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.
It may damn well be DC, considering it is the capital of this country and a big, cosmopolitan city. I loved DC when I visited but I like Chicago and its personality better, but that's just my biased opinion.
In terms of just downtown, you have to go with Chicago - downtown DC is no slouch, but in another 10 years downtown DC will be dramatically different with the tons of development that is currently going on and planned.
However, in terms of the entire metro area, I got to go with DC metro. You can't beat the DC metro location - within a days drive you have access to many large east coast cities..NYC for example..beaches, mountains, many recreational activities, milder winters, and so on.
Even though I like the DC metro area better, I still would have to give a slight edge to Chicago metro because of it's awesome downtown.
I honestly don't know here. DC has so many cool suburbs with their own mini skylines and cores, while Chicagoland is largely dependent on its city. However, Schaumburg, IL does have a small skyline and a large mall, but that's the only one, while DC has multiple places like this and even more impressive too (Silver Springs).
not sure... dc metro is a more suburban oriented metro in comparison to chicago. chicago is 3 million people of the metro, dc is 600k.
dc to me doesn't have the big city feel . chicago's north side core and surrounding is 1.35 Million@ over 20K density in a 65 mile footprint comparable to DC. And this are is much more packed with amenities. The only thing I would give in DC favor is monuments and museums.
I really don't care for the suburbs in either city, so for me, Chicago.
not sure... dc metro is a more suburban oriented metro in comparison to chicago. chicago is 3 million people of the metro, dc is 600k.
dc to me doesn't have the big city feel . chicago's north side core and surrounding is 1.35 Million@ over 20K density in a 65 mile footprint comparable to DC.
I really don't care for the suburbs in either city, so for me, Chicago.
I guess you can look at it that way.
No matter how anyone looks at it, Chicagoland is just gonna end up being much, much larger in every sense. DC may have more impressive suburbs, but that is a really irrelevant statement because the metros are not even close in size to begin with.
As far as amenities go, I'd have to give it to Chicago. The restaurants, nightlife, urban neighborhoods, shopping etc are more plentiful and probably better in Chicago. DC metro may have more employment per capita, but not necessarily implying that amenities there are any better than those in Chicago, let alone all of Chicagoland.
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.
