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.
Both cities have a waterfront, but you know what Chicago doesn't have? The Palisades. That was one of the most surprising and outstanding features during my first visit to NYC. I had no idea that even parts of Manhattan were rugged.
Both cities have a waterfront, but you know what Chicago doesn't have? The Palisades. That was one of the most surprising and outstanding features during my first visit to NYC. I had no idea that even parts of Manhattan were rugged.
New England is very rugged (coastline). NYC an extension of that
I actually liked certain parts of Beijing, but really that wasn't my point. How about this one - I like San Francisco more than LA. Point is that when you are visiting somewhere, size only matters to a certain extent. Okay great, city X has 20 more Vietnamese options than City Y, but guess what? You aren't going to get through those in a 3-7 day visit anyway, so it doesn't matter. If anything, quality at that point matters more. Size is such a crap indicator of "which city is better ____" when you're dealing with two cities of ample size, especially when you're just going on a short visit.
The biggest differentiator between NY and Chicago is not size but density. Manhattan has a density of 72k psm over 23 sq miles. The densest contiguous 23 sq miles in Chicago, fanning north and northwest from the Loop, yield a density of about 28k psm (after excluding the large parks).
The entire borough of Brooklyn, pop 2.6m, registers a higher average pop density than the densest community areas of Chicago.
Chicago's density profile is closer (both in absolute and % terms) to much smaller cities like Boston, Philadelphia, and DC than it is to NY.
The reasons people like to compare NY and Chicago are because (1) Chicago is America's traditional "Second City" and has the second largest business district, (2) like NY, Chicago has a spectacular skyline and (3) most visitors do not venture outside of a 2-3 sq mile area surrounding the Loop.
If someone spent a few days outside of Downtown Chicago, even in Chicago's densest Northside neighborhoods, they would be permanently disabused of the notion that Chicago and NY share a lot of similarities.
None of this is to imply that one is objectively "better" or preferable to the other, as that is a question of personal preference.
The biggest differentiator between NY and Chicago is not size but density. Manhattan has a density of 72k psm over 23 sq miles. The densest contiguous 23 sq miles in Chicago, fanning north and northwest from the Loop, yield a density of about 28k psm (after excluding the large parks).
The entire borough of Brooklyn, pop 2.6m, registers a higher average pop density than the densest community areas of Chicago.
Chicago's density profile is closer (both in absolute and % terms) to much smaller cities like Boston, Philadelphia, and DC than it is to NY.
The reasons people like to compare NY and Chicago are because (1) Chicago is America's traditional "Second City" and has the second largest business district, (2) like NY, Chicago has a spectacular skyline and (3) most visitors do not venture outside of a 2-3 sq mile area surrounding the Loop.
If someone spent a few days outside of Downtown Chicago, even in Chicago's densest Northside neighborhoods, they would be permanently disabused of the notion that Chicago and NY share a lot of similarities.
None of this is to imply that one is objectively "better" or preferable to the other, as that is a question of personal preference.
You seem to have this weird fixation with density, especially when it comes to Chicago. Period Chicago mandated that alleys be built on every street, and that buildings be detached. That was a knee-jerk reaction to a fire that destroyed most of the city. In terms of lived experience, Chicago is more similar to New York than any other city in the country.
You seem to have this weird fixation with density, especially when it comes to Chicago. Period Chicago mandated that alleys be built on every street, and that buildings be detached. That was a knee-jerk reaction to a fire that destroyed most of the city. In terms of lived experience, Chicago is more similar to New York than any other city in the country.
I don't know why you are continuing to bait me into this debate.
You seem to think that population density is just a number in a vacuum that has no correlation to any other urban characteristics.
You think that Lincoln Park, a neighborhood of detached townhouses and front yards, represents "peak urbanity".
It is obvious that there is a profound difference between how you and I perceive and experience urbanity. So there is really no point in continuing to go around in circles on this.
You seem to have this weird fixation with density, especially when it comes to Chicago. Period Chicago mandated that alleys be built on every street, and that buildings be detached. That was a knee-jerk reaction to a fire that destroyed most of the city. In terms of lived experience, Chicago is more similar to New York than any other city in the country.
On the other thread it was all "Chicago is unique and gives an experience completely different from NYC" now it becomes "Chicago is the most similar city to NYC in the country."
On the other thread it was all "Chicago is unique and gives an experience completely different from NYC" now it becomes "Chicago is the most similar city to NYC in the country."
NYC is unique, but Chicago is most similar. Both can be true.
Of course it is, you know this. Chicago and NYC each offer its tourists unique experiences and opportunities that simply can’t be replicated in the other city, unless you’re just looking at getting a fancy meal way high up with a commanding view and checking out a museum. Why can’t we just leave it at that?
This poster gets it. Kudos to you!
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
It’s pretty easy to like almost any city over Beijing, tbqh.
I’d also like for Chicago to bulk up quite a bit. Another million in city limits would be good with enough attendant infrastructure.
