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.
2 ) Chicago: Case for it: In many ways Chi is the most obvious choice. The city is massive. The other 3 could almost fit inside it. It is the only city that can almost rival NY in terms of skyline. It also comes the closest in terms of capturing the huge mega city feel. Case against it: IMO, there are only two thing that prevents Chi from running away with this: 1) it doesn’t have the dense midrise areas like the Tenderloin, Chinatown, Nobb Hill, North End. 2) Chi doesn’t really have that same vibrant, gritty urban feel that you get in parts of SF, Bos, and Phil. The loop has a little of this feel, but as a 9-5 office district, it doesn't have the same urban bustle of the other cities.
3) San Francisco: Case for it: SF’s core has the best collection of midrises outside Manhattan. Areas like the Tenderloin and Nobb hill could easily pass for NYC. It has lots of the 24hr dinners and street life of NYC. Case against it: : SF’s core is easily the 2 or 3rd most vibrant. But, once you get out of DT, it feels more like a big small town than a mega city.
3 or 4) Philadelphia: Case for it:: Architecturally the closest to NYC. In some ways the city looks more urban than Chi. It has more of the east coast urban grit. Case against it: : It is smaller and less dense than Chi. It lacks the midrise districts of central SF and the massive skyscrapers of Chi. Once you get out of CC, it lacks the large apartment buildings and vibrant streetscapes you will find in Chi neighborhoods.
3 or 4) Boston: Case for it: central Boston is easily one of the most urban areas of the county. The North End, Chinatown and the FiDi are as urban as they come. How it is not like NYC: As much as I like Boston, I can’t really see a case for Bos being the 2nd most urban. The city is very urban (especially in its core). But, SF does the midrise density better and Chi kills it on size and skyline.
To completely seal the deal, you would need to fill in Chi's parking lots with SF's mid-rises and splash the city with a little of Bos/Philly's east cost grit.
2 ) Chicago: Case for it: In many ways Chi is the most obvious choice. The city is massive. The other 3 could almost fit inside it. It is the only city that can almost rival NY in terms of skyline. It also comes the closest in terms of capturing the huge mega city feel. Case against it: IMO, there are only two thing that prevents Chi from running away with this: 1) it doesn’t have the dense midrise areas like the Tenderloin, Chinatown, Nobb Hill, North End. 2) Chi doesn’t really have that same vibrant, gritty urban feel that you get in parts of SF, Bos, and Phil. The loop has a little of this feel, but as a 9-5 office district, it doesn't have the same urban bustle of the other cities.
3) San Francisco: Case for it: SF’s core has the best collection of midrises outside Manhattan. Areas like the Tenderloin and Nobb hill could easily pass for NYC. It has lots of the 24hr dinners and street life of NYC. Case against it: : SF’s core is easily the 2 or 3rd most vibrant. But, once you get out of DT, it feels more like a big small town than a mega city.
3 or 4) Philadelphia: Case for it:: Architecturally the closest to NYC. In some ways the city looks more urban than Chi. It has more of the east coast urban grit. Case against it: : It is smaller and less dense than Chi. It lacks the midrise districts of central SF and the massive skyscrapers of Chi. Once you get out of CC, it lacks the large apartment buildings and vibrant streetscapes you will find in Chi neighborhoods.
3 or 4) Boston: Case for it: central Boston is easily one of the most urban areas of the county. The North End, Chinatown and the FiDi are as urban as they come. How it is not like NYC: As much as I like Boston, I can’t really see a case for Bos being the 2nd most urban. The city is very urban (especially in its core). But, SF does the midrise density better and Chi kills it on size and skyline.
To completely seal the deal, you would need to fill in Chi's parking lots with SF's mid-rises and splash the city with a little of Bos/Philly's east cost grit.
Totally disagree that SF feels like a big small town outside of the core. Have you ever been to the Mission District, lower Haight, Haight-Ashbury, Fillmore, Castro, Outer SOMA, etc.? Even the Marina has significant density.
SF has very vibrant and bustling neighborhoods, even if they do have a very "neighborhoody" feel. It has one of the most consistant urban fabrics of any city in the US. Not a mega city by any means, no, but very urban throughout.
Ive been to all four, but grew up near SF. Chicago was the one I expected to win until I went there. The skyline is amazing, and the setting is wonderful, but its not nearly as dense and vibrant as SF. Scale does not matter on this question, if it did LA would be in the mix.
Totally disagree that SF feels like a big small town outside of the core. Have you ever been to the Mission District, lower Haight, Haight-Ashbury, Fillmore, Castro, Outer SOMA, etc.? Even the Marina has significant density.
I think we are just disagreeing on semantics. Yeah, I have been to them all. They are all still very urban and have lively commercial strips. It's just SF doesn't feel that big when you get out of the downtown area.
SF is arguably more urban than Chi in its core, but when you go explore the neighborhoods you get a sense for how much more extensive Chi is.
To completely seal the deal, you would need to fill in Chi's parking lots with SF's mid-rises and splash the city with a little of Bos/Philly's east cost grit.
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.
^^ 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.
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.
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
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.
