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.
Without highrises (which it has more mostly linear along the coast and larger CBD) Chicago is actually closer to the scale in this regard of a Philly etc. than NYC truly though a atep above likely, NYC is a few step above Chicago, again meaning more of th neighborhood not the highrises. Also and while I love the coast, the line of highries along the lake is sort of not all interpecred with the highrises, while tall I actually find the next set of areas behind these highrises more interesting on the street level for urbanity, yet ome great views and parks along this area and lake no doubt
Yes. The interesting non-downtown urban neighborhoods in Chicago are all lowrise areas. The parts of Lincoln Park and Lakeview with good vibrancy are west of the highrise strip along the lake (so basically Broadway, Lincoln, Halstead, Armitage, Diversey, Belmont). The highrise strip along the lake is actually quiet and has almost no street level anything.
Those interior neighborhoods just north of downtown would come closest to the Brooklyn/Queens feel, though they're still a level below in urban intensity. Wicker Park/Bucktown is also a candidate, but is lower density and vibrancy than Lincoln Park/Lakeview. The main street (Milwaukee Ave.) could be a major street in Queens (not in look or feel, but in relative levels of vibrancy), though the side streets are much less intense than in Queens.
The overall scale in Chicago, while bigger than Philly, is generally in the same weight class. It's like a somewhat bigger version of Philly, Boston, DC or SF (but with a different look because of the regional differences). NYC has far more high density neighborhoods than all these cities combined and is definitely in another weight class.
Yes. The interesting non-downtown urban neighborhoods in Chicago are all lowrise areas. The parts of Lincoln Park and Lakeview with good vibrancy are west of the highrise strip along the lake (so basically Broadway, Lincoln, Halstead, Armitage, Diversey, Belmont). The highrise strip along the lake is actually quiet and has almost no street level anything.
Those interior neighborhoods just north of downtown would come closest to the Brooklyn/Queens feel, though they're still a level below in urban intensity. Wicker Park/Bucktown is also a candidate, but is lower density and vibrancy than Lincoln Park/Lakeview. The main street (Milwaukee Ave.) could be a major street in Queens (not in look or feel, but in relative levels of vibrancy), though the side streets are much less intense than in Queens.
The overall scale in Chicago, while bigger than Philly, is generally in the same weight class. It's like a somewhat bigger version of Philly, Boston, DC or SF (but with a different look because of the regional differences). NYC has far more high density neighborhoods than all these cities combined and is definitely in another weight class.
You seem to have trouble understanding the most basic premise of posts.
The answer is no. No one claimed that cities aren't urban because they have highrises. The issue is that highrises, by themselves, don't make cities urban.
If there were 0 highrises in Manhattan, it would still, easily, be the most urban place in North America, with easily the best street level activity. In fact the best urbanity in Manhattan is in areas with relatively few highrises. And the Bronx and Brooklyn and Western Queens are far more urban than Chicago, despite having far fewer skyscrapers.
And highrises in NYC are built totally different than highrises in Chicago, so no comparison anyways. They aren't as harmful to urbanity because they usually have no parking, no street cuts, no platform bases, no setbacks, no back alleys, and they generally align directly with the streetscape.
I never said highrises are the only characteristic of the urban landscape. I've only pointed that they also can have street level vibrancy at the base in which you seem to discount. If you were to cut all the floors above a few stories from the ground you will then have less people per building. Residential highrises are just as much a part of the urban landscape as row houses. There's no picking and choosing what is and what's not urban. It's like partially completing a puzzle landscape when you don't have the complete picture.
I never said highrises are the only characteristic of the urban landscape. I've only pointed that they also can have street level vibrancy at the base in which you seem to discount. If you were to cut all the floors above a few stories from the ground you will then have less people per building. Residential highrises are just as much a part of the urban landscape as row houses. There's no picking and choosing what is and what's not urban. It's like partially completing a puzzle landscape when you don't have the complete picture.
Sure, but extra space negates the density increasing effect of high rises. San Francisco and Boston have similar core residential densities to Chicago despite having fewer high rises, so what's the urbanity difference? It's just housing style preference then. Chicago's office skyscrapers do create higher employment densities, but as a negative some commercial streets don't have much on street level besides office entrances. But yes, it does make its downtown feel bigger than say, San Francisco or Boston.
Having lived in one city and being to NYC over 100 times in my lifetime I find these replies unusual. Thank goodness people in the real world don't talk like this, but I guess everyone has different hobbies, but I can't find enjoyment in density calculations of side streets?
Both great cities, NYC is 3 times the size of Chicago so surprise, surprise, its bigger. It is a great city and a fun place to walk around(my favorite time is spring or fall).
