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.
The Chicago Loop long has been one of the world's greatest job centers, but for much of its history, downtown emptied out after office hours. And as the city aged and its population declined, the suburbs became the preferred home to generations of young families. In recent years, those trends have reversed. After decades of watching the suburbs boom. >>>>>>Chicago now is outperforming the surrounding area by almost any measure—jobs, income, retail sales and residential property values, to name a few—despite the loss of 200,000 people in the 2010 census.
>>>>>>THE CITY IS SO HOT. That this expanded downtown is adding residents faster than any other urban core in America, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. <<<<<<<<<<<<<
“In the year 2020, no matter how many condos and apartments are built or sold, Chicago is likely to be a place of center-city affluence unequaled in size—or even approached—by anyplace in America,” journalist Alan Ehrenhalt writes in “The Great Inversion and the Future of the American City.”
Philadelphia can't match the Downtown area for Chicago - no doubt about that. The sheer amount of highrises bordering the parks which border the lake front is truly beautiful. I like Chicago's skyline better than NYC honestly. Chicago's downtown is easily the second best in the country and beats Philly no doubt - Chicago is just so much larger. I don't think Philly is a slouch though. I would definitely consider Center City, Philadelphia the fourth best downtown in the US after NYC, Chi and SF.
Philadelphia just doesn't offer the same level of skyscraper density that you'll find in Chicago, but then again it is not, and never has been a skyscraper city. Even to this day large swaths of the city, and even neighborhoods in Center City have strict height limits. In Philly you couldn't build taller than City Hall (548 feet) until 1989 with the completion of One Liberty Place.
One great thing about Philly though is the surrounding neighborhoods blend seemlessly into the Downtown area. One could walk from Center City into South or North Philly without a break in urbanity.
Yes. Spend most of my time towards that area when I'm in Philly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
It easily competes with the best that San Francisco and Chicago and Boston have to offer
It competes, yes, never said it didn't. But it's a suburban mall setup whereas the other cities have an urban setup.
Also, SF and Chicago in particular and Boston to a pretty strong degree are flagship cities. Retailers often comes to these cities first after NYC or LA, and in SF's case sometimes before LA. Philly in general not normally the case. Valentino will open a 4 story flagship in Chicago or SF before opening a mall branch at King of Prussia, let alone a location in Center City.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
and I SERIOUSLY doubt that type of retail is replicated all throughout those cities haha. Places like Ted Baker and Louis Vuitton and David Yurman you are NOT going to find outside of the main shopping districts in those cities.
This is where you'd be surprised. Visiting a city casually, sure, you're not going to realize the extent of the neighborhoods (the non-touristy parts where people actually live). However, in both Chicago and SF these very stores are located in shopping strips *outside* of the Michigan Ave/Oak and Union Square areas.
Chicago has Armitage/Halsted, North Ave, downtown Evanston, going even further north Highland Park, etc etc.
The shopping in Lincoln Park I would say nearly rivals Center City. Many of the major chains, furniture/design stores, boutiques, etc.
San Francisco may even beat Chicago in this regard. Fillmore has a ton of shopping, arguably higher end at its peak than Walnut/Rittenhouse (it has designers that Union Square doesn't even have), and considering the neighborhood...Chestnut and Union Streets are also pretty packed with shopping, and to lesser degrees you have outposts around Castro/Upper Market, Showplace Square/Potrero Hill, and Noe Valley/Mission.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
Also, you may not be aware of the way Walnut has changed, even in the past year.
I am and it is impressive, to say the least. Like urbanization and downtown renewals, street retail is a national trend, and Philly is capitalizing on it well. I was down in Philly a few months ago. It is impressive, but right now without flagships and major department stores and the sheer absolute number of stores, I would put it in the same boat as Georgetown, which is also just exploding. Same general rents, same sort of scale, but more "urban" in that Walnut is right in Center City and a canyon of sorts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
Walnut is now home to some very high end stores from Intermix to Vince, Michael Kors, etc.
Walnut has higher end stores than these...poor examples.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
I seriously doubt these kind of high end stores are all over these cities - in fact I know they're not since I've been to all three cities you're mentioning.
You may have been to Chicago or SF, but did you stroll Armitage or Fillmore?
Vince has 1 store in all 3 cities, but is carried in boutiques and Intermix and the like pretty much throughout both Chicago and SF, relegated to the Walnut St corridor in Philly.
MK - Philly area has 2, both Chicago and SF have gosh, close to 10? SF has 2 in city limits, though only 1 is in an urban area. SF suburbs have MK boutiques in street shopping formats as Bay Area suburbs are quite urban by suburban standards.
