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.
NYC is and always has had a very "lived in" look. It's the very epitome of shabby chic. It would not be the same if it were immaculate. I think I preferred 42nd St before they cleaned it up.
Quote:
Say what you like about Bloomberg, but he was clearly the better mayor compared to the current incumbent.
London is investing into sparkling new pavements and infrastructure, along with a panorama of new construction zones. All the DDIs in NYC seem to go into building those absurdly ugly, skinny skyscrapers which look like industrial chimneys from a distance.
NYC is and always has had a very "lived in" look. It's the very epitome of shabby chic. It would not be the same if it were immaculate. I think I preferred 42nd St before they cleaned it up.
Central London and parts of Central New York share some development patterns that are similar (width of sidewalks, width of arteries, wall-to-wall build, dual CBDs, boroughs, so on and so forth).
Wall-to-wall build is a feature the centre of any city deserving of that name in the traditional sense.
I think Flatiron, parts of BPC, and the Museum Mile/Central Park east would be the best areas of Manhattan to compare with Central London in terms of aesthetics and level of cleanliness. That is bearing in mind Central London has far better roads and sidewalks.
I think Flatiron, parts of BPC, and the Museum Mile/Central Park east would be the best areas of Manhattan to compare with Central London in terms of aesthetics and level of cleanliness. That is bearing in mind Central London has far better roads and sidewalks.
Yes!
The Flatiron District was the place that I had in mind when I made the wall-to-wall statement. I agree with your post completely.
The Flatiron District was the place that I had in mind when I made the wall-to-wall statement. I agree with your post completely.
The Flatiron is exquisite beyond words, but I don't see it as very London.
If you want an American city that is reminiscent of prosaic, residential London then Baltimore is the place. Also similar to many northern UK cities, with its rowhouses.
I've never been, but am planning a holiday next late-summer. Fly to BWI, train to DC for 3 night, then Baltimore 3 nights, then Philly, and a week in NYC (need my fix). Fly to Chicago for 3 nights and back home.
The Flatiron is exquisite beyond words, but I don't see it as very London.
If you want an American city that is reminiscent of prosaic, residential London then Baltimore is the place. Also similar to many northern UK cities, with its rowhouses.
I've never been, but am planning a holiday next late-summer. Fly to BWI, train to DC for 3 night, then Baltimore 3 nights, then Philly, and a week in NYC (need my fix). Fly to Chicago for 3 nights and back home.
Hey, just let us know when you are going to get here. I'm pretty sure some Baltimore Forum folks will show you around (the good, the bad, and the ugly.) At least I will.
London prosaic and residential? Maybe in the 1980s.
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.
