Rank these urban cores: Chicago, Philly, Boston, DC, San Francisco, & Toronto (America, quality)

[thedirtypirate]

My best photo of the "urban core" of philly coming into PHL



One thing Toronto and Philly have in common is that their big developments don't necessarily follow the waterfront like a lot of other cities do.

[KodeBlue]

Originally Posted by thedirtypirate

My best photo of the "urban core" of philly coming into PHL



One thing Toronto and Philly have in common is that their big developments don't necessarily follow the waterfront like a lot of other cities do.

Nice!
It gives you a real sense of how structurally dense and expansive Philly is.

[_OT]

I've been to Toronto recently, and I would say.

1. Chicago
2. Toronto
3. San Francisco
4. Philadelphia
5. DC
6. Boston

You guys are really underrating Toronto here. I'd literally put it as Chicago, Toronto, San Francisco...*gap*...Then Philly, DC, and Boston.

[jjv007]

Some more images showing Philly's stuctural density:



http://www.city-data.com/forum/phila...rial-shot.html

[fusion2]

Originally Posted by thedirtypirate

My best photo of the "urban core" of philly coming into PHL



One thing Toronto and Philly have in common is that their big developments don't necessarily follow the waterfront like a lot of other cities do.

The core spine of Toronto's skyline is actually perpendicular to the waterfront along yonge street. That is starting to change however as the waterfront is now starting to be developed along with the core spine so it is starting to take on an inverted T shape with a line along the waterfront and the more traditional one perpendicular to it.

[TalentedDrinker]

Originally Posted by jjv007

Some more images showing Philly's stuctural density:



http://www.city-data.com/forum/phila...rial-shot.html

Love the greeeeeeeeeeeeen!

[DavePa]

I generally defend and boast for Chicago. I especially like how the city's standard set-backs for green-frontage. Keeps its tree-canopy in the neighborhoods. Its grid stays standard in every era. No neighborhood has housing to the sidewalk without some set-back for green but areas once warehousing now loft loving have to to add green and trees or some oldest areas the streets were raised and it lost much of its set-backs.

Trees can tower over multi-story housing. The main streets do have most buildings to the sidewalk if businesses and apartment buildings.

Chicago North-side and Southside. Very Geeeeen till winter.

[Mr. Burns]

Originally Posted by thedirtypirate

One thing Toronto and Philly have in common is that their big developments don't necessarily follow the waterfront like a lot of other cities do.

Not sure if it's for the same reasons though, Toronto's skyscrapers follow the subway route along Yonge, which is perpendicular to the waterfront.

[personone]

Originally Posted by thedirtypirate

My best photo of the "urban core" of philly coming into PHL



One thing Toronto and Philly have in common is that their big developments don't necessarily follow the waterfront like a lot of other cities do.

Originally Posted by jjv007

Some more images showing Philly's stuctural density:



http://www.city-data.com/forum/phila...rial-shot.html

Really cool aerial pics of Philly!

[Enean]

Originally Posted by DavePa

I generally defend and boast for Chicago. I especially like how the city's standard set-backs for green-frontage. Keeps its tree-canopy in the neighborhoods. Its grid stays standard in every era. No neighborhood has housing to the sidewalk without some set-back for green but areas once warehousing now loft loving have to to add green and trees or some oldest areas the streets were raised and it lost much of its set-backs.

Trees can tower over multi-story housing. The main streets do have most buildings to the sidewalk if businesses and apartment buildings.

Chicago North-side and Southside. Very Geeeeen till winter.

You always have the best Chicago pics. Lived there for years, and LOVED it. Hope to get back there to live, someday.