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.
Chicago has pretty skyscrapers but those things are boring. Nice to look at but not much fun.
Do you know whats in downtown Chicago? WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more than L.A.
Lets see, in that "boring" area are world class museums, 2 stadiums (Soldier Field and United Center), some of the worlds best restaurants, art galleries, HARDCORE shopping, public parks, ice skating rinks (indoor and outdoor), gaming facilities, horse carriage rides, beaches, live theater, nightlife, sky-high observatories, planetarium, aquariums, etc, etc.
Do you know whats in downtown Chicago? WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more than L.A.
Lets see, in that "boring" area are world class museums, 2 stadiums (Soldier Field and United Center), some of the worlds best restaurants, art galleries, HARDCORE shopping, public parks, ice skating rinks (indoor and outdoor), gaming facilities, horse carriage rides, beaches, live theater, nightlife, sky-high observatories, planetarium, aquariums, etc, etc.
Please, dont make such ridiculous statements.
I didn't say downtown Chicago is boring. I said skyscrapers are boring. If you actually read my post you would see that I said you have to go to street level to enjoy a city. Los Angeles is much more well known for it's entertainment. If you think that is ridiculous I really don't care. You tend to attack anyone with a different opinion than your own and it's a waste of time to ever discuss a topic with someone like that.
Do you know whats in downtown Chicago? WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more than L.A.
Lets see, in that "boring" area are world class museums, 2 stadiums (Soldier Field and United Center), some of the worlds best restaurants, art galleries, HARDCORE shopping, public parks, ice skating rinks (indoor and outdoor), gaming facilities, horse carriage rides, beaches, live theater, nightlife, sky-high observatories, planetarium, aquariums, etc, etc.
Please, dont make such ridiculous statements.
you can find those things in lots of other downtowns as well
Do you know whats in downtown Chicago? WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more than L.A.
Lets see, in that "boring" area are world class museums, 2 stadiums (Soldier Field and United Center), some of the worlds best restaurants, art galleries, HARDCORE shopping, public parks, ice skating rinks (indoor and outdoor), gaming facilities, horse carriage rides, beaches, live theater, nightlife, sky-high observatories, planetarium, aquariums, etc, etc.
I have no doubt that if Chicago wasn't constricted by such small boarders, it would be larger than L.A, but I still believe L.A would have the larger metro area.
I have no doubt that if Chicago wasn't constricted by such small boarders, it would be larger than L.A, but I still believe L.A would have the larger metro area.
Well of course LA would still be larger. Nothing would really change if Chicago's city limit borders were bigger. The LA CSA alone is nearly twice the size of Chicago's CSA. I doubt Chicago would have an extra 9 million if its city limits were larger. Don't forget that Los Angeles is increasing with density, too. Many people like to say that Downtown Los Angeles is sprawlville, but the development a few miles outside of its downtown core is no different than what you would find in Chicago. Especially if you head out west. It's all in a nice, grid pattern.
...I'm from L.A, but I live in Chicago now, I don't think you knew that but whatever, anyway... you can't really compare Chicago to L.A in density, its a blow out for Chicago. Chicago's twice as dense. Interesting enough, the only advantages I believe L.A has over Chicago, is that it doesn't drop down to around 30 degrees for 4 months of the year. Besides, that, I think Chicago wins everything else. I think if L.A were more urban like Chicago, and had started developing around the same time Chicago did, L.A would be a much nicer place. Now its so fake, it focuses way to much on keeping up its image of glamor and tropical, that its let nearly all areas besides downtown deteriorate. Chicago on the other hand, tries to keep all of the city looking its best, and I must say, they do a very good job.
Density is not everything.... LA may not be as dense as Chicago, but it the city isn't really some sprawl fest. Especially the west side going towards Century City. The entire city of LA is basically a grid, while Chicago isn't. That, and LA's urban area is a lot more dense than Chicago's: USA Urbanized Areas: 2000 Ranked by Population(465 Areas)
Density is not everything.... LA may not be as dense as Chicago, but it the city isn't really some sprawl fest. Especially the west side going towards Century City. The entire city of LA is basically a grid, while Chicago isn't. That, and LA's urban area is a lot more dense than Chicago's: USA Urbanized Areas: 2000 Ranked by Population(465 Areas)
Excuse me? The entire city of Chicago isn't a grid? Well, I suppose there's about 1% of the city which doesn't conform to the grid system if you count the rivers.
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.
