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.
Chicago, to me, feels nothing like NYC. They have totally different feels.
The closest thing to a "mini NYC" in the U.S. would be Philly, or maybe Boston. The East Coast cities have some similarities.
Even SF feels more similar to NYC than Chicago. They both have the tight grid, narrow streets, very little parking, etc.
But the Midwest cities were built in a later era, with wider streets, different architecture, bungalow belts, and the like. I never got a NYC feel in Chicago.
Also, no offense to whomever created that spreadsheet, but what a simple-minded comparison devoid of all nuance.
The cities are similar because they have skyscrapers, transit, big parks, and four seasons? Gee, and so does Cleveland. I guess Cleveland is a mini NYC.
In reality, these aren't similarities. They're inherent to most major cities. If you actually look at the details, you see that NYC and Chicago don't have similar skyscraper profiles or skyscraper counts, they don't have similar transit orientation, they don't have similar park systems, etc. They're quite different. Just saying "Well there's a train in NYC and there's a train in Chicago so they're similar" is a tad ridiculous. One city is overwhelmingly transit oriented, with most households lacking cars, while the other has more two-car households than no car households. One city has something crazy like 15 times the daily passenger counts of the other city. You can probably guess which city is which.
Even SF feels more similar to NYC than Chicago. They both have the tight grid, narrow streets, very little parking, etc.
But the Midwest cities were built in a later era, with wider streets, different architecture, bungalow belts, and the like. I never got a NYC feel in Chicago.
San Francisco wasn't built any earlier than Chicago; its streets also tend to be a bit wider than Philadelphia and Boston. I still agree Chicago feels more different from San Francisco in city style, though not in scale.
Aren't you kind of contradicting yourself? You say that Chicago and Manhattan are far apart (I agree) but then say Chicago is more similar to Seattle? What the? Seattle and Chicago have just as a big of a gap as does NYC and Chicago in regards to their downtowns. While I agree NYC is in a league of it's own, the only downtown that I think can compare to Chicago is possibly SF. NYC is in it's own league. Then Chicago in the next league down with possibly SF being the only other city with it there, then Seattle in the third one down with cities like Philly, Boston, etc.
No you are right, that is exactly what I'm saying and why I made the comparison, though I think the gap is slightly larger with Chicago to NYC. So say, if NYC was 3:1 over Chicago, Chicago would be 2.75:1 over Seattle if you were to start bringing out #'s...but for the sake of it, both about a 3:1 difference.
The thing they have most in common is nice skylines and number of super talls.
Highrises still make a massive difference in how large a city feels. Manhattan still feels very large even when you're in Upper East or Westsides where those aren't skyscraper, but they are still highrises nonetheless.
I disagree, I think Philadelphia more closely resembles a "mini New York" more than Chicago does. East Coast intangibles are a factor here. Chicago feels, acts and looks decidedly Midwestern.
Philadelphia does have many similarities to NYC, and in fact is often referred to as the 6th Borough. But when compared to only Manhattan, Chicago has more similarities, than Philadelphia, or any other city in the world. (see attachment in the beginning of this post) Specifically to relating to Philidelphia, it does not have the skyscrapers, world influence, nor the dynamics as does Chicago's downtown.
Regarding Midwestern comment....
I feel that that is a convenient label (regardless if used for good or bad) often placed on Chicago to quickly sum it up and shut it up.....
I think that "Midwestern characteristics" can apply to small towns.
Once you hit a big cities, the characteristics associated with any big city, overrides and regional characteristics found in the area
Philadelphia does have many similarities to NYC, and in fact is often referred to as the 6th Borough. But when compared to only Manhattan, Chicago has more similarities, than Philadelphia, or any other city in the world. (see attachment in the beginning of this post) Specifically to relating to Philidelphia, it does not have the skyscrapers, world influence, nor the dynamics as does Chicago's downtown.
Regarding Midwestern comment....
I feel that that is a convenient label (regardless if used for good or bad) often placed on Chicago to quickly sum it up and shut it up.....
I think that "Midwestern characteristics" can apply to small towns.
Once you hit a big cities, the characteristics associated with any big city, overrides and regional characteristics found in the area
Nobody says that. The NY Times may have mentioned it years ago but most people refer to the 6th Borough as Hoboken I believe.
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.
