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.
How about seat belts. We use them but people still die in accidents. Should we get rid of those dubious contraptions.
Yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
Kid, United Nations maybe be perceived as a joke but in reality it is the only global forum we have on this planet.. There is no other. It maybe perceived as powerless or paralyzed but it is the only one we have. Appreciate the fact it exists.
...Kid? The UN is powerless. What's being done about N. Koreas nuclear test? Nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
What not? Let's imagine what would happen if Wall Street closed for afew days like during 9/11.... No matter what nespapers say Wall Street is critical to US and global economies....
Wall street can be replaced. It's not like only NYC can handle it. If it closed for a few days, people would get some time off work. What is your point? Are you trying to say we'd down spiral into a never ending depression?
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
Who is dementor? And yes, Broadway, the only place on the planet with 40 over 500 seats theaters and hundreds of smaller theaters. Nothing like that anywhere on the planet although West End comes close.
You are Dementor. That's great, but to be honest, I wouldnt go back to NYC just for Broadway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
Au contraire. It's bigger, stronger and better looking than ever before.
Come visit.
You learned how to use Google Translate! Nice! NYC is the opposite of what it use to be. Its not the giant anymore. How else do you explain its institutions being bought by other cities considered "inferior"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
Really? How is that possible that no building was ever erected in New York before Chicago's transformation from a trading post to a city? .
Buildings functioning in NYC today, for the most part, are just as old as anything you'd see in Chicago. There are a few exceptions, but you aren't going to find an 18th century home or buisness in NYC. Everything you see now is about the same age as Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
Kid, New York was a thriving city before Chicago was conceived on the prairie. There are some very old buildings in New York, Boston and Philly.
Wow, that's news to me!
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
Did you ask most people? Most people consider New York buildings to be more iconic than any other buildings in the country. ESB, Chrysler, Flatiron are fixtures of American culture either you like it or you do not.
The Capital trumps everything in NYC. I know a lot of New Yorkers have a huge ego about their city, but really? The National Mall has some of the most iconic buildings in the U.S. White House, or Empire State Building? Hmm....
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
Comparing skyscrpers is one thing, forgetting that most cities do not consists of skyscrapers only is another..
All NYC has going for it is the skyscrapers EVERYWHERE. It's not not an attractive skyline, its just amazing because its huge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
I think overall, considering New York iconic skyscrapers, iconic residential architecture of Manhattan and outer boros (Dakota and park Slope brownstones), incredible city planning with famous squares (Times, Union, Washington Squares) and Central Park, famous monuments like Lady Liberty, Columbus, Washington Square Arch, bridges such as Brooklyn and Verrazzano - New York clearly comes up as a winner.
Both cities are planned on a grid. I don't really think one grid can be superior to another. The same people that designed Central Park designed Chicago's lakeshore parks. Chicago is the leader in U.S Architecture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
I know both cities and while Chicago may have some picturesque areas, New York's variety of neighborhoods and architectonic styles accummulated over close to 400 of its history is simply unbeatable. New York has better architecture over all and it is hard to imagine that it could be otherwise considering that it is much older, much larger and much more affluent.
The city isn't much more affulent. Sure they may get paid more (maybe 10%) but the cost of living is so much higher than 10%. NYC and Chicago are similar on a city level, but Chicago leads the way in terms of architecture.
No New York built one too but thankfully dismantled most of it realizing environmental impact.
I think it is you who can't connect the dots. NYC does not build any new elevated lines, Chicago wanted to put the L underground, LA chose not to put an inch and you are still not able to "connect the dots" . Wow.
Yea, who doesn't know NYC built elevated lines in the late 19th century using late 19th century technology and then closed most of them down around the middle of the 20th (when elevated trains were only up to, surprise, surprise, mid-20th century technology). Yea, those els from the late 19th century were surely noisy, dirty, and ungainly in the mid-20th which is no surprise. However, I'm not sure why it's better to use that as a basis for comparison to modern subways rather than the elevated trains working on late 20th century and early 21st century technology.
