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.
My point is that Chicago for good chunks of it has more the vibrancy and pace that you find on the East Coast than the Midwest. Outside perhaps the people, the urban style and culture of Chicago is more comparable to Boston and Philly than it is to St. Louis or Indianapolis.
First of all, St. Louis is NOTHING like Indianapolis with regard to its culture or urban style. To put these cities in the same sentence to emphasize your point only further negates it.
Secondly, I think St. Louis looks more like Philadelphia than Chicago does, if for no other reason than age and housing style/building materials. I agree with you if you're talking about pace, however. That doesn't make it any less Midwestern, it's just a trait of a larger city, regardless of geography.
Every Midwestern city is different, each with its own distinctive flavor and culture.
If you're talking about city scale and style, group C. If you're talking about general culture, which is what I thought we were discussing, group B. Small city/town Massachusetts is still the Northeast, even if it's nothing like the big Northeast cities in urban environment.
I will go on the record as saying that if Detroit, Cleveland and St.Louis had its original intended population and built environment, it would be a lot more comparable.
I will go on the record as saying that if Detroit, Cleveland and St.Louis had its original intended population and built environment, it would be a lot more comparable.
Right, but that is my point. Chicago has that aspect more aligned to East Coast cities than Midwest ones.
I am not saying Chicago is and East Coast city, I am saying it's midwest, but has a lot of aspects of east coast cities as well, that you don't find in most midwest cities.
Indianapolis is the third largest city in the midwest by city proper why wouldn't it be included?
^ Visit all around Indianapolis and you'll see why. Its the third largest city because its like 600 Sq miles, but there's probably 5 sq miles of urbanity in the whole thing. Downtown is nice, along with a couple of neighborhoods, but its mostly sprawl with a freeway loop as the main for of transit. Its more like that group of Houston, Atlanta, Dallas
^ Visit all around Indianapolis and you'll see why. Its the third largest city because its like 600 Sq miles, but there's probably 5 sq miles of urbanity in the whole thing. Downtown is nice, along with a couple of neighborhoods, but its mostly sprawl with a freeway loop as the main for of transit. Its more like that group of Houston, Atlanta, Dallas
I have been to Indy plenty.
I was grouping those cities by region, not by style.
Its too bad the US disinvested in or dismantled most of its inner cities. There wouldn't be so much of an argument over what city belongs in what region. We would respect each region as being unique equals, much as Europe does with Scandanavian, Meditteranean, German, etc cities. No one region is held as being the zenith of urbanity as the East Coast is for the US.
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.
