Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I still think that a frugal dork with a fascination for urbanity would be pretty happy in Logan Square. They don't even make you do keg stands or quiz you on Arcade Fire when you move in anymore.
Would you say that's a fairly common lifestyle for your area, or do most people seem to prefer/own cars for regular errands/activities?
I think what I'm wrestling with is less Chicago's possibilities for car-free living and more the overall attitude toward car-free living in general. It seems Chicago has the infrastructure to support 50%+ car-free living, yet Chicago isn't even close. I think it's a preference thing, which was noted in an earlier comment. Chicagoans seem to enjoy the ability to (relatively) easily own/drive a car in the city. To each their own on that. I'd never begrudge someone for it. It's just that I'd personally prefer to live somewhere where there's a more progressive attitude toward the personal car paradigm.
Bridgeport is one of those places where if you own a car, no one looks down upon you for it. Parking is great here and I can usually find a spot on my street, or the street over.
On the north side, you'll likely find that fewer people own cars because of parking issues, but also because access to CTA is better. Northside neighborhoods are way more walkable than down south.
Haha! Maybe I am just looking for someone to tell me to "do it". Where's Shia LeBeouf when you need him?!
I've looked into Logan Square. I think it might be *too* hipster for me. I'm not really a hipster. I don't drink, don't smoke, and don't ride a fixie (or a bike in general). I actually checked out Portland this past January, but it was way too much of that for me. And it wasn't nearly as urban as I thought it'd be. The lackluster density should have tipped that off for me, but I wanted to see firsthand.
I guess I think of myself as a guy who likes to sit over cheap coffee and talk about philanthropy and TOD. I'm a frugal dork with a fascination for urbanity. Growing up in the Midwest, Chicago is kind of my "capitol". So it holds a special place in my heart. It's my favorite skyline. My favorite food (especially the thin-crust pizza). I love the rusty L tracks. The noise. The parks. Everything really. Maybe I just need to go. It's not like Trump is building a wall across Florida's border. I can always move back if it doesn't work.
Look into Uptown!
Also if you look at emathias's map, that area of Chicago as large as San Francisco is less than half the total population of Chicago and even less of the physical area. That's why you can have very different opinions of Chicago being walkable or not in comparison to perhaps an opinion on San Francisco--there's simply a lot more people and different areas in Chicago than there is in San Francisco.
Well, your response starts off as ignorant, to be honest. I'm not saying you're ignorant, but your phrasing comes across that way.
I didn't say that the transit usage wasn't a good cross-section of the city, representative of its citizenry. I said a "good chunk" of transit users likely use transit due to economic reasons. This is no less true in Chicago than it is in many cities across the country. I've been using the bus in my own city for years, and I can say for sure I'm one of the only people that does it voluntarily when I could otherwise easily afford a car. City-Data shows the percentage of Chicagoans living below the poverty level as 27%+. So one could probably draw some conclusions about the ~27% of transit users in the city. If it's a true cross-section of the city, then those living in poverty are probably going to be included in that number. That was my point. I'm saying that one can pretty safely assume that not all of the 27% of Chicagoans that account for its transit share are giddily hopping to/from the Loop by choice. Indeed, that jibes with what I saw when I was up there last (and, honestly, every other time I've been there). I'm not criticizing Chicago. I'm just looking to have an honest conversation about its merit relative to what I'm specifically looking for.
