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.
But to me. The overall street-grid of Chicago and housing stock. Differ the most between Chicago, Philly and NYC. Philly matches NYC more by attached housing. But Chicago's main-streets are far more attached in look of the built environment..... over in the actual neighborhood blocks.
Only NYC has the tenement-style embraced. Chi and Philly none to much much less.
I agree, Philly is definitely the closest to NY architecturally. Parts of City Center could be neighborhoods in Manhattan or Brooklyn and it would fit right in. Chicago is different architecturally. Only the canyons of the Loop remind me of NYC in a literal way. The similarity to NY is basically the grand big city feel. It's obviously much smaller than NYC, but comes the closer at capturing the huge urban city feel than Philly or any other US city.
Yeah, Chicago has the highrises and Philly the brownstones and general architecture, but neither city really has the neighborhoods full of walk up apartment buildings. Chicago has a lot on the North Side, but they tend to be interspersed with leafier row homes.
I agree, Philly is definitely the closest to NY architecturally. Parts of City Center could be neighborhoods in Manhattan or Brooklyn and it would fit right in. Chicago is different architecturally. Only the canyons of the Loop remind me of NYC in a literal way. The similarity to NY is basically the grand big city feel. It's obviously much smaller than NYC, but comes the closer at capturing the huge urban city feel than Philly or any other US city.
Yeah, Chicago has the highrises and Philly the brownstones and general architecture, but neither city really has the neighborhoods full of walk up apartment buildings. Chicago has a lot on the North Side, but they tend to be interspersed with leafier row homes.
I agree, Philly is definitely the closest to NY architecturally. Parts of City Center could be neighborhoods in Manhattan or Brooklyn and it would fit right in. Chicago is different architecturally. Only the canyons of the Loop remind me of NYC in a literal way. The similarity to NY is basically the grand big city feel. It's obviously much smaller than NYC, but comes the closer at capturing the huge urban city feel than Philly or any other US city.
Yeah, Chicago has the highrises and Philly the brownstones and general architecture, but neither city really has the neighborhoods full of walk up apartment buildings. Chicago has a lot on the North Side, but they tend to be interspersed with leafier row homes.
But Chicago is not in any degree a row-home city. i don't know of any blocks where you can find solid attached housing. You see a section in places. But not a block.
Chicago's choice was unattached by far. Even if mere inches apart. Even new infill multi-residential housing is separated.
There are examples of rows for sure. But in where city's fall in % of attached housing as rows ..... Chicago is very low in %.
These are even examples of newer infill. Same footprint as former-housing once there. But multi-residential infill now.
I agree, Philly is definitely the closest to NY architecturally. Parts of City Center could be neighborhoods in Manhattan or Brooklyn and it would fit right in. Chicago is different architecturally. Only the canyons of the Loop remind me of NYC in a literal way. The similarity to NY is basically the grand big city feel. It's obviously much smaller than NYC, but comes the closer at capturing the huge urban city feel than Philly or any other US city.
Yeah, Chicago has the highrises and Philly the brownstones and general architecture, but neither city really has the neighborhoods full of walk up apartment buildings. Chicago has a lot on the North Side, but they tend to be interspersed with leafier row homes.
^^^^^^^ this poster knows what they’re talking about. A very common answer to the question of the thread is Chicago is most similar to NY since it is the 2nd largest urban-style city with the 2nd biggest skyline which create the urban canyon effect similar to Midtown Manhattan, and while this is a very valid comparison, I feel it is kind of superficial. As this poster and DavePA have said, the built forms in the neighborhoods outside of the CBDs are different enough.
People bring up Philly which I understand as the closest major city to NYC, it has a lot of similarities. There are parts of Center City that remind me of The Village, and parts of North Philly that look like Bushwick. But one main difference is that Philly is pretty dominated by single rowhomes, which we do have in parts of Brooklyn/Queens but aren’t really that common throughout NYC. I’d say the main types of housing in NYC are tenements, highrises, brownstones, and 3-6 story walkups.
Those Boston shots remind me of Brooklyn, and the SF ones remind me of The Bronx with the midrises with the fire escapes and the hills. Maybe they are different architecturally, but it other than that it looks pretty similar to The BX, which is impressive because I’ve always thought that there is no place quite like The Bronx in built form, but this is the closest I’ve ever seen. Great post
^^^^^^^ this poster knows what they’re talking about. A very common answer to the question of the thread is Chicago is most similar to NY since it is the 2nd largest urban-style city with the 2nd biggest skyline which create the urban canyon effect similar to Midtown Manhattan, and while this is a very valid comparison, I feel it is kind of superficial. As this poster and DavePA have said, the built forms in the neighborhoods outside of the CBDs are different enough.
