New York City boroughs against these other cities (population, Los Angeles, highest)
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.
Well, here's the crux of the problem. Each of the individual boroughs have bits of the city that are world class elsewhere. Unfortunately, most of these cities don't work as a fully functional city in and of themselves--at least not a full city proportional to their populations. Brooklyn and Manhattan at least have centers tying the borough together and a real transportation hub rather than the disparate lines that run out in the Bronx or a main trunk that serves Queen.
I disagree with this. Queens has a major transportation hub. I have access to the E, F, J and Z trains, the long island railroad, various Long island buses, various NYC buses and my borough has the A, E, F, G, J, M, N, Q, R, S, Z and 7 trains. That's more lines than any city in the country flowing through this one borough. That's more public transportation options in this one borough than any other city in the country. Brooklyn is the same way. The Bronx is similar with metro north, iirc. Manhattan is too.
Queens has flushing which has main st. We also have Astoria, Jamaica, etc. We can easily compete with other major cities, period.
Queens has a lot going for it and can go toe to toe with San Francisco.
I disagree with this. Queens has a major transportation hub. I have access to the E, F, J and Z trains, the long island railroad, various Long island buses, various NYC buses and my borough has the A, E, F, G, J, M, N, Q, R, S, Z and 7 trains. That's more lines than any city in the country flowing through this one borough. That's more public transportation options in this one borough than any other city in the country. Brooklyn is the same way. The Bronx is similar with metro north, iirc. Manhattan is too.
Since were comparing Brooklyn to Chicago here's what I found:
On a single system like MTA vs CTA, sure. However, since we are counting "all" rail transit systems together then we'll have to also add Chicago's Metra as well therefore more stations ahead of Brooklyn's 227 stations as I have counted all 4 system maps (MTA,LRR,CTA and Metra. Long Island Rail Road only have a couple of stations in Brooklyn. Metra has a total of 240 but a 142 of that is in Chicago.
Brooklyn:
MTA: 227
Long Island RR: 3
Total stations: 230 stations for train lines A,B,D,F,G,J,L,M,N,Q,R,S,Z,5, and 4
Total train lines: 15
Chicago:
CTA: 144
Metra: 142 (Chicago only not counting the suburbs that would put it much higher)
Total stations: 286 stations combined for both CTA and Metra public rail transit combined (more than half of NYC's MTA total of 468 stations combined)
Total lines: 19 (CTA 8 and Metra 11 lines combined)
In summary, you would need to add another Borough to beat Chicago.
As for "rail" Chicago is still the undisputed rail hub of the entire country when counting the total number of rail lines connecting to it for both passenger and cargo together. Brooklyn may have more MTA lines when compared to CTA but when combined with Metra Chicago has more.
I disagree with this. Queens has a major transportation hub. I have access to the E, F, J and Z trains, the long island railroad, various Long island buses, various NYC buses and my borough has the A, E, F, G, J, M, N, Q, R, S, Z and 7 trains. That's more lines than any city in the country flowing through this one borough. That's more public transportation options in this one borough than any other city in the country. Brooklyn is the same way. The Bronx is similar with metro north, iirc. Manhattan is too.
Queens has flushing which has main st. We also have Astoria, Jamaica, etc. We can easily compete with other major cities, period.
Queens has a lot going for it and can go toe to toe with San Francisco.
I don't disagree with you. There's certainly much more public transportation available in four of the five boroughs than there are most in American major cities. However, I think how mass transit is arranged in Queens is indicative of how that borough is not built around a center. If you look at its heavy rail lines, Queens has a distinctive main trunk rather than separate connecting lines gridding a main downtown such as what you see in Brooklyn or Manhattan.
how is SF like Queens? aside from diversity its very different..
and Chicago is not really BK, tha'ts more philly/boston
the Bronx - prolly N.Philly? but more brookly/queens
and SI? i've never been to Cleveland/ more a the newark metro area
how is SF like Queens? aside from diversity its very different..
It's not...SF just has more over all except for population and transit ridership.
and Chicago is not really BK, tha'ts more philly/boston
the Bronx - prolly N.Philly? but more brookly/queens
Historically and culturally philly/boston have more in common with Brooklyn. Now on a larger over all category A-Z Chicago beats Brooklyn when you don't add Manhattan to the equation. Tell you the truth Brooklyn really isn't all that big. Atlantic Avenue compared to Michigan Avenue for shopping I really don't think so.
and SI? i've never been to Cleveland/ more a the newark metro area
I've been to both places. You'll be hard pressed to find Cleveland's version of the arcade or the old warehouse district in Staten Island on that scale. Staten Island doesn't have a larger dense urban core like Cleveland. It is more suburban
Manhattan's Advantages: Public transit, theater, restaurants, museums, walkability
LA's Advantages: More scenic
I'd choose Manhattan.
