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.
In my mind, although must of Boston is not on a grid system, one thing that Boston and Philadelphia really share like no other two cities is the sheer amount of tight-knit, colonial-era, human scaled neighborhoods. Obviously you have different types of architecture in Boston vs. Philadelphia (much more single-family "triple decker" housing in Boston, vs. plethora of row housing in Philly). However, the colonial-era/European-inspired influences in both cities are striking to the extent that many neighborhoods throughout both metro areas have very similar types of feel and charm.
What's confusing? I just like the way the look and layout (not street layout as in maze like) but layout of how their shops look, etc. But they don't look alike. They are both very dense, but I don't think they look that much alike. In some small instances maybe. But I don't even see that. So basically, I just like the way Boston looks more. What's so confusing about that? It's no disrespect to Philly either. I like Philly alot, even some of their gritty areas have a gritty charm (think South Philly). But I'm not to big on their rowhome structures in many of their neighborhoods. I don't mind some rowhomes. I just never saw that much appeal from Philly. And actually I have been to Philly more times than I can count, so I'm strictly judging on personal taste. . I like Brownstones like the ones in NYC better better than the rowhomes in Philly too. I also like the design of the buildings in Boston better. It's just personal preferrence. That's what the OP is asking for.
Last edited by supermanpansy; 08-15-2011 at 02:59 PM..
I think Philly and Boston are both tied for 2nd in the Northeast behind NYC. But really, I think this is a very silly debate. Philadelphia and Boston are both great cities, and I don't think anyone (as far as I can see) can make a convincing argument for one being higher than the other. Both cities are on the same level.
I think Boston's economy is stronger than Philly's. But then again those Philly cheese steaks are to die for. But Boston's colleges are top notch. I would say boston
I think Boston's economy is stronger than Philly's. But then again those Philly cheese steaks are to die for. But Boston's colleges are top notch. I would say boston
On economy that really depends. Philly as a city/MSA has a larger economy but Boston per capita is better, on CSA Boston is larger. Both are high on income generated, again Philly bigger on city/MSA Boston per cap and on CSA. Their unemployment rates are comparable, though Philly in the city is far worse but on metro overall very similar. Both economies would index better than national on just about every metric. Philly has slightly more diverse economy. Both have excelent educational institutions, though one would give the edge to boston.
As someone said recently, I am not sure there is clear cut choice. Both offer a ton on many many levels.
What's confusing? I just like the way the look and layout (not street layout as in maze like) but layout of how their shops look, etc. But they don't look alike. They are both very dense, but I don't think they look that much alike. In some small instances maybe. But I don't even see that. So basically, I just like the way Boston looks more. What's so confusing about that? It's no disrespect to Philly either. I like Philly alot, even some of their gritty areas have a gritty charm (think South Philly). But I'm not to big on their rowhome structures in many of their neighborhoods. I don't mind some rowhomes. I just never saw that much appeal from Philly. And actually I have been to Philly more times than I can count, so I'm strictly judging on personal taste. I like Brownstones like the ones in NYC better better than the rowhomes in Philly too. I also like the design of the buildings in Boston better. It's just personal preferrence. That's what the OP is asking for.
Sorry, I guess I could have elaborated more. Philly actually have a massive variety of rowhomes, so it's not like one neighborhood of rowhomes really speaks to the design of others, but I certainly respect your opinion (Philly, too, has a number of brownstones, though it obviously pales in comparison to the number in New York).
Overall, though, I was just confused because I see some pretty striking similarities between Philadelphia and Boston in terms of architectural heritage and development throughout different eras (colonial era to the industrial era), particularly comparing Center City architecture to the areas of Beacon Hill and Back Bay. That's all I was getting at.
Philadelphia. Both are big cities but more people live in Philadelphia and it has a bigger economy. And it's more important.
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.