I do appreciate the map, though. I've come across similar maps/discussions here on C-D over the years (my idea of moving to Chicago didn't just pop up over the last couple months, so I've been here for years). I agree that if you were to take just the densest/most popular neighborhoods of Chicago, its overall scores and density would fare well against most cities in the country, keeping in mind that the US isn't exactly a gold standard for urbanity. That said, I think the overall conversation here (over the last four pages) indicates that Chicago probably falls woefully short of what someone might consider high-quality urbanity and vibrancy. But you're not paying a high-quality price, either. Overall, I find Chicago to be a great value. As I noted in another comment, I think the point at which Chicago's price and urbanity spectra intersect (especially in some of the peripheral neighborhoods) is the most advantageous in the country. I won't find a better "bang for my buck" than Chicago. I'm well aware of that. I just don't want to move halfway across the country again if it's going to fall pretty short of my (admittedly unrealistically high for the price) expectations. If I'm going to readily find progressive people that are huge on TOD, transit, walkability, vibrancy, that's great. I just get the feeling that a lot (but certainly NOT all) Chicagoans prefer to own/drive their own car, when/if possible. If I'm incorrect, I'd be very happy. But many of the posts here seem to imply that I'm not too far off.
I use public transit to get to work for economic reasons (aka it's cheap), and my household income is in the top 5% nationally.
Also if you look at emathias's map, that area of Chicago as large as San Francisco is less than half the total population of Chicago and even less of the physical area. That's why you can have very different opinions of Chicago being walkable or not in comparison to perhaps an opinion on San Francisco--there's simply a lot more people and different areas in Chicago than there is in San Francisco.
Right. Absolutely. Chicago's sheer size works to its disadvantage when looking at density and scores (walk, transit, bike).
However, I'm not sure you'd see the type of traffic, cars, and surface parking in some of these other cities? Maybe you would. Chicago is where I've spent by far the most amount of time, so I'm far more familiar with it. I suppose I was just disappointed by the level of sprawl, traffic, and cars when I was up there last, leading me to believe that I've overestimated the place. That said, Chicago isn't priced for overestimation.
I think Chicago's infrastructure and development lends itself to far more usage of feet, bikes, and public transportation than what's currently being taken advantage of, but I'd never begrudge someone for choosing to get around by car (if they prefer). If too many people prefer that, however, it starts to detract from the vibe and feeling of the place (both through increased traffic and less progressive attitudes toward TOD).
I use public transit to get to work for economic reasons (aka it's cheap), and my household income is in the top 5% nationally.
Hey, that's great. I think Chicago (and everywhere else, really) needs more of this. I have hundreds of thousands of dollars put away, yet I've used the bus down here for years. But I'm also pretty unique in a lot of ways.
One of my personal heroes is Chuck Feeney. The guy is a (former) billionaire that decided to give away (almost) all of his money. He lives in a small one-bedroom apartment in SF. He walks or uses PT.
I think my only concern about Chicago is that you might represent a pretty small minority of people. The last thing I want to do is move up there, only to get strange looks when I have to arrange social calls or work purely around PT.
It's almost like, "It's great to use the L to get to/from the Loop from/to my pad in [insert sweet N or NW neighborhood here]. But if I have to go out, meet people, or get groceries, I jump in my car."
That's just the vibe I get from people and my visits there. I could be totally wrong, but a lot of comments here seem to indicate that I'm not way off the mark.
Again, Chicago is leaps and bounds better than anything I'll get down here. But it's not like the city doesn't have substantial drawbacks relative to where I'm at. So I'm trying to create a more accurate and realistic picture in my mind, because I do think I romanticized the city's urbanity a little too much. Being a poor kid from Detroit probably did that, as did my idealism.
Hey, that's great. I think Chicago (and everywhere else, really) needs more of this. I have hundreds of thousands of dollars put away, yet I've used the bus down here for years. But I'm also pretty unique in a lot of ways.
One of my personal heroes is Chuck Feeney. The guy is a (former) billionaire that decided to give away (almost) all of his money. He lives in a small one-bedroom apartment in SF. He walks or uses PT.
I think my only concern about Chicago is that you might represent a pretty small minority of people. The last thing I want to do is move up there, only to get strange looks when I have to arrange social calls or work purely around PT.
It's almost like, "It's great to use the L to get to/from the Loop from/to my pad in [insert sweet N or NW neighborhood here]. But if I have to go out, meet people, or get groceries, I jump in my car."