People bring up Philly which I understand as the closest major city to NYC, it has a lot of similarities. There are parts of Center City that remind me of The Village, and parts of North Philly that look like Bushwick. But one main difference is that Philly is pretty dominated by single rowhomes, which we do have in parts of Brooklyn/Queens but aren’t really that common throughout NYC. I’d say the main types of housing in NYC are tenements, highrises, brownstones, and 3-6 story walkups.
Those Boston shots remind me of Brooklyn, and the SF ones remind me of The Bronx with the midrises with the fire escapes and the hills. Maybe they are different architecturally, but it other than that it looks pretty similar to The BX, which is impressive because I’ve always thought that there is no place quite like The Bronx in built form, but this is the closest I’ve ever seen. Great post
I think the non-CBD neighborhoods are actually the most important point of comparison. And a part of NYC architecture that you're missing is the 6 story elevator buildings . I also disagree about 1 story rowhomes not being that common, there are a lot of neighborhoods that have them in every borough except Manhattan.
But Chicago is not in any degree a row-home city. i don't know of any blocks where you can find solid attached housing. You see a section in places. But not a block.
Chicago's choice was unattached by far. Even if mere inches apart. Even new infill multi-residential housing is separated.
There are examples of rows for sure. But in where city's fall in % of attached housing as rows ..... Chicago is very low in %.
These are even examples of newer infill. Same footprint as former-housing once there. But multi-residential infill now.
Fair point about Chicago not technically having rowhouses. I'm not sure what they are called in Chicago, technically I guess they are SFHs, but that dosen't seem to truly reflect their dense nature.
In any event, Chicago neighborhoods look pretty different from NYC between the leafy setbacks and the distinctive architectural style. Philly is the closest to matching NYC's brownstone districts.
After Philly, Boston or Baltimore comes the closest to matching the Browstones of Mahattan and Brooklyn.
Boston has a few genuine NYC-style browstones: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3351...7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3393...7i13312!8i6656
but mostly it has a slightly different rowhouse style throughout South End, Back Bay, Beacon Hill and then scattered among the outlying areas of Mission Hill, Cambridge, South Boston, East Boston, Charleston. It is a little different from Philly/NYC style, but they are far closer (with their tight to street build and ornate brick architecture) then what you would find in Chi or SF.
Baltimore has tons of federalist architecture and the tight build of NYC or Philly. It is more of a rowhouse city than Boston (which is really more a mix of triple deckers and walkup apartment buildings outside the immediate core). Its a step removed from NYC. It is architecturally similar to Philly which is similar to NYC. https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3045...7i13312!8i6656
Fair point about Chicago not technically having rowhouses. I'm not sure what they are called in Chicago, technically I guess they are SFHs, but that dosen't seem to truly reflect their dense nature.
In any event, Chicago neighborhoods look pretty different from NYC between the leafy setbacks and the distinctive architectural style. Philly is the closest to matching NYC's brownstone districts.
After Philly, Boston or Baltimore comes the closest to matching the Browstones of Mahattan and Brooklyn.
Boston has a few genuine NYC-style browstones: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3351...7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3393...7i13312!8i6656
but mostly it has a slightly different rowhouse style throughout South End, Back Bay, Beacon Hill and then scattered among the outlying areas of Mission Hill, Cambridge, South Boston, East Boston, Charleston. It is a little different from Philly/NYC style, but they are far closer (with their tight to street build and ornate brick architecture) then what you would find in Chi or SF.
Baltimore has tons of federalist architecture and the tight build of NYC or Philly. It is more of a rowhouse city than Boston (which is really more a mix of triple deckers and walkup apartment buildings outside the immediate core). Its a step removed from NYC. It is architecturally similar to Philly which is similar to NYC. https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3045...7i13312!8i6656
Aside from actual building style though, Philly is closest in feel, culture, street life, people, etc. Chicago has the dense skyscraper style vibe and lots of public transit options. Boston and SF just don't have the same vibe that NYC Philly and Chicago have. And NYC and Philly have the closest vibe.
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.
