Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Better Amenities
Chicago 69 49.64%
DC Metro 70 50.36%
Voters: 139. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-03-2011, 01:55 PM
 
Location: A Cultural Backwater
225 posts, read 751,885 times
Reputation: 169

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago South Sider View Post
I simply responded to the claim that Baltimore is as built up as Chicago. It isn't and that's a fact.
Quite true, but various posters will always try to link Washington and Baltimore areas together to attempt to make it a closer comparison. DC has many amenities that other cities don't have, but it will never be the same as Chicago. To say that they are alike is tantamount to saying that there is nothing in Philly except a cheesesteak that you can't find in Detroit, lol!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-03-2011, 02:08 PM
 
Location: Rockville, MD
3,546 posts, read 8,528,950 times
Reputation: 1389
Great poll--this one is exceptionally close, and I love both cities.

I voted DC for one reason only: access to the Blue Ridge Mountains and Shenandoah National Park. There's just nothing near Chicago that measures up (no pun intended) to the beauty of the Shenandoah. Otherwise, I think the two cities are very comparable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 02:14 PM
 
5,347 posts, read 10,103,386 times
Reputation: 2446
I would say that Baltimore is pound for pound built up just as much as Chicago. Baltimore's DT may not be as urban as Chicago's Loop but its residential neighborhoods featuring miles upon miles upon miles of rowhouses kill Chicago's suburban looking flats. Plus Baltimore doesn't the abundance of surburban looking strip malls that you see in Chicago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 02:17 PM
 
5,347 posts, read 10,103,386 times
Reputation: 2446
If we are talking about 225 square miles of each city, Chicago would win the density contest, but DC would definitely win the ammenity contest. Too many urban suburbs right outside (across the street in some cases) of DC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 02:21 PM
 
Location: Rockville, MD
3,546 posts, read 8,528,950 times
Reputation: 1389
Oh, and those comparing density just need to stop. Of course Chicago is going to win out when it comes to who has a larger, more dense area--Chicago is quite a bit larger than DC.

A better comparison would be looking at the central core of each city: Chicago (Loop, Streeterville, River North, South Loop, West Loop, Lincoln Park and environs) versus DC (Penn Quarter, Dupont, Georgetown, Logan, Capitol Hill). Chicago's skyscrapers give it a more authentically urban feel than DC, but DC's downtown core is also one of the largest in the country, with Penn Quarter becoming its increasingly vibrant heart.

But as others have noted, this isn't a density discussion, and on amenities I feel it's a virtual toss-up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Rockville, MD
3,546 posts, read 8,528,950 times
Reputation: 1389
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC's Finest View Post
I would say that Baltimore is pound for pound built up just as much as Chicago.
I don't know about that. In Chicago, you can start up around Edgewater/Lincoln Square and proceed south all the way through the South Loop and encounter nothing but a seemingly endless succession of vibrant, dense, amenity-filled neighborhoods. That is a huge tract of land. Baltimore doesn't have anything really comparable to that. And, as you mentioned, the Loop and Near Northside blow away Baltimore's downtown--it isn't even comparable.

I do prefer Baltimore's residential architecture over Chicago's; I also much prefer Chicago's commercial architecture over Baltimore's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 02:32 PM
 
5,347 posts, read 10,103,386 times
Reputation: 2446
I'm not talking about vibrancy or density. I'm talking about urban residential neighborhoods. 14th, you mentioned neighborhoods on the northside but venture south or west and you won't find that urban Chicago that you speak of. In the 70's going down Cicero, Chicago looks surburban as ever with strip malls galore. Baltimore has that Philly affect. Rowhouse on top rowhouse even though a lot of the neighborhoods are bombed out. Chicago does not have consistent structural density. Those flats remind me of 1950's suburbia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Rockville, MD
3,546 posts, read 8,528,950 times
Reputation: 1389
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC's Finest View Post
I'm not talking about vibrancy or density. I'm talking about urban residential neighborhoods. 14th, you mentioned neighborhoods on the northside but venture south or west and you won't find that urban Chicago that you speak of.
Who said that you would? I wasn't discussing the south or west sides of Chicago, or urban blight. I mean, if you want to talk about urban decay, let's talk about east and west Baltimore.

Your statement was that "Baltimore is pound for pound built up just as much as Chicago". I disagree with that, because Baltimore has nothing comparable to Chicago's northside or Loop. Chicago has far more urban residential neighborhoods than does Baltimore--numerous northside neighborhoods would qualify as an "urban residential neighborhood". And then there's southside neighborhoods like Hyde Park and Kenwood, and westside neighborhoods like West Town and Bridgeport.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 03:06 PM
 
Location: Chicago
721 posts, read 1,785,348 times
Reputation: 451
This thread should have been over after Danny made his post. He pretty much summed up everything I was going to say, but didn't bother to. D.C offers pretty much everything Chicago offers, Chicago just obviously has more because of its larger size. There really isn't anything to argue about in this thread as there is no clear winner in any category. D.C and Chicago are essentially urban equals. Chicago may have a slight edge on D.C because of its size, but both cities stack up well against each other, as well as many others.

Chicago's flats are far from suburban looking. The city is relatively young in comparison to D.C, so there are some differences in its layout. The Chicago Fire allowed for the city to essentially start over. Homes were set away from the street and given their own "front yard". Streets were lined with trees, and shaded homes from view. These aren't things you usually see on the east cost, but they are far from suburban looking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2011, 03:57 PM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,385 posts, read 28,372,317 times
Reputation: 5877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dncr View Post
This thread should have been over after Danny made his post. He pretty much summed up everything I was going to say, but didn't bother to. D.C offers pretty much everything Chicago offers, Chicago just obviously has more because of its larger size. There really isn't anything to argue about in this thread as there is no clear winner in any category. D.C and Chicago are essentially urban equals. Chicago may have a slight edge on D.C because of its size, but both cities stack up well against each other, as well as many others.

Chicago's flats are far from suburban looking. The city is relatively young in comparison to D.C, so there are some differences in its layout. The Chicago Fire allowed for the city to essentially start over. Homes were set away from the street and given their own "front yard". Streets were lined with trees, and shaded homes from view. These aren't things you usually see on the east cost, but they are far from suburban looking.
Yeah it certainly isn't suburban... there are 15 SFH style homes on my block, but only 2 of them are actual single families, the rest are 3 level housing units with 3 sets of people living in them. There are also 7 Courtyard style buildings and 1 brownstone type building... each courtyard style building has about 45-50 units a piece and are 4 stories high. Chicago housing is scatter brained like that. Some of the better neighborhoods such as Lakeview look like this, but has density over 30K...Looks can be deceiving and it certainly doesn't have the same gritty look as say Baltimore or tight streets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top