Brooklyn vs. Chicago
Brooklyn: More walkable, diverse, good food, great public transportation, good museums and parks, great architecture
Chicago: Less walkable, not as diverse, great downtown, great public transit, good food, theater, museums, great architecture
This is a draw. Maybe a slight edge to BK because of its diversity and density
Queens vs. San Francisco
This is a close one too. Queens is much bigger and more diverse. San Fran is more compact and has a lively downtown. Both have good food. Astoria, Jackson Heights, and Kew Gardens are pretty cool places. But Queens is so residential, it doesn't seem as lively as BK and Manhattan. Some parts are so remote that public transportation is not that feasible.
This is a draw, maybe an edge to San Fran.
Bronx vs. Philadelphia
Going with the hometeam. Center City smashes anything I know of in the Bronx.
Going with the hometeam. Center City smashes anything I know of in the Bronx.
LOL
As a bronxite i cant let the bx go out like that. The bronx can't possibly beat out the nations oldest city but
1. The bronx has great public transit. Atleast on par or slightly under philly
2. The yankees is a pop culture juggernaut
3. U mentioned parks for other boroughs the bronx has more parks than bk or qns and pelham bay park is the biggest in the city
4. The bronx zoo is the biggest metropolitan zoo in america
5.Home to some good architecture. The grand concourse is the biggest collection of art deco in the US
6. Good residential areas-riverdale,country club,pelham manor etc
7. City island
Center city would smash anything in ny outside manhattan just like manhattan would smash anything in philly not center city. The boroughs may not have skyscrapers but they do have above average vibrancy. IDK if philly's vibrancy is as spread out as the bronx
How is Chicago not as walkable? There are a handful of sparsely populated neighborhoods (i.e. Lawndale, Englewood, parts of Bronzeville), but that composes a very small portion of the city. And some of those neighborhoods were a lot more dense 10-15 years ago, but the Plan for Transformation (tearing down of the housing projects) made the neighborhoods into ghost towns.
And how does Chicago have good public transit? Chicago's transit sucks. The train lines miss so much of the city's neighborhoods. The buses are generally off schedule and it's not at all uncommon for 3 or 4 to show up at the same time and then none again for half an hour.
Plus Chicago has a good deal of diversity as well, it's just sprinkled around the entire city (remember Chicago is 4 times the size of Brooklyn). Neighborhoods like Edgewater, Rogers Park, Uptown, Albany Park can go toe to toe with any Brooklyn neighborhood for diversity. And these aren't small neighborhoods. Each one of them has about 60,000 residents or more (and on scale with the density of much of the BK).
I often thought while living in Chicago, that it feels a lot like Brooklyn (if you were to take away the Loop, River North, Streeterville, and the South Loop) in terms of character of neighborhoods, vibrancy, and similar population demographics. Northwest Brooklyn feels similar to the North Side of Chicago. Park Slope and Lincoln Park are incredibly similar neighborhoods. Brooklyn Heights is comparable with the Gold Coast. The only difference is the North Side is more vibrant (parts of it have the hustle and bustle of Manhattan, particularly near the lakefront). But I think there are a lot of other similarities between the 2 cities/areas. Like Wicker Park/Bucktown/UK Village being similar to Billyburg/Greenpoint. Other similarities include Pilsen and Bushwick, The Far North Side (Uptown, Edgewater, Rogers Park) feel a lot like South Brooklyn (Brighton Beach, Coney Island- minus the theme park, etc). Then Chicago's Northwest and Southwest Sides, I would say are very comparable to Central and Southwest Brooklyn. I think in the end Chicago is a bit superior to Brooklyn, but then again BK is just one borough and it's not Manhattan.
As a bronxite i cant let the bx go out like that. The bronx can't possibly beat out the nations oldest city but
1. The bronx has great public transit. Atleast on par or slightly under philly
2. The yankees is a pop culture juggernaut
3. U mentioned parks for other boroughs the bronx has more parks than bk or qns and pelham bay park is the biggest in the city
4. The bronx zoo is the biggest metropolitan zoo in america
5.Home to some good architecture. The grand concourse is the biggest collection of art deco in the US
6. Good residential areas-riverdale,country club,pelham manor etc
7. City island
Center city would smash anything in ny outside manhattan just like manhattan would smash anything in philly not center city. The boroughs may not have skyscrapers but they do have above average vibrancy. IDK if philly's vibrancy is as spread out as the bronx
I had to qualify my post by saying "anything I know of in the Bronx." NYC is a big city, man. You gotta give me some time to see all of it!
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.