Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
Don't strain yourself moving those goal posts:
I just pointed out to you the absurdity of your statement. Of course they are different cities, but they share some aesthetic qualities - in places - that don't exist in most other cities.
|
You clearly don't know the definition of "moving the goal posts". How am I "moving the goal posts" by using the same ridiculous comparison method (Google Street View) you did in order to "prove" that just because two cities share some aesthetic qualities doesn't necessarily mean they are alike from a development perspective? Because that's exactly what I just proved.
Look, I live and work in Manhattan. I'm in Philly's core frequently. They are NOTHING alike. Sure, maybe some parts on the outskirts of South Philly resemble certain neighborhoods in Queens, but the similarities end there, from a development pattern perspective. Do yourself a favor and compare, side by side, a map of Philly's core and Manhattan. No similarities whatsoever. Downtown Philly, to me (architectural differences obviously not withstanding), resembles an East Coast version of Dallas or Houston. Similar sized skylines, freeways and university campuses on the edges of downtown, sports arenas and stadiums situated a stones throw from downtown, etc.
New York/Manhattan is NOTHING like that, AT ALL.
Do they share a few architectural similarities? Of course, they are both old as sh*t, and both on the East Coast. But, to be honest, most of the stuff (not just buildings - infrastructure, bridges, tunnels, etc.) in Philly looks WAY older than what you see around New York, and also much more bombed out, filthy and dilapidated.