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.
Well, my definition is pretty inclusive. I think different cities have different types of development, but all cities do possess a mix of building types in urban core neighborhoods. So, because in urban core neighborhoods you’re going to get apartment buildings and row-houses, I will say as long as your row-house neighborhoods have apartment buildings along the large avenues those neighborhoods can be included. Single building type neighborhoods consisting of single family detached houses would not be included in the urban core.
Philadelphia is unique among US cities in that:
--it has very few of those large avenues. In fact, it has only four: Broad Street, Market Street, the Benjamin Franklin Parkway and Roosevelt Boulevard. Even the principal thoroughfares, with a few exceptions (Erie Avenue, Allegheny Avenue, Washington Avenue), are narrowish, with only one travel lane and one parking lane in each direction.
--single-family detached houses make up a smaller share of the total housing stock than in any other US city, and rowhouses dominate here as they do in no other large US city. Large apartment buildings of the kind you describe are pretty much confined to Center City and the Parkway; even the two principal axes, along which the rapid transit lines run, are largely low-rise in character once outside Center City - and rowhouses line both for much of their length.
Im surprised Toronto is ranking so low. It's on a much larger scale than Philly. Now Philly has more architectural character, but Toronto has a lot more vibrancy/streetlife.
Im surprised Toronto is ranking so low. It's on a much larger scale than Philly. Now Philly has more architectural character, but Toronto has a lot more vibrancy/streetlife.
Does it? Toronto has a very large core area, sure, but it doesn't offer much in terms of street-level activity. I don't even consider its core to be top in Canada (my vote would go to Montreal.) It's great, it's big, it's tall, has an impressive skyline, but something about it is lacking, and I cant quite put my finger on it. Maybe charm? Uniqueness?
Does it? Toronto has a very large core area, sure, but it doesn't offer much in terms of street-level activity. I don't even consider its core to be top in Canada (my vote would go to Montreal.) It's great, it's big, it's tall, has an impressive skyline, but something about it is lacking, and I cant quite put my finger on it. Maybe charm? Uniqueness?
Philly/Montreal/Boston/SF hands down have more old world charm. Toronto can't match them in old pedestrian scale charm. But, then again neither can Chicago.
I'm a big Philly fan and think it is often underrated. But having visited both several time, IMO there is no way Philly can match Toronto's scale on streetlevel vibrancy and diversity of amenities. Toronto is much more on Chicago's level than it is Philly/Boston. Sure it has lots of boring condo buildings, but all those condos support tons of vibrant commercial corridors and it downtown core is improving with every passing year.
I would live in Philly. But, if given a choice between Toronto and Philly, I would chose Toronto given its much larger scale, energy and range.
Philly/Montreal/Boston/SF hands down have more old world charm. Toronto can't match them in old pedestrian scale charm. But, then again neither can Chicago.
I'm a big Philly fan and think it is often underrated. But having visited both several time, IMO there is no way Philly can match Toronto's scale on streetlevel vibrancy and diversity of amenities. Toronto is much more on Chicago's level than it is Philly/Boston. Sure it has lots of boring condo buildings, but all those condos support tons of vibrant commercial corridors and it downtown core is improving with every passing year.
I would live in Philly. But, if given a choice between Toronto and Philly, I would chose Toronto given its much larger scale, energy and range.
--it has very few of those large avenues. In fact, it has only four: Broad Street, Market Street, the Benjamin Franklin Parkway and Roosevelt Boulevard. Even the principal thoroughfares, with a few exceptions (Erie Avenue, Allegheny Avenue, Washington Avenue), are narrowish, with only one travel lane and one parking lane in each direction.
--single-family detached houses make up a smaller share of the total housing stock than in any other US city, and rowhouses dominate here as they do in no other large US city. Large apartment buildings of the kind you describe are pretty much confined to Center City and the Parkway; even the two principal axes, along which the rapid transit lines run, are largely low-rise in character once outside Center City - and rowhouses line both for much of their length.
Yeah, which is also found in Baltimore. That’s why I personally feel Philadelphia’s urban core is Center City and University City only. After that, it’s just attached single family homes. Sure, some have been converted but they aren’t intermixed with large buildings.
Toronto has a very large core area, sure, but it doesn't offer much in terms of street-level activity.
Lol, Huh? That's just plain wrong. Toronto's core is absolutely packed with people and activity, especially in the warmer months when it's downright annoying sometimes trying to walk around with all the crowds getting in your way. I don't think any of the other cities in this thread have an intersection as busy as Yonge and Dundas in terms of daily pedestrian traffic.
Core neighbourhoods such as The Downtown Yonge Street strip, Queen Street West (stretching for kilometres) , Dundas and Spadina in Chinatown, Kensington Market, Bloor-Yorkville, The St. Lawrence Market area, The Harbourfront, The Entertainment District, The Gay Village, Bloor Street in The Annex, Little Italy and The Financial District are all bustling with street-level activity, many of them 7 days a week, well into the night.
Note: I've been to all of these within the last few years except Toronto. It's been a good decade and a half since I've been there.
Vibrancy: Philly
Shopping: Chicago
Number of residents: Philly
Number of jobs: Chicago
Amentities and attractions: Philly
Walkability: Philly
Public transportation: DC
Nightlife: Philly
Philly's core is great for its livability, residential population, nightlife and bar scene. Chicago's is great for being its business, job and shopping center of the metro. A lot of Chicago's nightlife is distant from its core. I personally love Philly's downtown for its intimacy, walkability, and neighborhood upon neighborhood of vibrant nightlife.
The Philly bias is strong in this one.
I don’t see how you can give the nod to Philadelphia in any of those categories.
It’s nowhere near as vibrant as Chicago or Toronto, it has less residents in the downtown core than Chicago as another poster noted, it clearly has far less attractions and amenities than Chicago (Mag Mile, Navy Pier, Lakeshore, The Loop, Oak Street Beach, Ohio Street Beach, Chicago Theatre, Millenium Park, Grant Park, etc), it trails SF and Boston in walk score (https://www.walkscore.com/cities-and-neighborhoods/), and it has a grandma-esque 2 AM closing time compared to Chicago’s 5 AM closing time.
Philly is by no means a bad city but there’s no way it’s the best in any of those categories.
I don’t see how you can give the nod to Philadelphia in any of those categories.
It’s nowhere near as vibrant as Chicago or Toronto, it has less residents in the downtown core than Chicago as another poster noted, it clearly has far less attractions and amenities than Chicago (Mag Mile, Navy Pier, Lakeshore, The Loop, Oak Street Beach, Ohio Street Beach, Chicago Theatre, Millenium Park, Grant Park, etc), it trails SF and Boston in walk score (https://www.walkscore.com/cities-and-neighborhoods/), and it has a grandma-esque 2 AM closing time compared to Chicago’s 5 AM closing time.
Philly is by no means a bad city but there’s no way it’s the best in any of those categories.
I'm guessing he's going by a more limiting definition of urban core that's just downtown.
Yeah, which is also found in Baltimore. That’s why I personally feel Philadelphia’s urban core is Center City and University City only. After that, it’s just attached single family homes. Sure, some have been converted but they aren’t intermixed with large buildings.
There are a few interesting areas outside of those you've mentioned. Not the same mix as U-City or CC., (Business/Residential, etc.)
Here's a street view in the Northwest section of the city.
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.
