Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-19-2012, 03:40 PM
 
1,750 posts, read 3,389,286 times
Reputation: 788

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
Chicago's "Manhattan" would probably be the area from Roger's Park on the north limits, down through the Mag Mile, the Loop and the South Loop, and inland up until around the Chicago River.

This area is:
530,000 people
around 23 square miles
around 23,000 people per square mile

It contains many of the nuts and bolts that make Chicago tick as far as culture, entertainment, business and lively residential areas.

* Over 1,000 highrises
* The downtown area with around 600,000 office workers
* Millions of square feet of retail
* Over a dozen colleges/universities with around 100,000 enrollment
* 54 above ground and underground transit stations
* 11 commuter rail stations
* Dozens of bus lines
* Over 1,700 acres of parkland
* 7 beaches
* 7 marinas with over 5,600 boat slips
* McCormick Place convention center with 2,670,000 sf of space
* US Cellular Field with the White Sox
* Soldier Field for the Bears football
* Wrigley Field for the Cubs
* Art Institute of Chicago
* Museum Campus contining the Shedd Aquarium, Field Museum and Adler Planetarium
* Navy Pier
* 2 major cemeteries with 470 acres of land
* I believe over 1,000 bars and an equal number of restaurants
Great info. I didn't go up to Rogers Park, because I think Wicker Park should be in the "Manhattan" footprint, but a case could be made either way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-19-2012, 03:42 PM
 
1,750 posts, read 3,389,286 times
Reputation: 788
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrantiX View Post
Pretty much a thread for Chicago, San Francisco, and LA.
I think all cities do well in these categories, LA actually may be at a disadvantage at ~20 sq miles, but I do agree that Chicago and SF would do particularly well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 03:46 PM
 
Location: Nob Hill, San Francisco, CA
2,342 posts, read 3,987,596 times
Reputation: 1088
Quote:
Originally Posted by prelude91 View Post
I think all cities do well in these categories, LA actually may be at a disadvantage at ~20 sq miles, but I do agree that Chicago and SF would do particularly well.
Just finished adding on to my post. Tell me what you think, since you've lived in NYC, DC, and Chicago. I cant give either San Francisco or Chicago the edge on food because they specialize in different types and for quality and different types LA is definitely in the mix IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 03:49 PM
 
1,750 posts, read 3,389,286 times
Reputation: 788
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrantiX View Post
Pretty much a thread for Chicago, San Francisco, and LA.

Density, Public Spaces / Parks = San Francisco

Walk-ability = Chicago and San Francisco

Public Transportation, Architecture = Chicago

Other (Millennium Park- very toned down version of Times Square) (LA Live- toned down Times Square) = Chicago and LA

Museums, Nightlife = LA

Quality of Food / Types of Food = Chicago, LA, and San Francisco
I have to give Parks to Chicago (by a land slide) because of the Lakefront, no other city has a setting that's close. Millennium Park is nothing like Times Square.

Other than those two things I think your list looks good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 03:51 PM
 
Location: Nob Hill, San Francisco, CA
2,342 posts, read 3,987,596 times
Reputation: 1088
Quote:
Originally Posted by prelude91 View Post
I have to give Parks to Chicago (by a land slide) because of the Lakefront, no other city has a setting that's close. Millennium Park is nothing like Times Square.

Other than those two things I think your list looks good.
I can concede parks to anyone from Chicago and Boston making cases for them. I beg to differ on Millennium Park, its not like Times Square by look but by function its the center for tourists in the downtown area and that's really what I meant. Tourist trap with lights, activities, outdoor concert places, surrounded by skyscrapers, etc etc.

I think Lincoln and Grant are fine parks and I was actually rethinking about that one but for parks my bias is leading me to GGP.

Last edited by scrantiX; 09-19-2012 at 04:02 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 04:12 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,983 posts, read 53,447,987 times
Reputation: 15179
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post
^^^ only issue on walkability with SF is the hills but in the core not so much.
Hills make better walking and more interesting views (makes walking more worthwhile). San Francisco hills in the core don't break up the built form.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 04:36 PM
 
Location: NYC/D.C.
362 posts, read 665,175 times
Reputation: 210
Nice info. Can someone please make a map for sf, Boston, Philly, or dc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 04:41 PM
 
672 posts, read 1,788,243 times
Reputation: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOOK MA NO HANDS View Post
Nice info. Can someone please make a map for sf, Boston, Philly, or dc.
How's this for San Francisco:

2.8-mile radius of specified point
Total Population 501,807
Population Density 21659
Land Area Sq. Miles 23

SAS Output=
Attached Thumbnails
Which city has the most vibrant and urban "Manhattan"?-sf-23.gif  
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 04:45 PM
 
Location: NYC/D.C.
362 posts, read 665,175 times
Reputation: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhymes with Best Coast View Post
How's this for San Francisco:

2.8-mile radius of specified point
Total Population 501,807
Population Density 21659
Land Area Sq. Miles 23

SAS Output=
Not bad
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 04:50 PM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,653 posts, read 67,476,702 times
Reputation: 21228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhymes with Best Coast View Post
How's this for San Francisco:

2.8-mile radius of specified point
Total Population 501,807
Population Density 21659
Land Area Sq. Miles 23

SAS Output=
Great map and I like the diverse crossection of neighborhoods.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top