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.
Very interesting comparison between the two cities, for San Francisco and its size this is not even a contest. But if you are judging cities for its vibrancy, setting and overall character San Francisco pack a lot of punch and it will go toe to toe with any cities in America including NYC. I was watching the Americas Cup last week on tv the views I get is like watching a Mediterrean coastal city. Nothing like it in America, those houses, rollings hills and overall landscape gives you the vibes of European city. With that said comes a higher property cost, especially the rents, but people are willing to pay the price. You honestly cannot say that about Chicago with bigger housing market.
Very interesting comparison between the two cities, for San Francisco and its size this is not even a contest. But if you are judging cities for its vibrancy, setting and overall character San Francisco pack a lot of punch and it will go toe to toe with any cities in America including NYC.
no.
Quote:
I was watching the Americas Cup last week on tv the views I get is like watching a Mediterrean coastal city.
very beautiful
Quote:
Nothing like it in America, those houses, rollings hills and overall landscape gives you the vibes of European city. With that said comes a higher property cost, especially the rents, but people are willing to pay the price. You honestly cannot say that about Chicago with bigger housing market.
Live in SF now, but I have to vote for Chicago by a large margin
Chicago's downtown is about 3X larger in area, superior architecture, far more skyscrapers and shopping areas, the river is really nice, and more lively during the day and at night in the parts of downtown north of the river. South Loop and West Loop probably aren't bad either at this point
SF's downtown is growing really quickly though; by 2020, the comparison might actually be fair
Live in SF now, but I have to vote for Chicago by a large margin
Chicago's downtown is about 3X larger in area, superior architecture, far more skyscrapers and shopping areas, the river is really nice, and more lively during the day and at night in the parts of downtown north of the river. South Loop and West Loop probably aren't bad either at this point
SF's downtown is growing really quickly though; by 2020, the comparison might actually be fair
hmmm, I assume you have been to Chicago, but I definitely didn't see it being more lively day and night than downtown SF. Bigger, yes! Superior architecture, yes! But move lively....I have to disagree.
hmmm, I assume you have been to Chicago, but I definitely didn't see it being more lively day and night than downtown SF. Bigger, yes! Superior architecture, yes! But move lively....I have to disagree.
Downtown Chicago is a lot more crowded and bustling during the day. SF's Fidi is actually quiet in many places
During the evening, the Loop is fairly active; about the same as SF. But it's River North, Streeterville, Gold Coast, Old Town, etc. that are packed with ppl at night in a very urban setting. Can't say the same for SF right now--there are ppl in the street, but the scale and quantity is much smaller
Downtown Chicago is a lot more crowded and bustling during the day. SF's Fidi is actually quiet in many places
During the evening, the Loop is fairly active; about the same as SF. But it's River North, Streeterville, Gold Coast, Old Town, etc. that are packed with ppl at night in a very urban setting. Can't say the same for SF right now--there are ppl in the street, but the scale and quantity is much smaller
Agreed. And River North year after year gets more bustling and bustling. I was hanging out around 11pm in River North on a Thursday night and was shocked to see how bustling it was. As more people continue to move there and bars and restaurants continue to open there, I can only imagine it's going to get even more bustling.
Agreed. And River North year after year gets more bustling and bustling. I was hanging out around 11pm in River North on a Thursday night and was shocked to see how bustling it was. As more people continue to move there and bars and restaurants continue to open there, I can only imagine it's going to get even more bustling.
Right. And I think what separates Chicago from SF isn't even how crowded it is, but that the streets are lined with high-rises or mid-rises, which adds to the urban feel. SF doesn't have that, though it's slowly changing. Most ppl in SF live in low/mid-rise residential neighborhoods in the city; those neighborhoods are densely populated to be sure, but it takes away from any "downtown" feel
Sf is still more dense than Chicago is lol. Doesn't matter how many highrises it has and you'd be surprised at some of the density levels of SF. They can reach Manhattan level densities.
Right. And I think what separates Chicago from SF isn't even how crowded it is, but that the streets are lined with high-rises or mid-rises, which adds to the urban feel. SF doesn't have that, though it's slowly changing. Most ppl in SF live in low/mid-rise residential neighborhoods in the city; those neighborhoods are densely populated to be sure, but it takes away from any "downtown" feel
The thing is that River North is booming as is the West Loop and South Loop. While many might argue that West Loop and South Loop are not part of downtown, I get a feeling that in 10 years when those neighborhoods are more developed with highrises and what not people will consider it downtown. Heck I sometimes consider the northern part of the South loop and the eastern portion of the West Loop downtown.
SF's downtown might be booming but so is Chicago's. Chicago also has more potentinal in their downtown ad there is more space. Plenty of surface parking lots in the Near North Side, West Loop and South Loop to build on, something SF doesn't have.
Sf is still more dense than Chicago is lol. Doesn't matter how many highrises it has and you'd be surprised at some of the density levels of SF. They can reach Manhattan level densities.
And your point?
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.