Intermix - urban Chicago has 3, one in River North and 2 on the near Northside (Armitage and North Ave). SF doesn't even have one, but I don't think that means anything. You can pick a boatload of stores and do this -
I know in the latter link (from World Travel Shopping), it's pretty comprehensive, but noticed it's missing a few, like the Sandro boutique (I know about that because I got a jacket there this year), and you can go to other "districts". Noticed for the Mission and Hayes Valley missing a lot of men's stores like Steven Alan, Jack Spade, Gant, and Billy Reid, as well as BluDot furniture (also in New York).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
Sooo I get what you're saying, but you're seriously exaggerating and seriously understating what Philly has to offer. King of Prussia is very high end and Walnut is becoming very much so.
It's all relative. Philly is going through boomtimes right now, but it's not the only city experiencing rapid change. I do think Walnut retail coming back strong is a longer term trend, and CC retail in general is undervalued. A prior firm I worked with seriously considered buying a lot of retail in the area, and I think they missed out by not. It's a major discount to peers (Boston, NYC, Chicago, SF) and with lots of room to grow.
The difference between Philly and Chicago or SF is that once you leave CC, arguably you leave where you want to be. In Chicago or SF, many would argue that those cities' finest and most urbane neighborhoods are not near their downtowns at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
And what cities are more urban than Philly? On paper, NYC, Chicago and San Francisco. Boston is no more urban than Philly in the core, in fact Philly might be more so urban. Boston is denser on paper because it's smaller in city limits. Philly is more urban than DC and Los Angeles no doubt. What are the next cities in line then? What would you consider more urban than Philly? Because there's only 3 cities in the US you can honestly say are more so.
I think generally we agree. For me it goes like:
NYC
.
.
.
.
.
Chicago
.
San Francisco
.
Boston
.
Philadelphia
.
.
DC
.
.
Seattle
everybody else.
I think Philly is larger than Boston, it's also much larger than SF, or DC, or lots of places. It doesn't have those peak densities or the level of gentrification that makes almost all of Boston "amazing", and it's missing the cleaned up aspect. Central Boston is just more intense than Central Philly, and those are the urban parts I care about.
Philadelphia can't match the Downtown area for Chicago - no doubt about that. The sheer amount of highrises bordering the parks which border the lake front is truly beautiful. I like Chicago's skyline better than NYC honestly. Chicago's downtown is easily the second best in the country and beats Philly no doubt - Chicago is just so much larger. I don't think Philly is a slouch though. I would definitely consider Center City, Philadelphia the fourth best downtown in the US after NYC, Chi and SF.
I think Philly has a better downtown than SF (assuming you aren't "expanding" that definition to Chinatown, Union Square, Soma, etc), and if you're only counting the Loop, then I would say better than Chicago's. Center City Philly is truly a great neighborhood...if I lived in Philly, it would undoubtedly be there and I wouldn't even care to leave. One of the few cities, perhaps the ONLY, where downtown is the hippest place in the entire metro.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
One great thing about Philly though is the surrounding neighborhoods blend seemlessly into the Downtown area. One could walk from Center City into South or North Philly without a break in urbanity.
This is true. Chicago is a little cut off. But Chicago has a vast amount of "city" beyond the Loop and River North where more people prefer to live, work, and play. Chicago's whole downtown, if you include River North, South Loop, West Loop, etc, is MUCH larger than Philly's and much more encompassing. Chicago's urban neighborhoods likewise are also pretty amazing, and most people would agree. Philly has room for growth in that area, though having that cohesion will be a huge plus long term.
MK - Philly area has 2, both Chicago and SF have gosh, close to 10? SF has 2 in city limits, though only 1 is in an urban area. SF suburbs have MK boutiques in street shopping formats as Bay Area suburbs are quite urban by suburban standards.
Intermix - urban Chicago has 3, one in River North and 2 on the near Northside (Armitage and North Ave). SF doesn't even have one, but I don't think that means anything. You can pick a boatload of stores and do this -
Philly technically has four Michael Kors There is the one opening in Center City, one in King of Prussia, one in Cherry Hill, and one in Atlantic City. Plus a few Michael Kors Outlet stores in the Outlets around the metro. Shopping is something that is quickly changing in the Philly area. Center City, as you know, is getting better when it comes to retail options every year. King of Prussia is expanding, Cherry Hill has become high end and is quickly becoming more so. Willow Grove is in the same boat - it is becoming more high end. And then Atlantic City has high end stores too.
Retail is usually the last thing to come - and we are finally seeing retailers looking at Center City, Philadelphia again.
Agree on all your other points really. Philly in gentrification and redevelopment is not there to the same levels that Boston, San Fran, DC and even Chicago are at, but it is improving and it's a cool time to be in Philly and see the changes.
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,281,063 times
Reputation: 1483
Wow. What's next. Comparing Flee markets and airport food courts??
Philly's GAYBORHOOD is a good portion of its downtown housing and bar area. WHY DONT YOU PHILLY LOYALIST NOTE THAT VS CHICAGO???JUST SAYING ��
As for shopping CHICAGO HAS 2 Downtown shopping strips. THE MAGNIFICANT MILE otherwise known as Michigan Av and the original onto STATE STREET. MAGNIFICANT MILE is the High End shopping. With also 3 vertical Malls and Boutique shops along side streets. STATE STREET Has the Mall stores. Even a Target store lol.
