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.
Honestly, I think both Boston and DC are a helluva lot more similar to each other than either one is to New York.
The comparison of these 3 cities is kind of hardly to explain - because even though Boston looks a lot more like NYC on the surface, Boston is much closer to DC in actual size. Therefore, a lot of the built environment and the kinds of residential areas in Boston tend to resemble DC more.
NYC is a megacity of a scale/intensity which is unlike any other in the United States.
Washington as a concept had a purpose to be built before they even knew where to put it.
New York and Boston were both settled and grew more authentically. People "discovered" them. They started off as ports and the soil around the Hudson was probably the most fertile in the Northeast at the time, so both cities grew from humble beginnings. The 1700's farm-to-market trade, mercantile, and eventually industrialization. Similar types immigrated to the both of them.
Washington doesn't share history with those cities. It grew differently, probably would have to see Ottawa, Canberra, so on to see other places that could relate to that.
Boston is more laid back than DC. It definitely resembles a blue collar city even if it isn't one. DC is more upscale and fast paced.
How is Boston more laid back than DC? From the way some of you guys tell it, DC is this "Go, Go, Go" town where locals are hustling tourists in games of three card monty everyday. There's nothing "aggressive" or "streetwise" about DC.
The only argument for DC being "faster" than Boston is public transit use and a larger CBD employment population. But that doesn't really translate into feeling faster paced. For one, the majority of DC's transit ridership is government workers catching the train from park and ride stations in the suburbs. It feels like more like commuter rail during the morning rush than the T does. And the street traffic in the morning and/or afternoon is not noticeably different from Boston. If anything, Boston beats DC here because it doesn't empty out as much after hours.
Outside of the CBD, Boston is more urban. And it doesn't have neighborhoods like Deanwood, Anacostia and others that give a more genteel feel to the city. Not even Jamaica Plain or distant Mattapan feel that way.
How is Boston more laid back than DC? From the way some of you guys tell it, DC is this "Go, Go, Go" town where locals are hustling tourists in games of three card monty everyday. There's nothing "aggressive" or "streetwise" about DC.
The only argument for DC being "faster" than Boston is public transit use and a larger CBD employment population. But that doesn't really translate into feeling faster paced. For one, the majority of DC's transit ridership is government workers catching the train from park and ride stations in the suburbs. It feels like more like commuter rail during the morning rush than the T does. And the street traffic in the morning and/or afternoon is not noticeably different from Boston. If anything, Boston beats DC here because it doesn't empty out as much after hours.
Outside of the CBD, Boston is more urban. And it doesn't have neighborhoods like Deanwood, Anacostia and others that give a more genteel feel to the city. Not even Jamaica Plain or distant Mattapan feel that way.
Boston has neighborhoods in the core that are more compact and urban that D.C. can't compete with. I would agree Boston is more compact and urban as an entire city, however, it's core isn't that large like D.C.'s. I think Boston compares to D.C. in this way:
Downtown Winner: D.C.
Urban Core Winner: D.C.
Entire City Winner: Boston
Boston has neighborhoods in the core that are more compact and urban that D.C. can't compete. I would agree Boston is more compact and urban as an entire city, however, it's core isn't that large like D.C.'s. I think Boston compares to D.C. in this way:
Downtown Winner: D.C.
Downtown Core Winner: D.C.
Entire City Winner: Boston
The Financial District is similar to Manhattan's Financial District in many places. There's nothing in DC like this.
It has a real Chinatown where you can actually haggle with vendors over prices. Not a fake Chinatown where you have the large Fuddrucker's burger is written on the menu in Chinese.
Boston has more urban infrastructure than DC. More tunnels, Zakim Bridge, Tobin Bridge, skyscrapers, taller residential buildings, etc. It just feels more urban driving around.
It has a real Chinatown where you can actually haggle with vendors over prices. Not a fake Chinatown where you have the large Fuddrucker's burger is written on the menu in Chinese.
Downtown Boston crushes Downtown DC. So if the "fast-paced" argument is based on their downtowns, then it's definitely a loser.
I wasn't talking about being fast paced. I think that was another poster. Downtown Boston is too small to even compare to downtown D.C. It's land locked so there isn't much else you can do to it. Downtown Boston is nice, it's just so small. I couldn't care less about a Chinatown in any city so that is beside the point, I was just talking about the size of the two area's from an urban perspective.
I wasn't talking about being fast paced. I think that was another poster. Downtown Boston is too small to even compare to downtown D.C. It's land locked so there isn't much else you can do to it. Downtown Boston is nice, it's just so small. I couldn't care less about a Chinatown in any city so that is beside the point, I was just talking about the size of the two area's from an urban perspective.
Downtown DC is probably larger than FiDi NYC. So what?
I wasn't talking about being fast paced. I think that was another poster. Downtown Boston is too small to even compare to downtown D.C. It's land locked so there isn't much else you can do to it. Downtown Boston is nice, it's just so small. I couldn't care less about a Chinatown in any city so that is beside the point, I was just talking about the size of the two area's from an urban perspective.
Yet the streets in Boston are much narrower so there is more crammed in to that space. It doesn't need to be as big of a land area. I thought you were always talkin about how you liked dense narrow streets, so why not with Boston, clearly it's got a much tighter street grid than DC and the urban neighborhoods are more urban.
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.
