Will Chicago feel like a worldly, cosmopolitain city coming from San Francisco? (Madison: organic, to live)

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by Aleking

Sounds to me like he's going to hate it. Chicago is super socially conservative compared to SF or Europe and the places that aren't are overrun with hipsters. Andersonville might work, progressive, gay friendly and not too hipster.


EDIT: also funny when people on shoestring housing budgets inclued chic/sylish lounges and bars as their interests.

Apparently one poster here already gave himself as an example of this.

One can still pull out chic/stylish lounges on a budget if they do it carefully.

[aragx6]

You'll be just fine. You should come for a visit, but River North, Old Town and Lincoln Park will be right up your ally -- urban, dense, walkable, progressive.

In regards to rent, at $850 you won't be living the high life alone, though you can definitely get a studio in Lincoln Park for that amount, but if you were in a similar situation with 2 roommates, $2,550 would get you a nice 3BR rental in most any neighborhood.

[ChikidII]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

Except for the fac that that "real city" feel where one can live without a car in a very densely populated neighborhood is much more widespread across the metropolitan area of New York (basically everywhere except Staten Island) and extending well into New Jersey.

Whereas Chicago its basically area code 312, and a narros strip along the north lakefront extending about a half mile or so. Chicago definitely offers this, but unlike New York City, it is less representative and reflective of the lifestyle of the metro area, or even significant parts of the city.

San Francisco is also dense and transit oriented, but being a smaller city, one can characterize that city as being like that throughout all of San Francisco.

Agreed on some stuff. The closer to the core the more it will have that urban, cosmopolitan feel too it. However, I disagree about 312 being the only areas along with the lakshore that feels like a city. I live in Avondale and have for 25 years without a car and I get around just fine, it's very diverse with a pretty good urban feeling.

Yes places like Portage Park, Hyde Park, and similar further out neighborhoods, it loses that city feel to it. However, the majority of the northside is pretty built up and pretty urban.

[ChikidII]

Originally Posted by Aleking

Sounds to me like he's going to hate it. Chicago is super socially conservative compared to SF or Europe and the places that aren't are overrun with hipsters. Andersonville might work, progressive, gay friendly and not too hipster.


EDIT: also funny when people on shoestring housing budgets inclued chic/sylish lounges and bars as their interests.

Give me a break. SF and Europe might be much more liberal than Chicago, but Chicago by no means is conservative or do most people have that impression. I am not saying it is liberal but it's not conservative at all.

[aragx6]

Originally Posted by ChikidII

Give me a break. SF and Europe might be much more liberal than Chicago, but Chicago by no means is conservative or do most people have that impression. I am not saying it is liberal but it's not conservative at all.

This. Seriously.

[destroycreate]

Originally Posted by FAReastcoast

$850 budget alone is tough, but with roomates it is doable.

I was saying that $850 is what a pay for a ROOM, not the apartment. I'm willing to live with roommates - my apartment is $2000 with a roommate currently in SF...and it's really ugly and old. I suspect I could get better for $850 in Chicago with roommates - not expecting my own place.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by ChikidII

Agreed on some stuff. The closer to the core the more it will have that urban, cosmopolitan feel too it. However, I disagree about 312 being the only areas along with the lakshore that feels like a city. I live in Avondale and have for 25 years without a car and I get around just fine, it's very diverse with a pretty good urban feeling.

Yes places like Portage Park, Hyde Park, and similar further out neighborhoods, it loses that city feel to it. However, the majority of the northside is pretty built up and pretty urban.

I was suggesting that 312 and along the lakeshore is the area that would feel like NYC or San Fran. The rest of the city is urban, but in a way that Cleveland, or Pittsburgh, etc. is urban. (I use those examples as those cities have/had major Polish enclaves, whereas say STL never did.

I agree that Avondale is urban and diverse, but it is urban in a way that Queens, NY is urban. Or maybe a more bustling version of the more diverse neighborhoods in other midwestern cities. Kind of like Hamtramck, MI with public transit.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by destroycreate

I was saying that $850 is what a pay for a ROOM, not the apartment. I'm willing to live with roommates - my apartment is $2000 with a roommate currently in SF...and it's really ugly and old. I suspect I could get better for $850 in Chicago with roommates - not expecting my own place.

That will be plenty with a roommate in most of the nice urban areas of Chicago.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by ChikidII

Give me a break. SF and Europe might be much more liberal than Chicago, but Chicago by no means is conservative or do most people have that impression. I am not saying it is liberal but it's not conservative at all.

There is a unique style of Chicago/midwest liberalism. that is different from liberalism in California or New York.

People are very open minded, progressive and tolerant, yet there is a much stronger sense of what is considered "normal" in Chicago and other liberal enclaves in the midwest (Minneapolis, Madison, Ann Arbor, etc, other hipster artsy hoods in STL, Cincy, Cleve, Det., etc.) than what is found on the coasts.

[aragx6]

^It's important to not take that as his way of saying that by being gay you won't be considered normal. I don't think that's what he meant, but I do know it's not true. You will not feel out of place as a gay man or woman here.