite like these buildings, though the examples outside London tend to be in somewhat poor condition.
For those who've never seen these up close, typically each house has a small private garden in the back for the ground floor tenants to use.
none of these pictures look especially appealing, do they? two of the "dense" examples appear to be oppressively non-human scaled.
Gomez @ 6: Yes.
Those pictures would be nicer to look at if there were a little corner grocery... something like a City Market... get a little something to eat, a little to drink, a some thin some thin. Why drive 6 blocks to loose a good parking space? (or take the car in and out of the garage, as the case may be). You walk.
I guess the question is, is it a big, small, or a what-the-fuck-you-talking-about, evil to drive a mile. I mean, that's a 40 minute walk there and back, vs. 15, may be 20 minutes when you drive, tops.
But then I live where I live, most places in the city are a mile or two away (I'm being very generous, arguably more like 5 - 7 miles, is more the norm for the likes of Carkeek, Sandpoint, most of West Seattle, etc.) from everything. A 30 block walk is still a long walk, no matter how fit a person is.
Phenics, I hear what you're saying. I work for the city, and as such am "out and about" on the north end for at least half the workday, every workday. There's an awful lot of "density" going on, but not much of it is, IMO, good, and it's not addressing the pedestrian issue: Tearing down three single family homes to put up six remarkably ugly townhomes doesn't relieve parking or make a grocery store any closer. It just degrades the neighborhood.
I suppose that eventually stores will follow, bit it doesn't seem like things are being well thought-out when it comes to this density thing.
"Tearing down three single family homes to put up six remarkably ugly townhomes doesn't relieve parking or make a grocery store any closer. It just degrades the neighborhood."
It also doesn't necessarily increase density, if density means increasing the number of people living on a lot. It does degrade the environment by decreasing permeable surface (which increases bacterial counts in the Sound).
EXcellent. I must say if the end product of a denser Seattle is anything like #s 1 or 3, I'd be thrilled.
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).