Chicago is a city of neighborhoods most people don't even venture out to for why would they. It has a beautiful downtown. the second best in America. IMO, that is saying a lot! Plus Mich Ave. is my favorite street in the world. Yes, the world and I have traveled the world. They do a wonderful job in the spring, summer, and winter time.
From downtown to Ohare, Chicago does it right in the Holiday season.
I am off to NYC next week. Can't wait. Work related, but I always cab it to the Bronx on Belmont and eat some good italain food!.(Stay away from Little Italy, crap food!)
Both great cities, NYC is 3 times the size of Chicago so surprise, surprise, its bigger.
The relative difference in city populations has nothing to do with relative differences in street level feel.
LA doesn't have a stronger street level feel than Chicago just because it is much bigger. NYC wouldn't have a different street level feel if its population were bigger or smaller. City populations are essentially irrelevant to street level vibrancy.
I think this comes down to the core of each city main attraction, Like Times Square or Hollywood blvd Trumps any street in Chicago when you factor in the popularity, Tourist attraction & Entertainment value, Even the Vegas Strip trumps the main attraction in Chicago but on a dense level Chicago is on par with a few streets in Nyc,But as a whole Nyc is on another level.
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,290,631 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by westburbsil
Having lived in one city and being to NYC over 100 times in my lifetime I find these replies unusual. Thank goodness people in the real world don't talk like this, but I guess everyone has different hobbies, but I can't find enjoyment in density calculations of side streets?
Both great cities, NYC is 3 times the size of Chicago so surprise, surprise, its bigger. It is a great city and a fun place to walk around(my favorite time is spring or fall).
Chicago is a city of neighborhoods most people don't even venture out to for why would they. It has a beautiful downtown. the second best in America. IMO, that is saying a lot! Plus Mich Ave. is my favorite street in the world. Yes, the world and I have traveled the world. They do a wonderful job in the spring, summer, and winter time.
From downtown to Ohare, Chicago does it right in the Holiday season.
I am off to NYC next week. Can't wait. Work related, but I always cab it to the Bronx on Belmont and eat some good italain food!.(Stay away from Little Italy, crap food!)
Yes.... the Densities most Americans prefer is ONE THAT DID NOT GIVE UP GREEN-SPACE to gain density or saw the masses did not need it? But Affluent areas and homes ALWAYS had it. Even in their cores.
European cities offered very little green-space in cores. But made it up in quaintness and wonderful Architecture and class. Some American cities get praise for densities and all kinds of businesses anywhere and with housing built for its masses pretty plain and far less of the trimmings that wealthier classes enjoyed. Today some praise this plain mass built housing for high densities and interiors now gutted nd modern.
But I surely prefer a city like Chicago with its Classy core not shy with greenery and its dense neighborhoods still having green-space with all homes and most Apartment buildings and new housing to Skyscrapers and loft space. Still have it incorporated.
I also have no problem with aspects of Parking garages that don't take up whole blocks or on main Retail streets. Some do and can have retail and eateries too ground level and look nice too. Or be off on side streets and less bland behemoths of blandness.
So I am taking my comment to PARKING GARAGES.... SOME POSTING HERE SAY TOTALLY KNOCKS DOWN CHICAGO'S STREET VIBRANCY AND DENSITY.Including some posting in this thread. To me CHICAGO HAS A DECENT MIX AND ADDS MANY VERY WELL.
PARKING GARAGES ARE A ASPECT OF STREET-LEVEL IN OUR CITIES..... SOME TRASH ON C-D. So it is relevant to the topic....
THOSE I CALL BLAND BEHEMOTHS .....Those are the ones I saw in Texas cities like Houston. So many even on main streets and intersections too. Like these far too common in Houston......
JUST A NOTE....I don't think putting these ponds on Main St.in Houston work too well either..... still very bland no where to sit. Maybe they have gold fish to look at in them....... For some that like to say Houston is a Sub-Tropical Paradise? They sure don't make their downtown look like Tropical-Paradise they could??? Certainly not here...... https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7569...7i13312!8i6656
NYC has few Parking garages in Manhattan. Land too expensive to use for it and streets could not handle more traffic.
CHICAGO DOES HAVE PARKING GARAGES DOWNTOWN and under its Residential High-Rises. Some Bash it kills its density and street-level vibrancy. I say compared to some cities like Houston I showed are done badly..... CHICAGO'S BLEND IN MORE AND NOT ABOUT KILLING STREET-LEVEL VIBRANCY.... So this is my aim with noting PARKING GARAGES SOME BASH TOTALLY IN A CITY'S CORE.... CAN BE DONE DECENTLY WITH NESSESARY PURPOSE.
