Does Chicago feel like the third largest city? (Addison, Lincoln: neighborhood, to live)

[Drover]

Dude... go away.

[quigboto]

Originally Posted by durf

Paytonc, you didn't like downtown SJ? Why would you be there on a Sunday? Even Sunday is pretty good in Downtown SJ with Bijan Bakery, Original Joes and others opened. Didn't you go to the coolest hangout places like the Clubhouse with tons of chics hanging out on an afternoon? How about San Jose Bar and Grill? The Tech Museum and Martin Luther King are great hangouts for Sunday in Dt. SJ and so are the movie theaters and comedy clubs. It's such a nice walk and decent people watching. Paytonc, are you bluffing? What about these places I mentioned. My favorite is Tanq bar at the Marriott's where you see cool people. Oh what a nice Sunday afternoon in Dt. San Jose? I miss that.

Wait. Your favorite is a hotel bar?

Fail.

[Alacran]

There's people from Albuquerque repping me with insults about how ABQ is prettier, better weather, and less crime.

I think we found out who votes on these polls.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by Attrill

Chicago feels like the second largest city - mostly because it has all of the traditional urban characteristics:

1 - Skyscrapers. Chicago is obviously second to NYC, but has twice as many highrises as the next closest city (LA).
2 - Public Transit. Chicago is one of the few cities to have an old school heavy rail system, and once again it is second only to NYC in just about every measurement (ridership, miles of track, etc.). You can easily live without a car in much of Chicago.
3 - Population density. This basically follows having a comprehensive transit system, and Chicago is in the same league as the other US cities with transit (San Fran, Boston, etc.).

Those are the main criteria that I see for a city "feeling" big, or even being considered an urban city really.

First off: Does Chicago really have more skyscrapers than LA? Or are LAs skyscrapers simply spread across the entire city proper. You have to county everything including Wilshire/Miracle Mile, Century city, North Hollywood-Universal City, Westwood, etc., etc. There are MANY small skylines scattered across the city.

What about European cities, whose historic core areas, really don't have skyscrapers. Parises skyscrapers are built on the edge of the city. Does that make Paris less of a city?

LA is about 8,000 people per square mile. And that includes large areas of steep terrain in the Santa Monica Mountains, etc. where no on lives and is parkland. The San Fernando Valley is pretty suburban, but if you subtract the steeper, rugged terrain that is either parks, or can only have single family homes built on, and the San Fernando Valley, which most Angelinos consider to be suburban, then the density is about the same. People simply associate LA with the mansions of movie stars.

Most of the city is way denser and more urban than that.

[tomcho]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

First off: Does Chicago really have more skyscrapers than LA?

High-rises...yes more than twice as many.

•
New York City2,716 •
Toronto2,162 •
Chicago1,193 •
Shanghai1,052 •
Hong Kong737 •
Mexico711 •
Vancouver700 •
Montreal647 •
Los Angeles581 •
London570

[quigboto]

This thread has durfed.

[tonythetuna]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

First off: Does Chicago really have more skyscrapers than LA?

I can't believe you are seriously asking that question.

[tonythetuna]

Originally Posted by quigboto

This thread has durfed.

Or better yet, "been durfed."

[mas23]

durf is the same person who said San Jose has a better downtown than Manhattan. And I'll leave it at that...
mas23

[chikid]

Seriously guys, STOP FEEDING THE TROLL. He/She/It is getting exactly what it wants from you, to annoy you. Just ignore durf and will go away.

I have been to L.A., Chicago and New York so I think I might have a pretty good opinion on this. I think when it comes to Chicago, you do feel like you are in the second largest city in the country when in downtown. However, outside of that, L.A. to me felt bigger.