That would be nice, but sadly I'm not holding my breath it'll happen. Save for maybe a few corporate executive job relocations to this area due to more companies moving their corporate offices to the Chicago area, the only way a lot of declined population city neighborhoods(i.e. Lawndale, Roseland, Englewood, Grand Crossing) and places just outside of Chicago(i.e. Gary, IN(though I do like its Miller neighborhood), Harvey, Maywood) to come back would be reinvestment in them again. With most factory jobs already evaporated away in the past few decades, I doubt that'll occur. Back in October of this year during Open House Chicago(an architectural open house throughout the Chicago area), I had a sad reminder of this trend when I toured the former Schulze Baking Company bread plant on 55th Street east of I-90/94, and west of the still nice Hyde Park neighborhood. The new owner of Schulze is trying to renovate the building from a bread baking plant that used to employ 1500 people at its peak into a data and cloud computing center, and hopefully his dream to renovate the building into that will happen. It needs a little renovation work for that to occur, and hopefully it occurs in the future. Also since I have urbexed abandoned buildings in various places, I have seen former factories elsewhere in worse shape than Schulze. Once the water leaks in the former truck loading area are fixed, I don't think renovating this building will be a problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunion Powder
Both cities have a waterfront, but you know what Chicago doesn't have? The Palisades. That was one of the most surprising and outstanding features during my first visit to NYC. I had no idea that even parts of Manhattan were rugged.
Good for you guys. We have cool scenic places outside the Chicago area too, such as Starved Rock State Park, Matthiessen(sp?) State Park, Mississippi Palisades State Park(this one is underrated IMO), any of the dunes state and national parks on Lake Michigan east of Chicago(i.e. Indiana Dunes, Warren Dunes), Galena, IL, to name just a few examples. And of course, scenic areas are a dime a dozen in nearby states like Michigan and Wisconsin. Even northeast Iowa(don't forget to stop in Dubuque and also Dyersville for the Field of Dreams movie filming site, if you head that way), southwest Minnesota and southeast Minnesota are nice and hilly as well, and IMO those 3 parts are hidden gems to drive to and check out. Check out google street view for yourself, and you'll see how darned scenic US Highway 61, and Wisconsin Highway 35 paralleling the Mississippi River are to drive on. Also some nice small cities and towns in that area, such as La Crosse, WI, Red Wing, MN, and Prairie du Chien, WI. I can't forget to mention nice cities and towns that aren't right along the Mississippi River, such as Rochester, MN, Decorah, IA, Monroe, WI, and Savanna, IL.
I think a certain few C-D posters overestimate in their heads that Chicagoians and NYC residents obsess about the various differences between the 2 places. Honestly, I do NOT think much about those differences at all, and I live in Chicago! Have been to NYC twice, and it is just more dense, more populated(dunno by how much, and the exact times(2X, 2.5X?) bigger NYC is doesn't matter to me), and obviously more diverse than Chicago. Besides the fact NYC does do some foods better or differently than Chicago, such as bagels, thin crust pizza(though Chicago does have numerous decent thin crust pizza places too that the media greatly underreports about, so this is more like a draw), and egg cream drinks. I don't believe I've seen egg cream drinks anywhere in Chicago, and if I'm wrong Chicagoians and at least 1 or 2 places exist here serving this(dunno, maybe Eleven City Diner? hadn't eaten there and also looked at their menu online, and did not spot this on their menu unless I missed it somehow), let me know in a thread response. Since I'd like to see how their versions compare, if any local places serving an egg cream drink exist in Chicago. Just like how we do certain things better or differently than NYC, such as hot dogs, deep dish pizza(and don't be afraid to try it if you visit, though I'd steer clear of Giordano's and go to Lou Malnati's or any of the other deep dish restaurants), and Italian Beef sandwiches. And *GASP*, we even have good thin crust pizza places worth trying here too if by some chance you don't go for deep dish, such as Piece Pizzeria(good beer they brew on their own too), Vito and Nick's(of Diners, Drive-Ins, and Dives fame), Candlelite(not nationally famous, but it's only a short trip from Evanston, IL on the Chicago side of the border if you're that far north, on Western(called Asbury in Evanston) south of Howard), to name just a few of many such places that exist.
I applaud all the posters in this thread that respect the differences between Chicago and NYC, such as Bluefox. And IMO, both are worth visiting. I understand why if a foreign visitor has little time to go to the US, and knowing how spread apart US cities are, why they'll prioritize seeing NYC over Chicago.
Last edited by SonySegaTendo617; 11-20-2017 at 11:05 AM..
NYC is unique, but Chicago is most similar. Both can be true.
That’s an opinion! I don’t share it but it doesn’t really matter. I don’t know about everyone else but I would love to meet some of the keyboard warriors here in person.
Simply, based only on museums, NYC visit is a gem that is wholly different. If you're a fan, just seeing the one-of-a-kind paintings at the Met is worth a trip...or MoMA, or the Frick Gallery etc.
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.
We have cool scenic places outside the Chicago area too, such as Starved Rock State Park, Matthiessen(sp?) State Park, Mississippi Palisades State Park(this one is underrated IMO), any of the dunes state and national parks on Lake Michigan east of Chicago(i.e. Indiana Dunes, Warren Dunes), Galena, IL, to name just a few examples. And of course, scenic areas are a dime a dozen in nearby states like Michigan and Wisconsin. Even northeast Iowa(don't forget to stop in Dubuque and also Dyersville for the Field of Dreams movie filming site, if you head that way), southwest Minnesota and southeast Minnesota are nice and hilly as well, and IMO those 3 parts are hidden gems to drive to and check out. Check out google street view for yourself, and you'll see how darned scenic US Highway 61, and Wisconsin Highway 35 paralleling the Mississippi River are to drive on. Also some nice small cities and towns in that area, such as La Crosse, WI, Red Wing, MN, and Prairie du Chien, WI. I can't forget to mention nice cities and towns that aren't right along the Mississippi River, such as Rochester, MN, Decorah, IA, Monroe, WI, and Savanna, IL.
