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.
I think if Philly experienced growth and investment, it could even become bigger and more popular than Chicago, particularly to foreigners being it's near the coast next to New York City. If Philly annexed the eastern 100 square miles of Delaware County, it would be the size of Chicago, with almost exactly 2 million people. For Infrastructure, add SW and NW subway/elevated lines, extend the MF Elevated to the West and to the North East, and extend the BS line to the north and south.
As much as I'd love to have the fantasy of having 100 extra square miles, I'm still torn on the city of Philadelphia's phallic shape. It's one of the things I like about the city. Philly would look very funny if it were to annex Upper Darby, Lansdowne, Springfield, and even Chester. Just keep the shape. And for the billionth time, yes, the city should've expanded it's subway system during the 1940's and 1950's and even in the 1980's when Chicago, NYC, Boston and SF was expanding their mass transit systems and ditto for LA, Atlanta, DC, and Miami, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KoNgFooCj
Maybe even throw in an expressway in the new addition of West Philly. For housing density, build loads of high-rise public housing projects. Do all this, and Philadelphia will go from 1.6 million to 2 million to 3 million in a matter of 20 years. Philly COULD become as big and urban as Chicago. Its urban layout permits it. Philly just needs it's own version of Robert Moses.
If we ever had somebody like a Robert Moses in Philadelphia, the South Street that we know wouldn't exist, it would be just another service road, and possibly parts of West Philly would be decimated due to this new expressway you're talking about. Besides, we have enough expressways and for the trillionth time, we need a better subway system!!!
As much as I'd love to have the fantasy of having 100 extra square miles, I'm still torn on the city of Philadelphia's phallic shape. It's one of the things I like about the city. Philly would look very funny if it were to annex Upper Darby, Lansdowne, Springfield, and even Chester. Just keep the shape. And for the billionth time, yes, the city should've expanded it's subway system during the 1940's and 1950's and even in the 1980's when Chicago, NYC, Boston and SF was expanding their mass transit systems and ditto for LA, Atlanta, DC, and Miami, too.
We would have had a subway line up the Boulevard had Mayor Frank Rizzo not told outgoing Transportation Secretary (and old friend of his) William Coleman to approve the funding grant request for the Commuter Tunnel instead on Coleman's last day as secretary in 1977. (The city had submitted grant requests for both, and Coleman had called Rizzo as he was headed out the door to tell him he could only approve one of them.)
Arguably, the Commuter Tunnel was a project of greater regional significance, and I do believe Rizzo was interested in ending the poisonous city-suburb animosity that characterized intergovernmental relations in Southeastern Pennsylvania up through the 1970s. (You still find embers of those fiery relations flaring up every so often.
BTW, while it would be nice to revive the former interurban line along West Chester Pike, I'd say that some other rail line extensions should be undertaken first, including some significant restoration of Regional Rail service abandoned when the Commuter Tunnel opened because the tracks serving the communities in question weren't electrified. However, the Northeast Spur, which was to have fed the Broad Street Line, should be one of the top priorities.
I can’t think of a difference other than the fact that Philadelphia is in closer proximity to other large cities (and geography of course). Both Philly and Chicago both are large cities with bustling downtowns, great museums , beautiful architecture, plenty of history, and notorious for their high crime in certain parts. Actually, I think it’s safe to say that Chicago has more high-end retail shopping than Philly.
Edit: Also, I’ve heard a lot of people (not on CD) criticize Philly for having little/nothing to do outside of Center City. Chicago does seem like the more fun city overall with more things to do and see.
I can’t think of a difference other than the fact that Philadelphia is in closer proximity to other large cities (and geography of course). Both Philly and Chicago both are large cities with bustling downtowns, great museums , beautiful architecture, plenty of history, and notorious for their high crime in certain parts. Actually, I think it’s safe to say that Chicago has more high-end retail shopping than Philly.
Edit: Also, I’ve heard a lot of people (not on CD) criticize Philly for having little/nothing to do outside of Center City. Chicago does seem like the more fun city overall with more things to do and see.
Please stop using this as a positive; it's unintentionally insulting. I've yet to see DC or NY be championed for it's close proximity to other cities the way Philadelphia is.
It's just like whenever someone refers to the city as "gritty" and "blue collar" which is usually coded language for "poor" and "uninvested".
Please stop using this as a positive; it's unintentionally insulting. I've yet to see DC or NY be championed for it's close proximity to other cities the way Philadelphia is.
It's just like whenever someone refers to the city as "gritty" and "blue collar" which is usually coded language for "poor" and "uninvested".
Thank You for saying that. I've seen saying exact same thing for years in regards to Baltimore's proximity to other cities. You rarely, if ever, see someone mention NYC's proximity to other cities.
Please stop using this as a positive; it's unintentionally insulting. I've yet to see DC or NY be championed for it's close proximity to other cities the way Philadelphia is.
It's just like whenever someone refers to the city as "gritty" and "blue collar" which is usually coded language for "poor" and "uninvested".
IDK, I don't think it's that deep. I like Philadelphia's location because there are great, easily accessible day/weekend trips to be had. It doesn't really give me a complex about Philadelphia's quality.
IDK, I don't think it's that deep. I like Philadelphia's location because there are great, easily accessible day/weekend trips to be had. It doesn't really give me a complex about Philadelphia's quality.
But when the one main quality people seem to mention is that it is close to other cities, then that says something about the city, don't you think?
Philadelphia is a better artsy hipster city than Chicago.
Chicago is a better Big Ten bro city.
Full census isn't out yet, but going off the estimates (which appear to be under counted currently), Philadelphia most likely gained 10s of thousands of new residents in the last decade oppose to Chicago losing a few thousand.
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.
