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.
Are the "colored" buildings the proposals? Incredible.
Here's a color coded model but unfortunately there are a lot of buildings that are already completed. It doesn't break down what is under-construction/proposed/completed. What it does though is show the volume and scale that Chicago is still building at and the amount of proposals over the last decade. A couple active mega-projects are not pictured here also.
I'm only posting this because posters from much smaller cities that have experienced transformational building-booms seem to have an overly inflated belief that they're closing the gap with Chicago like it's been stagnant. The model shows Chicago will essentially add a large city core to its' already massive 'downtown.'
Here's a color coded model but unfortunately there are a lot of buildings that are already completed. It doesn't break down what is under-construction/proposed/completed. What it does though is show the volume and scale that Chicago is still building at and the amount of proposals over the last decade. A couple active mega-projects are not pictured here also.
I'm only posting this because posters from much smaller cities that have experienced transformational building-booms seem to have an overly inflated belief that they're closing the gap with Chicago like it's been stagnant. The model shows Chicago will essentially add a large city core to its' already massive 'downtown.'
By any measure that does not pretend that cities stop existing below the 35th floor those “much smaller cities” have been closing the gap with Chicago. Whether it be Transit ridership, Population, GDP, media exposure etc.
The gap hasn’t been closed (hence the thread) it certainly is a pretty solid case that Chicago is more like the cities smaller than it than the ones bigger
Problem is you are comparing stature of chicago to bostons msa on 1 metric. Skyscrapers in the urban core. I mean nyc is so insane with skyscrapers neither comes close but absolutely chicago feels more like nyc in this department on the ground. Most other metrics I’d say chicago falls closer to Boston at a metro level.
The built-environment of a city's core and extended neighborhoods is the most critical metric people use to evaluate how massive an area seems and how important they believe a city to be. It's the defining characteristic that largely shapes someone's first impression. Visitors are engaging with and reacting to the physical landscape. I'm approaching the comparison as if people were dropped off in the center of each city and had to explore them in all directions.
I'm also not only speaking about skyscrapers in the core. We all know Chicago has dense, urban, walkable neighborhoods with transit access, historic architecture and mid & high-rise building stock 8/9 miles south to South Shore and 10 miles north to Rogers Park. There are areas of the city where the scale falls off a cliff but there is a big-city urban fabric over an exhaustive stretch that gives Chicago a magnitude that Boston cannot equal.
New York is leagues beyond Chicago in magnitude but if the built-environment isn't the most critical metric why is it that everyone jumps to the sheer mass of New York to constantly declare it the ultimate city in all these debates?
People are a bit resentful that the city punches above its weight. And that the city strikes a nice balance of progressive politics and sensibility.
I think people especially from larger cities or metros do feel begrudged that Bosotn has managed ot work its way into the upper echelon of US cities. They seem a bit peeved it has the nerve to be as expensive as NYC or SF, and that it can be more cosmopolitan than most cities. They also seem annoyed that it never seriously falls victim to the larger woes of American cities (recessions, COVID crime waves, meth/homeless encampments- which I think is what lends itself to the provincial notion. Some people ar offended it has the nerve to have a significant Black History given its reputation. People even try to minimize the Patirots SuperBowl victories as cheatings, and the success of the Celtics Big 3 "They won one championship in the last 30 years" (to which I say there are 30 teams)
My older brother made note of this now that he lives in NYC he said to me in November "bro do you get Boston hate in Baltimore? its like everyone everywhere hates Boston and especially in NYC"
It has many groups of people that are predisposed to dislike it Leslie Jones alluded to on SNL recently. Many conservatives, hate it, many Black people and POC hate it, many of the far left in cities like SEA- SF-POR hate it, many Southerners hate it, and many New Yorkers/Philadelphians hate or look down on it.
Boston doesn't really have many allies and many people think we're arrogant know-it all so when you bring up matter-of-fact things in Boston's favor its like were trying to be something we're not I guess. Many people sort of want Boston to be what they think Boston was in the 1980s and are determined to keep it there in their own minds regardless of what the reality is. For many people, it will always be a short, insular, boring, backwards college "town" devoid of diversity, significant culture, or a corporate footprint. Thats just where they are with it.
