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.
SF definitely does the best job of filling the entire city with urban. Boston and Chicago both have large swaths of emptiness that were once taken up by freight yards or industry and subsequently became parking lots. I don't know about Chicago, but these areas in Boston are beginning to fill back in, almost entirely with mid-rise development. One of the most interesting areas of the city right now is the corridor between Boylston St. and Brookline Ave., heading West from Fenway Park. Twenty years ago, the area was a dead collection of cheap looking strip malls and gas stations, but now it houses multiple mid-rise developments and boasts a vibrant street life. The same thing is about to happen in the parking lots of South Boston. Twenty years from now, Boston is going to seem much bigger than it is today due to the combination of infill and extending the urban core to formerly outlying districts.
[edit]
Here is a rough rendering of what I'm talking about. Everything in white does not currently exist. This is 20 blocks of what is currently parking lots and small warehouses, right across a shipping channel from downtown.
Chicago is doing the same, all the way out to the medical district, south loop past canal on roosevelt, rebuilding into where cabrini green used to be , into new east side, grant park will end up looking like a 3 sided central park wall
a lot of that empty green and parking lots is now filled in with new high rises and commercial.
development at bottom half of grant park this will all fill in, almost done now, the one building under construction in the pic is now done, as is the modern wing of the art institute.
and this is the finished product...
chicago loses out a lot simply b/c it often tries to build so damn tall...when it might be better to make 20 buildings out of those 4 and do fill in instead, but in the same sentence it is definitely going for the skyline and that gap between 2 and 3(whoever it is) continues to widen. just to put it in perspective all those buildings are taller than *anything* in San Francisco, the tallest building there is 48 floors (sears tower for instance is 110) but in less you are there, the sheer HEIGHT of Chicago is often lost in pictures (it's taller than new york in the 300m range for supertalls currently)
to put this *height* in perspective to Philly which many think is often the 2nd most urban... Chicago has 607 buildings over 50m, SF has 148, Philadelphia has just 134...Boston, a measly 79.
Peaking out with very tall buildings over 200m... Chicago has 27, Philadelphia has 5, SF has 3. Going even higher neither SF or Philly have anything over 300m... Chicago has 8, and a few going over 400m.
So remember when you might feel Chicago is less vibrant in the street sometimes, look at all the urban development up in the sky.
^^^
Cool, glad to see Chicago is doing the same thing. Large low density plots like that have no place in either city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmac9wr
^^ Sigh...we can only hope it turns out like that. It's not great, but it's better than what will probably turn out. It'd be so nice if they could chop some of those blocks into halves or quarters.
Actually the block size is okay, though you can't make it out well in the render. Those are not landscrapers and typically one block is one building. The problem will be if they do not orient the exterior of the building to street life. It's too early to tell on that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly
Is this the area by the Convention center/williams tunnel exit?
Is there much residential there, that is one area of boston i have hardly explored
It is an area running from there to the Fort Point Channel, which separates the seaport from the rest of downtown. Probably about a mile by half a mile, mostly parking lots built on what were once rail yards.
Here's another rendering of the Boston Seaport plans that does a better job of contextualizing it. Kidphilly -- a corner of the convention center is at the lower left corner of the picture.
This is just one project. There are more planned for some of the other open spaces visible in the lower left.
^^^ is always good to see re-development and use - thanks for the pic
This ia a smaller scale but will better connect center city and U City (Penn really) with the redevelopment of an old railyard that was in between Penn's campus and Center City
Location: Waukegan,il. Approx 40 miles north of Chicago.
85 posts, read 238,039 times
Reputation: 85
I dont think some of these people that are saying other cities like SF is more urban than Chicago and better. If they have been to Chicago, they would know Chicago is it. I live here. I know Dude. Ive been to all of those cities. Baby, I ll take Chicago anytime. We didnt get the title, All American City for nothing. If youve never been to CHicago. You should put it on your vacation list. ITs the best. If you can answer this ? for yourself. And the answer is yes. Then ok. The ? is can you go into your city that you like the best and find 1 bdr condos for 1.5 million and above. If you can, then, well, I ll shut my mouth. Excluding N.Y.