AND PLEASE CHICAGO PUT DOWNERS. CHICAGO HAS MILES AND MILES OF TREE LINED WITH FRONT LAWNS BUNGALOWS IN DIFFERENT STYLES, THROUGH EACH DECADE OF GROWTH. A BIG BOOM CAME IN THE SIXTIES. LEAVE ALL GHETTO INFERENCES UNDER YOUR BELT. ZIPPED for most of Chicago.
Also to say Shopping is the last thing to COME BACK??? You ACKNOWLEGE DOWNTOWN PHILLY LOST MOST OF ITS SHOPPING BEFORE A COMEBACK.
So youre saying a city feels more urban due to street width and building density? lol So if you take out all the hustle and bustle and noise, and youre left with a lifeless, dull shell that is densely packed and has narrow streets, that its more urban? Oh geez.
And FYI, I never said NYC's population is what makes it feel more urban than Chicago, but rather the core's relative size compared to Chicago's. And not all of NYC's buildings are attached, youre assuming they are. There are plenty of parts of downtown Chicago where the buildings are so jammed together that you can hardly slip a piece of paper between them.
We're not only talking about downtowns, though. We're talking about the cities in their entirety. The street level urbanity discussion really has to take into account structural environment (e.g., street width and building style), since that's where people really get most of their cues for urbanism. Obviously Chicago as more activity/"busy-ness" than Philly -- that's not up for debate, but I think how urban things look is the crux of the argument, here.
Maybe, lol.
I think Philly is larger than Boston, it's also much larger than SF, or DC, or lots of places. It doesn't have those peak densities or the level of gentrification that makes almost all of Boston "amazing", and it's missing the cleaned up aspect. Central Boston is just more intense than Central Philly, and those are the urban parts I care about.
I think overall you've made very good points. (Although I think retail dominates these conversations a bit much, particularly on the super high-end side that really only caters to the 1%). But yeah, I don't think that anyone will argue that Philly is as gentrified/revitalized as the cities you've listed (although I think it comes closest to Chicago in that regard; Chicago may be more polished in its core, but it still has an equally troubling proportion of its city).
Regardless, I think what is most exciting about Philly is the potential. Mostly due to its compact form and largely seamless urban environment, the opportunities for infill really make for dramatic improvements to the city. Additionally, its core has room to expand very easily. It was a city that was actually planned very well, and the opportunities to "re-amenitize" the city by building on its already strong core are fantastic.
NYC
.
.
.
.
.
Chicago
.
San Francisco
.
Boston
.
Philadelphia
.
.
DC
.
.
Seattle
everybody else.
Excellent post. Your points are well-reasoned, and your critique is both fair and constructive. BTW, I owe you an apology; I had seen some of your earlier posts and jumped to the conclusion that you were a knee-jerk Philly-basher. My fault for making assumptions.
As you rightly point out, Philly is making significant strides in the right direction, but is also still very much a work in progress. Half a century of decline isn't going to disappear overnight, but we're getting there. I think over the next decade or two, if we can maintain our momentum (and I'm optimistic, but who knows?; tough times all over) we will be more competitive nationally and globally.
A short list of what I'd to see take shape over the next 10-15 years: the waterfront (finally) properly developed and re-integrated with Center City, University City continue expand and (ideally) also become an extension of Center City, mass-transit continue to improve, the airport (finally) get it's act together, city/region/state get on the same page about economic development, civic leadership figure out more effective ways to brand and market the city, particularly internationally. For starts. Thankfully, I see positive signs on all these fronts and more. As others have noted, it's a very exciting time. My one concern is that as the city (and region) continue to regenerate, that we are able to balance the need to attract capital and investment, with maintaining quality of life, and manageable cost of living. Gentrification is welcome, and needed, but I would hate to see long time residents priced out in the process, or the city lose the unique character that makes it so wonderful, and also, so freaking weird.
Thank you again for your thoughtful comments, and enjoy your weekend. See you around C-D, I hope.
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,281,063 times
Reputation: 1483
Seems to me in short. CHICAGO'S downtown does have density of skyscrapers like Manhattan, but less quantity. With many of its tree lined, with front lawn neighborhoods of Bungalow style housing. Being more LA like. With a flavor all its own. Works for me. But still very much all worthy of the term... Urban.
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.
There is the one opening in Center City, one in King of Prussia, one in Cherry Hill, and one in Atlantic City. Plus a few Michael Kors Outlet stores in the Outlets around the metro. Shopping is something that is quickly changing in the Philly area. Center City, as you know, is getting better when it comes to retail options every year. King of Prussia is expanding, Cherry Hill has become high end and is quickly becoming more so. Willow Grove is in the same boat - it is becoming more high end. And then Atlantic City has high end stores too. 