I've been pretty explicit in showing what dots are being connected and which ones are stretches. Yes, you want to go with NYC and LA again as examples--great! Sure Chicago and other US cities can do that, but they can also look to cities that are not NYC and not LA (certainly a great example to use when talking about mass transit), but others with great mass transit which uses the mix of modes that makes the most sense within the local context using modern technology.
...Kid? The UN is powerless. What's being done about N. Koreas nuclear test? Nothing.
Wall street can be replaced. It's not like only NYC can handle it. If it closed for a few days, people would get some time off work. What is your point? Are you trying to say we'd down spiral into a never ending depression?
You are Dementor. That's great, but to be honest, I wouldnt go back to NYC just for Broadway.
You learned how to use Google Translate! Nice! NYC is the opposite of what it use to be. Its not the giant anymore. How else do you explain its institutions being bought by other cities considered "inferior"?
Buildings functioning in NYC today, for the most part, are just as old as anything you'd see in Chicago. There are a few exceptions, but you aren't going to find an 18th century home or buisness in NYC. Everything you see now is about the same age as Chicago
Wow, that's news to me!
The Capital trumps everything in NYC. I know a lot of New Yorkers have a huge ego about their city, but really? The National Mall has some of the most iconic buildings in the U.S. White House, or Empire State Building? Hmm....
All NYC has going for it is the skyscrapers EVERYWHERE. It's not not an attractive skyline, its just amazing because its huge.
Both cities are planned on a grid. I don't really think one grid can be superior to another. The same people that designed Central Park designed Chicago's lakeshore parks. Chicago is the leader in U.S Architecture.
The city isn't much more affulent. Sure they may get paid more (maybe 10%) but the cost of living is so much higher than 10%. NYC and Chicago are similar on a city level, but Chicago leads the way in terms of architecture.
Excellent, fair post. To answer your point about one grid not being better than another, I found a link.
In my experience, New York feels a lot more open than Chicago. Chicago's buildings rise up from the ground and continue straight up, towering over the streets. In Manhattan, the buildings taper down, so they always feel like they are in the distance (IMHO).
I'm not sure which one I prefer, or even if I need to pick sides. Both cities are incredible. I like Chicago better for other reasons, which I have discussed at length elsewhere.
In my experience, New York feels a lot more open than Chicago. Chicago's buildings rise up from the ground and continue straight up, towering over the streets. In Manhattan, the buildings taper down, so they always feel like they are in the distance (IMHO).
I'm not sure which one I prefer, or even if I need to pick sides. Both cities are incredible. I like Chicago better for other reasons, which I have discussed at length elsewhere.
Interesting link. I realized I was wrong after I posted that. Chicago's was set up a lot better. They made everything percise. Every 8 blocks is a mile, every 4 is a major avenue...
Interesting link. I realized I was wrong after I posted that. Chicago's was set up a lot better. They made everything percise. Every 8 blocks is a mile, every 4 is a major avenue...
In nyc every block is a major avenue. Madison, Broadway, park ,lexington third ave second ave it goes on and on
Chitown is a much smaller city than new york how you figure its grid is more impressive
Chicago's grid is a gift and a curse in my opinion. The grid is perfect for walking and traveling but it can become boring and too predictable in some areas of the city. I like cities that have a variety in their landscape. European cities have very imperfect grids which create great public meeting places and quaint parks within the city. Manhattan is the easiest city to get around because it sits on an island. The numbered streets run east to west in an ascending order from downtown. The major avenues (some are numbered) run north to south. Plus NY has big bridges, tunnels, and major avenues that sometimes run into each other to create that chaotic mass that we love to see in cities. NYC streets are smaller than Chicago's, so it adds to the congestion. The intersection of streets that meet in Time Square is a great example.
Last edited by DC's Finest; 05-28-2009 at 08:40 PM..
In my experience, New York feels a lot more open than Chicago. Chicago's buildings rise up from the ground and continue straight up, towering over the streets. In Manhattan, the buildings taper down, so they always feel like they are in the distance (IMHO).
I'm not sure which one I prefer, or even if I need to pick sides. Both cities are incredible. I like Chicago better for other reasons, which I have discussed at length elsewhere.
