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.
The inner south and west suburbs of Chicago are pretty much indistinguishable from the city. The only northern suburb I can think of that even comes close is Evanston. Skokie's fairly dense, but its nothing like Chicago.
The inner south and west suburbs of Chicago are pretty much indistinguishable from the city. The only northern suburb I can think of that even comes close is Evanston. Skokie's fairly dense, but its nothing like Chicago.
So, Dolton and Burham are more like the city than Skokie? Would Burbank be more built-up, or have more of an "urban" feel than Evanston? Or would it be that density gradually decreases in every direction, some ways quicker, some ways slower, and that there is no distinguished way of telling outlying neighborhood vs. inner-ring suburb?
So, Dolton and Burham are more like the city than Skokie? Would Burbank be more built-up, or have more of an "urban" feel than Evanston? Or would it be that density gradually decreases in every direction, some ways quicker, some ways slower, and that there is no distinguished way of telling outlying neighborhood vs. inner-ring suburb?
I don't really understand what you're trying to say. Suburbs do become less dense the further from the city you are, that's kind of the point of urban sprawl.
I honestly don't understand why people always compare CSA's or MSA's. I've been to the suburbs maybe 3 or 4 times since I've been in Chicago. If you live in the city, and work in the city, there's no reason to go to the burbs.
Your urban bias is showing. We suburbanites have many reasons to visit urban cores, as well as, downtowns of other burbs. But we also know how to enjoy all the rest as well.
The burbs don't offer anything that the city doesn't. They usually don't offer better dining, entertainment, or cultural options.
A rural environment would atleast offer something that the urban environment doesn't.
There are plusses to living in the suburbs. You can have a slower pace of life while still being able to experience the benefits of an urban environment.
When you live an urban environment though, there's just not a huge appeal to visit the burbs. Your 99% of the time not missing anything by not going.
Chicago will always be the second city. See post #7!
I just read it and you need to stop living in the past!!
I love Chicago, but the it's no match for LA, as far as being #2 in this country today.
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.