That's just the vibe I get from people and my visits there. I could be totally wrong, but a lot of comments here seem to indicate that I'm not way off the mark.
Again, Chicago is leaps and bounds better than anything I'll get down here. But it's not like the city doesn't have substantial drawbacks relative to where I'm at. So I'm trying to create a more accurate and realistic picture in my mind, because I do think I romanticized the city's urbanity a little too much. Being a poor kid from Detroit probably did that, as did my idealism.
People get strange looks for driving downtown. No one will think twice about you taking CTA.
Right. Absolutely. Chicago's sheer size works to its disadvantage when looking at density and scores (walk, transit, bike).
However, I'm not sure you'd see the type of traffic, cars, and surface parking in some of these other cities? Maybe you would. Chicago is where I've spent by far the most amount of time, so I'm far more familiar with it. I suppose I was just disappointed by the level of sprawl, traffic, and cars when I was up there last, leading me to believe that I've overestimated the place. That said, Chicago isn't priced for overestimation.
I think Chicago's infrastructure and development lends itself to far more usage of feet, bikes, and public transportation than what's currently being taken advantage of, but I'd never begrudge someone for choosing to get around by car (if they prefer). If too many people prefer that, however, it starts to detract from the vibe and feeling of the place (both through increased traffic and less progressive attitudes toward TOD).
Here's my beef with some of the 'progressives'. They often forget about prioritizing schools/jobs/feeding people. Or it gets somehow lost in the discussion regarding cars vs public trans.
I think my only concern about Chicago is that you might represent a pretty small minority of people. The last thing I want to do is move up there, only to get strange looks when I have to arrange social calls or work purely around PT.
It's almost like, "It's great to use the L to get to/from the Loop from/to my pad in [insert sweet N or NW neighborhood here]. But if I have to go out, meet people, or get groceries, I jump in my car."
That's just the vibe I get from people and my visits there. I could be totally wrong, but a lot of comments here seem to indicate that I'm not way off the mark.
Again, Chicago is leaps and bounds better than anything I'll get down here. But it's not like the city doesn't have substantial drawbacks relative to where I'm at. So I'm trying to create a more accurate and realistic picture in my mind, because I do think I romanticized the city's urbanity a little too much. Being a poor kid from Detroit probably did that, as did my idealism.
I get a small sense that you have spent too much time either with one particular type of socioeconomic demographic, or perhaps in the Sarasota sun.
Who cares what the 'vibe' is? Do you really care how people get their groceries(?) Do what you feel is the correct path for you. Maybe others will finally figure it out and get rid of their cars they really don't need
Hey, that's great. I think Chicago (and everywhere else, really) needs more of this. I have hundreds of thousands of dollars put away, yet I've used the bus down here for years. But I'm also pretty unique in a lot of ways.
One of my personal heroes is Chuck Feeney. The guy is a (former) billionaire that decided to give away (almost) all of his money. He lives in a small one-bedroom apartment in SF. He walks or uses PT.
I think my only concern about Chicago is that you might represent a pretty small minority of people. The last thing I want to do is move up there, only to get strange looks when I have to arrange social calls or work purely around PT.
It's almost like, "It's great to use the L to get to/from the Loop from/to my pad in [insert sweet N or NW neighborhood here]. But if I have to go out, meet people, or get groceries, I jump in my car."
That's just the vibe I get from people and my visits there. I could be totally wrong, but a lot of comments here seem to indicate that I'm not way off the mark.
Again, Chicago is leaps and bounds better than anything I'll get down here. But it's not like the city doesn't have substantial drawbacks relative to where I'm at. So I'm trying to create a more accurate and realistic picture in my mind, because I do think I romanticized the city's urbanity a little too much. Being a poor kid from Detroit probably did that, as did my idealism.
If you have hundreds of thousands of dollars put away, why would you care what anyone thought of your lifestyle?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
