HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


View Poll Results: What is the second most urban US city after NYC?
Boston 3 5.00%
Chicago 28 46.67%
DC 0 0%
LA 6 10.00%
Philly 7 11.67%
San Francisco 16 26.67%
some other city 0 0%
Voters: 60. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 5:38 PM
pj3000's Avatar
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh & Miami
Posts: 4,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by park123 View Post
clever riposte! Because Tokyo is 60 miles from the US border and uses basically American English as its native language.
The question posed was for the US. We hadn’t even gotten to the 2nd page, let’s try to keep it on topic before it goes into comparing Toronto and Montreal to Chicago and Boston.

These threads all end up being the same shit over and over because someone had to alter the topic early on. Start another thread if you need to talk about Toronto.
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 5:40 PM
austlar1 austlar1 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,731
Chicago is number two simply because of its highrise core and ample rail transit. After Chicago, I think LA gets the nod. Obviously it is not a traditional urban environment, but it has a depth of human activity that can only be found in a global metropolis. No other US city comes close, not even Chicago. I would rank LA number two except for the fact that Chicago's core is so impressive.
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 5:41 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago View Post
-There are more people on the 22sq miles of manhattan than the entire 230sq
miles of Chicago.
That's not true...
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 5:47 PM
park123 park123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by austlar1 View Post
Chicago is number two simply because of its highrise core and ample rail transit. After Chicago, I think LA gets the nod. Obviously it is not a traditional urban environment, but it has a depth of human activity that can only be found in a global metropolis. No other US city comes close, not even Chicago. I would rank LA number two except for the fact that Chicago's core is so impressive.
I think this is fair, and I would definitely agree LA far outstrips Chicago in "depth of human activity", which is a good way of putting it. But LA just doesn't come across as a "city" in most of the world. It's something else, something new, which doesn't really exist outside of the USA.
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 5:48 PM
RedCorsair87 RedCorsair87 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 333
^Ya, that's definitely not true. Chicago has at least a million more than Manhattan. Brooklyn has more than Manhattan, but less than Chicago.
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 5:55 PM
park123 park123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 18
Houston and Dallas are large too, rivaling Philadelphia in a lot of ways - economically, demographically, I guess culturally. But Houston and Dallas just aren't "cities". Same thing with LA, although it is more dense from an American perspective
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:06 PM
kool maudit's Avatar
kool maudit kool maudit is offline
five one foreigner
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 11,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by park123 View Post
I think this is fair, and I would definitely agree LA far outstrips Chicago in "depth of human activity", which is a good way of putting it. But LA just doesn't come across as a "city" in most of the world. It's something else, something new, which doesn't really exist outside of the USA.
I think Los Angeles is pretty legible from the standpoint of Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, Mexico City etc.
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:13 PM
austlar1 austlar1 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by park123 View Post
Houston and Dallas are large too, rivaling Philadelphia in a lot of ways - economically, demographically, I guess culturally. But Houston and Dallas just aren't "cities". Same thing with LA, although it is more dense from an American perspective
Here's the deal as I see it. Most US cities aren't "cities" in the traditional sense. Even some of the older cities with 19th Century cores no longer function as traditional "cities", especially the economically and socially challenged cities. Most of the economic activity is spread out in a way that is similar to what you find in newer Sunbelt cities. I think those of us who participate on this site prefer traditional urban environments, but it is important to recognize that LA, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, etc. do function as cities in a very real way in spite of the fact that their form is something rather alien to much of the world.
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:13 PM
park123 park123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by kool maudit View Post
I think Los Angeles is pretty legible from the standpoint of Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, Mexico City etc.
Only insofar as they are underdeveloped cities with inadequate public transportation systems. So people there would understand that you have to use a car to get around. But in all of them, there are an order of magnitude (or two) more people out and about, walking around, than in LA.