The problem is trolls interfere with learning about cities by devolving every thread they participate into stupid pointless shouting matches. The General U.S forum and especially the "city v. city" forum have become virtually useless for that purpose because trolls are given free reign to hijack threads. Anyone trying to get anything useful out of this thread would have to wade through 50 pages of mostly twaddle to get at the few morsels of useful information.
There are two reasons for this....
1) Too many people engage the "trolls" by posting counter-attacks back at them when they say something they don't like. If you simply ignored them, it would help eliminate the problem.
2) Virtually no one uses the "report post" icon to report posts by people who are breaking the terms of service agreement. No, it should NOT be used casually to report posts just because, "I don't like what he said to me", but if they are breaking the TOS, which everyone should be up on if you post here, then you should report the post. We can't read every post. If you don't report the REAL problems, we may not see them.
First of all, please folks re-read the sticky at the top of this forum: //www.city-data.com/forum/gener...eneral-us.html and pay attention to the guidelines for posting photos. I've let a few VERY large posts of VERY large photos slide because they're nice shots, but they bog down the pages/site. Please go by the guidelines for pics/posts spelled out in the sticky or excessively long pic posts will have to be deleted.
Stop poking, trolling, and fighting. See the last post about reporting posts that are really breaking the tos agreement. Don't discuss other member's "possible" other screen names in posts or issues that are not on topic or the messages will be deleted. If you have real issues, contact a moderator.
Chicago's grid is a gift and a curse in my opinion. The grid is perfect for walking and traveling but it can become boring and too predictable in some areas of the city. I like cities that have a variety in their landscape. European cities have very imperfect grids which create great public meeting places and quaint parks within the city. Manhattan is the easiest city to get around because it sits on an island. The numbered streets run east to west in an ascending order from downtown. The major avenues (some are numbered) run north to south. Plus NY has big bridges, tunnels, and major avenues that sometimes run into each other to create that chaotic mass that we love to see in cities. NYC streets are smaller than Chicago's, so it adds to the congestion. The intersection of streets that meet in Time Square is a great example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC's Finest
Chicago's grid is a gift and a curse in my opinion. The grid is perfect for walking and traveling but it can become boring and too predictable in some areas of the city. I like cities that have a variety in their landscape. European cities have very imperfect grids which create great public meeting places and quaint parks within the city. Manhattan is the easiest city to get around because it sits on an island. The numbered streets run east to west in an ascending order from downtown. The major avenues (some are numbered) run north to south. Plus NY has big bridges, tunnels, and major avenues that sometimes run into each other to create that chaotic mass that we love to see in cities. NYC streets are smaller than Chicago's, so it adds to the congestion. The intersection of streets that meet in Time Square is a great example.
New York's streets are more narrow, and this does make the city feel more vibrant. Of course, most areas of NYC are more densely populated than their Chicago counterparts. Yet, there is something about a narrow street, walled by mid-rise buildings, that seems to trap the energy within it. It's a cool effect.
Chicago's streets are laid out in a grid, and they are WIDE. My fraternity brother from Philly kept remarking how "big" Chicago felt in areas like Lincoln Park and Wicker Park, and he couldn't put his finger on why.
The reason Chicago's streets are laid out that way has much to do with the Chicago Fire. City planners had a second chance, and so they plotted the whole city out, which allowed it to fill in according to a skeleton that was already in place. You see the opposite of this in Boston, whose streets wind all over, and even criss-cross one another!
Chicago's planners would have had openness and ease of travel in mind, rather than creating a cool urban effect. Granted, a cool urban effect was indeed created, but it's a different one than in New York.
It's not all a grid, though. There are streets like Lincoln Ave. and Milwaukee Ave. which used to be old Indian trails. They run diagonal to the street grid and create some very cool intersections. Do a Flickr search for "six corners" in Chicago, and check out the intersection of Milwaukee, North Ave., and Damen. It has a really cool flat iron building there called the Coyote (nee Northwest Tower), which recalls the Flatiron in Manhattan.
ADDENDUM: I meant to say Chicago's main streets are wide. The smaller, residential streets lined with row homes are not. They are much more narrow. As well, there are streets in the Loop and River North (as well as Printers' Row and South Loop) that are extremely narrow.
Last edited by chitown2pa; 05-28-2009 at 09:45 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.
.