I dont think some of these people that are saying other cities like SF is more urban than Chicago and better. If they have been to Chicago, they would know Chicago is it. I live here. I know Dude. Ive been to all of those cities. Baby, I ll take Chicago anytime. We didnt get the title, All American City for nothing. If youve never been to CHicago. You should put it on your vacation list. ITs the best. If you can answer this ? for yourself. And the answer is yes. Then ok. The ? is can you go into your city that you like the best and find 1 bdr condos for 1.5 million and above. If you can, then, well, I ll shut my mouth. Excluding N.Y.
Actually all 4 of these would have 1 BR condos in that price range - Boston and SF would be the most expensive with Chicago and Philly being about equal and less expensive than those two - not sure what your point is. Baltimore would have 1BR condos in the same price range - does that make it more urban?
Last edited by kidphilly; 10-20-2010 at 01:53 PM..
I dont think some of these people that are saying other cities like SF is more urban than Chicago and better. If they have been to Chicago, they would know Chicago is it. I live here. I know Dude. Ive been to all of those cities. Baby, I ll take Chicago anytime. We didnt get the title, All American City for nothing. If youve never been to CHicago. You should put it on your vacation list. ITs the best. If you can answer this ? for yourself. And the answer is yes. Then ok. The ? is can you go into your city that you like the best and find 1 bdr condos for 1.5 million and above. If you can, then, well, I ll shut my mouth. Excluding N.Y.
What is the point your trying to make? For the record, according to the MLS, there is exactly 1 property for sale that meets your criteria (1 bed, $1.5mil) and it is at 400 Lake Shore Dr, aka. Chicago Spire (which doesnt even exist).
What is the point your trying to make? For the record, according to the MLS, there is exactly 1 property for sale that meets your criteria (1 bed, $1.5mil) and it is at 400 Lake Shore Dr, aka. Chicago Spire (which doesnt even exist).
Well here is one for Philly - my search turned up 70+ for sale but some are 2 or 3 bedrooms, I do know a two bedroom just sold this year in Liberty at 16.5 million for a 2 BR condo - but really does this matter - these properties are a small percentage of housing in any and high end exist in most cities.
Prudential Fox & Roach Real Estate | 210 W Rittenhouse Square2905 (http://www.prufoxroach.com/PropertyDetails.aspx?propertyid=E8C10782-695C-4A75-A92F-7A694F3322BA&recid=40&totalcount=82 - broken link)
Well here is one for Philly - my search turned up 70+ for sale but some are 2 or 3 bedrooms, I do know a two bedroom just sold this year in Liberty at 16.5 million for a 2 BR condo - but really does this matter - these properties are a small percentage of housing in any and high end exist in most cities.
Prudential Fox & Roach Real Estate | 210 W Rittenhouse Square2905 (http://www.prufoxroach.com/PropertyDetails.aspx?propertyid=E8C10782-695C-4A75-A92F-7A694F3322BA&recid=40&totalcount=82 - broken link)
Ah, the Rittenhouse Hotel....Just stayed there last month! The restaurant La Croix is one of my favorite in Philly!
I dont think some of these people that are saying other cities like SF is more urban than Chicago and better. If they have been to Chicago, they would know Chicago is it. I live here. I know Dude. Ive been to all of those cities. Baby, I ll take Chicago anytime. We didnt get the title, All American City for nothing. If youve never been to CHicago. You should put it on your vacation list. ITs the best. If you can answer this ? for yourself. And the answer is yes. Then ok. The ? is can you go into your city that you like the best and find 1 bdr condos for 1.5 million and above. If you can, then, well, I ll shut my mouth. Excluding N.Y.
As others have said, Boston and San Francisco are both considerably more expensive than Chicago...Philadelphia is about the same. To again echo what others have said, that doesn't make a city more urban than another.
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.