If you drive around, LA feels large and never-ending. But if you park your car and get out, almost anywhere in LA feels sleepy.
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:20 PM
Investing In Chicago Investing In Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
That's not true...
Yes it is. Manhattan has a daytime population of ~4M people
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:22 PM
Investing In Chicago Investing In Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedCorsair87 View Post
^Ya, that's definitely not true. Chicago has at least a million more than Manhattan. Brooklyn has more than Manhattan, but less than Chicago.
I think you are confused with what I’m saying. I’m referring to actual population: tourists, office workers, and everyone else.
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:26 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,930
It's obviously Chicago. Not really much to debate.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:43 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 25,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by park123 View Post
Only insofar as they are underdeveloped cities with inadequate public transportation systems. So people there would understand that you have to use a car to get around. But in all of them, there are an order of magnitude (or two) more people out and about, walking around, than in LA.

If you drive around, LA feels large and never-ending. But if you park your car and get out, almost anywhere in LA feels sleepy.
LA is decentralized, New York is centralized but both function and 'feel' like cities. Houston is very decentralized as well and you need a car for everything but it still looks and acts very much like a major American city. City does not mean high density with mass transit.
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:43 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago View Post
Yes it is. Manhattan has a daytime population of ~4M people
This isn't really the same thing. If you arbitrarily defined some section of Chicago around the downtown area, it would also have a super high daytime population.
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:46 PM
Investing In Chicago Investing In Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
This isn't really the same thing. If you arbitrarily defined some section of Chicago around the downtown area, it would also have a super high daytime population.
I’m not sure what you mean by same thing. Same thing as what? What I said was a fact: The 22sq miles of Manhattan have more people on the island than the entire city of Chicago, residents, tourists, and all.
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:47 PM
park123 park123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
LA is decentralized, New York is centralized but both function and 'feel' like cities. Houston is very decentralized as well and you need a car for everything but it still looks and acts very much like a major American city. City does not mean high density with mass transit.
If you take someone from Tokyo or Seoul or Paris or Athens to Montrose or something in Houston, and tell them you are in an American "city" of 6 million people, (or even of 1.6 million people), they will just stare back at you not understanding what you just said.

Houston is only a city in the American context. LA is not as extreme as Houston, but it also isn't urban to the great majority of people in the world.
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:49 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago View Post
I’m not sure what you mean by same thing. Same thing as what? What I said was a fact: The 22sq miles of Manhattan have more people on the island than the entire city of Chicago, residents, tourists, and all.
The way you phrased it was meant to imply that Manhattan is, by itself, larger than all of Chicago. We all know that Manhattan, as the center of New York City, is bigger than whatever its analogy in Chicago would be.
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:53 PM
Investing In Chicago Investing In Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
The way you phrased it was meant to imply that Manhattan is, by itself, larger than all of Chicago. We all know that Manhattan, as the center of New York City, is bigger than whatever its analogy in Chicago would be.
You’re way over complicating this, I’m not implying anything, just simply stating a fact, which I’ll stare again:

The 22sq miles of Manhattan has more people
On it, than the entire 227sq miles of Chicago.
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:55 PM
austlar1 austlar1 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by park123 View Post
Only insofar as they are underdeveloped cities with inadequate public transportation systems. So people there would understand that you have to use a car to get around. But in all of them, there are an order of magnitude (or two) more people out and about, walking around, than in LA.

If you drive around, LA feels large and never-ending. But if you park your car and get out, almost anywhere in LA feels sleepy.
Yeah, but if you get out of your car often enough in LA, you will quickly realize that you are not in Wichita or Grand Rapids. The local population is incredibly cosmopolitan. You can locate and experience every kind of cuisine in LA, enjoy some of the finest and most diverse cultural offerings to be had in North America, and obtain just about any type of goods or services that your heart may desire. The place never feels sleepy to me, but I will admit that it almost always fails to deliver that on-the-pavement big city pedestrian experience that many of us crave.
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2019, 6:59 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago View Post
You’re way over complicating this, I’m not implying anything, just simply stating a fact, which I’ll stare again:

The 22sq miles of Manhattan has more people
On it, than the entire 227sq miles of Chicago.
On a weekday during business hours.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:02 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.