American City most similar to NYC (New York, Hyde Park: city hall, home, neighborhoods)

[erin3465]

People always said it was Chicago, but when I finally got to Chicago, it felt nothing like NYC to me (besides the amount of skyscrapers).

For one, Chicago is really not that walkable on the whole, and there are parts where it almost feels like an NYC inner-ring suburb. Also, there arent that many areas that have that much foot traffic, it just doesnt feel that vibrant. And the people arent nearly as diverse or interesting.

If anything, despite endless differences I'd have to say (parts of) San Francisco are as close to the NYC "feel" as Ive seen in this country. The Market Street/Powell Street BART station area is very dense and bustling and somehow reminded me of parts of Manhattan. Also, despite the hills, it felt very dense and walkable, with lots of distinct neighborhoods in the same way that NYC has. The part of town with the Mission/Haight/Church Street/Marina/Fillmore neighborhoods all connected is the only part of a US city that has that conitguous walking neighborhood after walking neighborhood feel like NYC does (I guess downtown SF has several neighborhoods like that too, but the hills there make it more of a workout!). Also, lots of interesting people in SF, very diverse, etc...

Of course, overall NYC just dominates every other city in the country in terms of urban vibrancy, etc...IMO, parts of SF are as close as you can get, but still not really close at all.

Anyways, I live in Denver (for now) so I enjoy talking about cities that are actually urban...

[analyticalkeys]

Most people will say SF is the closest you'll find, and once you've been in both cities for a good amount of time, you'll realize that neither are similar to each other at all.

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by erin3465

For one, Chicago is really not that walkable on the whole, and there are parts where it almost feels like an NYC inner-ring suburb. Also, there arent that many areas that have that much foot traffic, it just doesnt feel that vibrant. And the people arent nearly as diverse or interesting.

I'm a life long Chicagoan and I can't imagine anyone not finding a vibrant street life in many, many parts of Chicago. Virtually the entire North Side lakefront is made of incredibly dense, charming, and walkable neighborhoods. That vibrancy extends inland to places like Wicker Park and Buckdown.

Gentrified Chicago also spreads through the near west and near south sides. South, it is filling in between McCormick Place and delightfully urban Hyde Park. And that doesn't even cover the center of it all, that burgening core that extends from North Avenue on the north to McCormick Place on the south and out into the near west side heading out to the United Center. We're talking the Loop, River North, the Mag Mile, Streterville, the Gold Coast, Printers Row and all those other fabulous downtown neighborhoods.

No, New York doesn't feel like Chicago. Or San Francisco. Then again, neither Chicago nor San Francisco feel like New York. So what? They are three great cities in a nation that is losing its power and domination of the world as they play in an international, global arena far removed from the provincial attitudes of the United States that not only builds a hierachy on our own cities, but spikes their importance for just being part of the United States of America. America will not command the 21st century. And don't for a minute think that won't effect the dominance of any US city...be that New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Washington or the very Chicago which at this moment is going up against some very stiff global competition for the 2016 Olympics in a world that hardly sees the US today in the way it saw us during that dominant half century after WWII.

It's not the 20th century, folks. Our playground is global, not national. And no city anywhere on the globe will be "A number one, top of the heap", the end all to be all. The 20th century was the American Century. One could easily say it was the New York century. The coming of age of this great city was a monumental tale of those 100 years so recently passed. But it might be sobering to New Yorkers to consider in this ever-changing world that a short 100 years ago from this very day, a mere blip in time, New York would hardly have been considered one of the world's greatest cities.

Things change. Sobering for New York, as noted. But for Chicago and San Francisco and the rest, as well. Being too full of ourselves is a danger we all face.

So the real answer to which US city is most like NY? None. It's unique. So are Chicago and San Francisco and so many others. It isn't a matter of "better than" as much as it is about "enjoy what you are".

For New Yorkers, that should be the easiest of tasks: they is so much to enjoy and to be proud of and happily none of it really relates to how you compare or if you are better than any other city.

No, my issue here is hardy New York vs. Chicago. New York is fabulous on every level and I love it. And if you as a New Yorker doesn't feel that way about Chicago, I'm comfortable enough about the Windy City that that's fine with me, too; neither I nor Chicago seek validation here. Point is, we in Chicago respect your city and recognize its greatness without being the least bit in awe of it. That's because we are very secure in the pure urban joy and greatness that is Chicago. I have never, ever returned home from an enjoyable trip to the great city of New York and felt I was returning to a lesser city.

Chicago is unique. As are New York and San Francisco. The three of them are models of urban vibrancy, great density, incredible street life. They don't compete, but complement each other. I would never fault any New Yorker who thinks that the epitomy of urban joy is that soaring omnipresence of that island of Manhattan towering over the rivers that surround it and beckoning all to its Oz like draw. And who could argue with the urban charms of hilly, quaint San Francisco. But there are many of us, in town and out, who are drawn from that musular city rising above the lakefront parks and beaches with a special urban draw all of its own.

[clevedark]

Los Angeles, except for the weather, architecture and geography. Now how do you like that! I still think it's true, though, they're both huge, international, obsessed with style and career.

[johntremaine]

what about philly? I noticed some similaries...

[passdoubt]

Midtown feels like Chicago.

The Village/downtown feels like San Francisco.

Upper Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn feel like Philly.

[bkhakis]

Well put !

[DesiArnez6]

Originally Posted by johntremaine

what about philly? I noticed some similaries...

Yep, thats what I was about to say. I'd say Philadelphia is probably most similar, or certainly at the top.

[bronx_kidd]

SF

a lot of people walking around downtown

however they are two different cities...NYC could never match up with SF's sweeping views,beauty,weather, etc however nothing touches NYC's urban vibrancy so its a tossup

[7 Wishes]

I think New York is unique just because of it's sheer size and density. But I have pondered this question for a long time, so here are my thoughts in order of most to least similar (though none are that similar):

Chicago - Probably the only other one to even come remotely close in having the combination of the skyline, density, and sheer urban sprawl

Philadelphia - More like the outer boroughs than Chicago, but needs a bit more sprawl to be as similar to NY as Chicago is (there are farms in NJ where you can easily see the skyline), skyline was lacking too until they removed the "no building higher than City Hall" 548 ft. limit in the 90s, but skyline is growing fast and in 10 years I may say it's more similar to NY than Chicago is. Ironically some people (not natives from Philly of course, who are probably insulted by this) jokingly call Philly "the 6th boro" because of many NYers moving down there in the 90s and early 2000s for cheaper housing and a "supercommute".

San Francisco - Has the skyline, the neighborhoods and some of the sprawl, but the city itself is smaller in physical size than the Bronx.

Boston - In terms of skyline, sprawl, and "neighborhoodiness", it's a NY in minature to me. If it were bigger in sheer size, it could probably compete with Chicago or Philly for the title.


HONORABLE MENTION:

Los Angeles - Lacks the skyline (though that's changing) and just seems like the NYC area without the city itself for some reason. Or as I once joked "squash Manhattan and watch it all spread out, add some mountains and palm trees and you've got L.A.".

Miami - Growing skyline, lots of sprawl, ethnic diversity, but city itself too small physically to have that "neighborhood" feel.