I find many Chicago downtown Garages blend in well and have some business ground level. Some could do better. But far more acceptable and offer the ability to still Drive into Downtown for the Theater and Fine evening dining and drive home.
You don't have that luxury in Manhattan. Mass transit is great for going to work. But not necessarily a night on the town in your fine clothes and dress. Unless you do a limo or taxi... but YOU ARE NOT GOING TO FROM SUBURBS FOR SURE.....
Garages on side streets in Chicago are also of valuable for Theater clientele and more. I find are fine. I think these few examples on Loop side streets are totally acceptable....
This one I don't particularly care for across from the Willis(Sears)Tower on the left. But it does have retail ahead and along the street ahead also. It serves its purpose. https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8787...7i13312!8i6656
SPARE ME SOME ARE BANAL IN CHICAGO TOO....
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
The relative difference in city populations has nothing to do with relative differences in street level feel.
LA doesn't have a stronger street level feel than Chicago just because it is much bigger. NYC wouldn't have a different street level feel if its population were bigger or smaller. City populations are essentially irrelevant to street level vibrancy.
I disagree here.... Manhattan and near Boroughs have HUGE POPULATIONS. ALONG WITH THRONGS OF TOURIST WALKING. Basically ALL IN TIMES SQUARE.
The LIVE-IN population and tourist ARE KEY. Offerings NEED PEOPLE(businesses retail to eateries). The CLOSE-KNIT MULTI-FLOOR HOUSING(tenements to Skyscraper living) Help a awful lot too.
LA's more SPREAD OUT GRID and more in SHOPPING CENTERS hurt its street level and having more multiple cores. With its Downtown mostly offices till LAST FEW YEARS A NEW BUILDING FRENZIE OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS INFILLING. They probably will succeed if any Sunbelt city will.
So NYC HAS THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT WITH PEOPLE less car dependent. That too adds street-level presence.
Chicago and other cities. Still can offer you who DO NOT LIVE IN THE CORE. A Easier access to DRIVING FROM OUTLINER PARTS TO SUBURBS...... FOR A NIGHT ON THE TOWN and places(garages) to park near the Nightlife to Restaurants and Theater.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe25
I think this comes down to the core of each city main attraction, Like Times Square or Hollywood blvd Trumps any street in Chicago when you factor in the popularity, Tourist attraction & Entertainment value, Even the Vegas Strip trumps the main attraction in Chicago but on a dense level Chicago is on par with a few streets in Nyc, But as a whole Nyc is on another level.
Chicago surely has no Times Square Equivalent or the Vegas strip one..... But it is not and never will be a Capital of the World as NYC....... WE ALL RESPECT Or a GAMBLING MECCA. On a Vegas level.
But Chicago did gain its GRAND MAIN CORE STREET.... That being its MICHIGAN AVE. and it has ESQUISITE VISTAS to view classic American Architecture New and Old and HUGELY SUCESSFUL Millennium Park as a border and Grant Park as its FRONT LAWN OF THE CITY. Also North Michigan Ave.(Chicago's Magnificent Mile) Of Shopping and Boutique stores on side streets, Vertical Malls.... WITH NO GATED AND SHUTTERED STEEL DOORS ON SHOPS WHEN CLOSE and plenty of GREENERY. I hate shuttered and steel gated stores.... makes me feel unsafe and their ugly. Too many ....IN MANHATTAN have them.
Michigan Ave. Begins at Lake Shore Drive WITH A GRAND URBAN DOWNTOWN BEACH....OAK STREET BEACH. THEN CONTINUES WITH THIS GRAND SHOPPING CORRIDOR
NYC has few Parking garages in Manhattan. Land too expensive to use for it and streets could not handle more traffic.
It's a lot more than just a few. Chicago may have more of them but Manhattan has plenty as well. Some are underground beneath a lot of buildings and some above ground which is evident to indicate that there are many people in Manhattan who also have cars despite having a subway, bus systems or taxis. I could easily drive in from NJ into Manhattan rather than take a NJTransit train to Penn Station from Secaucus Junction. Of course, I personally wouldn't want to do it but you do have people who drive into Manhattan from all over the metro area with their personal vehicles. This is just one of many reasons you'll have parking there. Chicago isn't the only city here with parking garages or surface parking even though it has more of them.
Last edited by urbanologist; 12-06-2015 at 11:45 PM..
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.
.... still very bland no where to sit. Maybe they have gold fish to look at in them....... For some that like to say Houston is a Sub-Tropical Paradise? They sure don't make their downtown look like Tropical-Paradise they could??? Certainly not here......
So this is my aim with noting PARKING GARAGES SOME BASH TOTALLY IN A CITY'S CORE.... CAN BE DONE DECENTLY WITH NESSESARY PURPOSE.
