Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-12-2013, 11:45 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,078 posts, read 15,846,871 times
Reputation: 4049

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by tmac9wr View Post
I'm not saying they're not accessible, but they're far larger. For example, the Wiki of Lakeview said it was 3.16 sq miles, while the Lincoln Park Wiki says it's 3.19 square miles. In that 6.35 square miles, you can fit Back Bay, Beacon Hill, the South End, Boston Common, the theater district, Chinatown and probably the North End and Downtown Boston haha. Those are 7+ neighborhoods, each with their own vibe and unique set of architecture.

There's no doubt Chicago is well-connected, but in this case Boston's smaller footprint/neighborhoods give better pedestrian access than larger areas like Chitown.
Yeah - there is a downside of that accessibility, and that is that the central urban parts of Boston are just not that large. It doesn't offer itself up to "endless exploration" the way vast cities like Chicago do.

I would imagine that going between neighborhoods in Chicago would be an "El-based" affair, while in Boston it is more on foot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-12-2013, 11:52 AM
 
Location: Denver
6,625 posts, read 14,452,056 times
Reputation: 4201
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
Yeah - there is a downside of that accessibility, and that is that the central urban parts of Boston are just not that large. It doesn't offer itself up to "endless exploration" the way vast cities like Chicago do.

I would imagine that going between neighborhoods in Chicago would be an "El-based" affair, while in Boston it is more on foot.
I would definitely agree with that...which is why Boston is "America's Walking City" haha. Both sides have their advantages. SF, Boston and DC offer a lot in a little area, which boosts access. Chicago, LA, and NYC offer a lot over a lot of area...which makes it tougher to navigate by foot, but can give you more places to explore (as you alluded to).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top