Its also a lot of people simply cannot afford to live there and it rubs on them. Ive accepted the efforts to minimize the city as our 'cross to bear' ultimately its inconsequential because it doesn't line up with the actual city in any way.
Boston does indeed punch above it's weight, bit I think the real sticking point is the few places in the world punch so significantly under their weight than Chicago. It's the 29th largest metropolis in the world and literally nobody thinks it feels like that. It's indolent, overweight, and has been in a decades-long decline. The flip side to that is that it has a huge supply of housing for a dwindling population and that makes the place cheap-ish.
Boston does indeed punch above it's weight, bit I think the real sticking point is the few places in the world punch so significantly under their weight than Chicago. It's the 29th largest metropolis in the world and literally nobody thinks it feels like that. It's indolent, overweight, and has been in a decades-long decline. The flip side to that is that it has a huge supply of housing for a dwindling population and that makes the place cheap-ish.
Well, there's your version of Chicago, and then there's the real Chicago. Still the third largest city in the US, with a whole lot of clout.
By any measure that does not pretend that cities stop existing below the 35th floor those “much smaller cities” have been closing the gap with Chicago. Whether it be Transit ridership, Population, GDP, media exposure etc.
The gap hasn’t been closed (hence the thread) it certainly is a pretty solid case that Chicago is more like the cities smaller than it than the ones bigger
City for city you know what it is, just like SF, D.C. Atlanta and Miami. We have to pull everything within a day's drive to get the numbers up.
When Chicago and New York are compared it's city for city, I've said before nobody from Chicago is ever talking about Naperville, Schaumburg, Gary and Kenosha. NY'ers are never talking about Newark, Stamford, White Plains and Hempstead.
City for city you know what it is, just like SF, D.C. Atlanta and Miami. We have to pull everything within a day's drive to get the numbers up.
When Chicago and New York are compared it's city for city, I've said before nobody from Chicago is ever talking about Naperville, Schaumburg, Gary and Kenosha. NY'ers are never talking about Newark, Stamford, White Plains and Hempstead.
Chicagoans famously never say they have an elite University like Northwestern. New Yorkers never talk about their NFL teams.
There is civic jockeying but nobody truly believes their city is an island
its like everyone everywhere hates Boston and especially in NYC
Many conservatives, hate it, many Black people and POC hate it, many of the far left in cities like SEA- SF-POR hate it, many Southerners hate it, and many New Yorkers/Philadelphians hate or look down on it.
Boston doesn't really have many allies and many people think we're arrogant know-it all so when you bring up matter-of-fact things in Boston's favor its like were trying to be something we're not I guess. Many people sort of want Boston to be what they think Boston was in the 1980s and are determined to keep it there in their own minds regardless of what the reality is. For many people, it will always be a short, insular, boring, backwards college "town" devoid of diversity, significant culture, or a corporate footprint. Thats just where they are with it.
Its also a lot of people simply cannot afford to live there and it rubs on them. Ive accepted the efforts to minimize the city as our 'cross to bear' ultimately its inconsequential because it doesn't line up with the actual city in any way.
Eh, lots of us have lived in the "new and better Boston" of the last ten years and aren't talking about 1980s Boston. Pretty presumptuous of you to think that those of us who aren't that enamored with Boston and the metro area are doing so because we are priced out of Boston or stuck in the 80s. The city has some things going for it, but it's a stereotypically provincial viewpoint to think the city is in the same league as Chicago and even punching NYC tier.
Many of us understand the current reality of Boston pretty well, visit often and even take the MBTA; you might however be overly rosy of your hometown.
Eh, lots of us have lived in the "new and better Boston" of the last ten years and aren't talking about 1980s Boston. Pretty presumptuous of you to think that those of us who aren't that enamored with Boston and the metro area are doing so because we are priced out of Boston. The city has some things going for it, but it's pretty provincial and arrogant to think the city is in the same league as Chicago and even punching NYC tier.
Literally nobody is saying this. It’s is a Chicago closer to Boston or New York.
It’s not particularly like either of them.
The truth is Boston has an economy 70% the size of Chicago while Chicago is 40% the size of NYC. It’s not an absurd premise that Chicago is more like Boston than New York
(It’s also true because the media is based in NYC Boston does get a fair bit of unfair reputation by the culture)
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.
