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 hear everyone talking about how San Francisco is urban feeling and dense and has a city feeling to it. Since Chicago is the second city to New York in those categories is San Francisco the third city. I am not talking about population cause i know that San fran is not the third populated city and chicago is not the second. I just want to see what everyone else thinks about the third city. And if san fran is not than what do u guys think is the third real city.
'Second City' is a pretty dated moniker for Chicago; it hasn't been that for a while now. Los Angeles is the Second City, Chicago the Third. I would tend to think of SF as #4, but isn't DFW holding that position right now?
"Second City" doesn't refer to Chicago being 2nd to anything. It's not a reference to being the 2nd most populated city, or the 2nd most popular city in the country, or anything like that.
"Second City" refers to the new Chicago being the "2nd City" built in this location. The first city burned down in the fire.
"Second City" doesn't refer to Chicago being 2nd to anything. It's not a reference to being the 2nd most populated city, or the 2nd most popular city in the country, or anything like that.
"Second City" refers to the new Chicago being the "2nd City" built in this location. The first city burned down in the fire.
"Second City" doesn't refer to Chicago being 2nd to anything. It's not a reference to being the 2nd most populated city, or the 2nd most popular city in the country, or anything like that.
"Second City" refers to the new Chicago being the "2nd City" built in this location. The first city burned down in the fire.
Wow, didn't know that. Learn something new everyday here.
Wow, didn't know that. Learn something new everyday here.
Yea, since Chicago used to be the 2nd largest city in the country most people think it just referred to population.
Chicago is actually a very, very interesting city.
~ From 1860-1950, the city went from 109,000 to 3.6 million.
~ The city reversed the flw of the Chicago River so that it would flow away from Lake Michigan and away from the city.
~ Lakeshore Drive is built on debris that was pushed into Lake Michigan after the Chicago fire.
~ The downtown was raised by manpower to allow for drainage systems to be built
~ Chicago had over 1,000 gangs in the 1920's.
~ Chicago's "Uptown" neighborhood competed with Hollywood, CA to become the entertainment capital (obviously Hollywood, CA won)
Yea, since Chicago used to be the 2nd largest city in the country most people think it just referred to population.
Chicago is actually a very, very interesting city.
~ From 1860-1950, the city went from 109,000 to 3.6 million.
~ The city reversed the flw of the Chicago River so that it would flow away from Lake Michigan and away from the city.
~ Lakeshore Drive is built on debris that was pushed into Lake Michigan after the Chicago fire.
~ The downtown was raised by manpower to allow for drainage systems to be built
~ Chicago had over 1,000 gangs in the 1920's.
~ Chicago's "Uptown" neighborhood competed with Hollywood, CA to become the entertainment capital (obviously Hollywood, CA won)
I don't think anyone actually responded to the question. In my opinion, though, I wouldn't put
Chicago as second for density/urbanity. I would put Boston, SF or Phila. as 2nd to NYC; then Chicago.
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.