Back 2 Basics: What is your absolute favorite city in the world, and why?

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

anecdotal for sure, but my guess is that, due to the international border, there are more familial/friendship ties between detroit and chicago than there are between detroit and toronto. and unlike us nerds on this forum who travel to cities just to see them, a great many people travel to other places to visit their family and friends.

and, mid-late 00s i remember entire chicago neighborhoods that seemed like extra-state enclaves of michiganders. i doubt there's ever been anything like that in toronto.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

and, mid-late 00s i remember entire chicago neighborhoods that seemed like extra-state enclaves of michiganders. i doubt there's ever been anything like that in toronto.

yeah, chicago has like 8,000 wolverines and spartans sports bars.

i wonder how many wolverines and spartans sports bars there are in toronto?

[The North One]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

My own personal anecdote. In the 90s, my parents went to Toronto - from Detroit - several times in the 90s to see plays and musicals that weren't showing in Detroit: "Cats", "Phantom of the Opera", "Show Boat", and probably some others that I'm forgetting. But I don't think you would've ever heard someone in the 90s refer to Toronto as "the big city" for Detroiters. Toronto just had an aggressive tourism campaign that ran in Detroit for a good chunk of the 90s that promoted its theatrical shows.

I don't think they ever went to Chicago. In the 90s, I think most people would've gone to Chicago for a specific purpose, like sitting in one of the talk show audiences. I don't think there was as much urban tourism as there is now.

I can't speak for the 90s because I'm too young but in the 00's the go to urban location (for shopping walking around/whatever) was almost always Chicago. I think most people in Michigan barely knew what Toronto had to offer because Chicago was a much older and established big city with lots of famous landmarks, just overall more present in people's minds. Not to mention Chicago is also extremely aggressive in the tourism department so that helped people gravitate there. I think now people are more aware of Toronto though.

Also Detroit is further north than Chicago, so you have to drive south and then you have to go around lake Michigan which adds time. Detroit to Toronto is basically just a straight line, there's nothing you have to go around so that makes it faster.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

growing up in the 80s, my parents good college friends from metro detroit would come to visit us in chicago to do "city stuff" like ride the el to a game at wrigley field, go shopping on michigan avenue, etc.

i remember them lamenting the state of urban detroit in relation to chicago. "oh i wish we had something like this"

anecdotal for sure, but my guess is that, due to the international border, there are more familial/friendship ties between detroit and chicago than there are between detroit and toronto. and unlike us nerds on this forum who travel to cities just to see them, a great many people travel to other places to visit their family and friends.

Absolutely there are more family ties between Detroit and Chicago. If we had family or friends in Chicago then I'm sure we would have visited. Our family is mostly in California, the northeast, and North Carolina, so those are the places we visited most often, in addition to the obligatory trips to D.C. and Florida.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by The North One

I can't speak for the 90s because I'm too young but in the 00's the go to urban location (for shopping walking around/whatever) was almost always Chicago. I think most people in Michigan barely knew what Toronto had to offer because Chicago was a much older and established big city with lots of famous landmarks, just overall more present in people's minds. Not to mention Chicago is also extremely aggressive in the tourism department so that helped people gravitate there. I think now people are more aware of Toronto though.

Also Detroit is further north than Chicago, so you have to drive south and then you have to go around lake Michigan which adds time. Detroit to Toronto is basically just a straight line, there's nothing you have to go around so that makes it faster.

Yeah, the 00s were all about Chicago. My gut says the 90s were more Toronto focused as a tourist destination from Detroit. Just thinking about it more, in middle school we took an overnight class trip to Canada's Wonderland Amusement Park, just north of Toronto. That was in the late 90s. Wonderland was a very popular destination for Metro Detroiters in the 90s. I don't know anyone who even considered going to Six Flags Great America back then.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

in middle school we took an overnight class trip to Canada's Wonderland Amusement Park, just north of Toronto. That was in the late 90s. Wonderland was a very popular destination for Metro Detroiters in the 90s. I don't know anyone who even considered going to Six Flags Great America back then.

anyone in metro detroit who goes to either canada's wonderland or six flags great america instead of cedar point is a complete idiot.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

anyone in metro detroit who goes to either canada's wonderland or six flags great america instead of cedar point is a complete idiot.

why would someone need to even leave metro detroit? does it not have a six flags or something similar? it blows my mind that someone would make leaving a metro area for a six flags an overnight type vacation.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

why would someone need to even leave metro detroit? does it not have a six flags or something similar?

no, metro detroit does not have a major roller coaster theme park.

but cedar point, the greatest roller coaster park on the planet, is close by in sandusky, OH (about a 2 hour drive).



source: http://www.aerialagents.com/cedar-point-aerial-photos

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

and, mid-late 00s i remember entire chicago neighborhoods that seemed like extra-state enclaves of michiganders. i doubt there's ever been anything like that in toronto.

Yeah, but that's a different phenomenon. Chicago is a huge magnet for B10 grads, who obviously aren't going to move to a foreign country (with fewer professional jobs and lower pay) with similar frequency.

And the weekend visit crowd isn't exactly the same as the B10 postcollegiate crowd.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

no, metro detroit does not have a major roller coaster theme park.

but cedar point, the greatest roller coaster park on the planet, is close by in sandusky, OH (about a 2 hour drive).

ah, yeah, i guess they have to split with cleveland. and i hear that it's about as good as it gets.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

anyone in metro detroit who goes to either canada's wonderland or six flags great america instead of cedar point is a complete idiot.

Haha, well of course everybody mostly went to Cedar Point. Cedar Point is what killed off Boblo Island, which had been the most popular amusement park destination for Detroiters until the early 90s. Boblo Island was on Bois Blanc Island, which is in Canada.

[edale]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

toronto. its flat, next to a lake, modern, worldly and decrepitly great lakes at the same time. its the first big city i ever skateboarded in where the cops didnt care, you could stay out late with getting harrassed or robbed, and was only 4 hours away from my house growing up. my parents both came from chicago and while i always loved going back to see relatives, growing up in michigan, toronto was always my go to big city destination. i LOOOOOOVE toronto....really....

Just curious, why is flatness a desirable quality for you? I feel just the opposite. I really dislike unrelentingly flat landscapes, and in urban areas, I feel like it leads to neighborhoods largely feeling the same, and boundaries between them artificial.

Never been to Toronto, though. Would love to check it out, though based on pictures I don't think I'd be a huge fan. I love me some Montreal and Quebec City, and I'm over due for a return trip to Vancouver. Canada has some really wonderful cities!

[Centropolis]

Any amusement park that is an island wins the game.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by edale

Just curious, why is flatness a desirable quality for you? I feel just the opposite. I really dislike unrelentingly flat landscapes, and in urban areas, I feel like it leads to neighborhoods largely feeling the same, and boundaries between them artificial.

The hills drove me insane when i lived in kansas city, and rode a fixy everywhere, which is probably the hilliest urban core in the midwest behind cincy. In St. Louis the huge hills are in the suburbs, and the urban core is gently to aggressively rolling (with a few very steep areas) which is pleasant. I guess it's whatever you are used to, but i'd rather have the surrounding countryside and suburbs be hilly and the city gently rolling (not flat, per say).

[JManc]

Originally Posted by The North One

Yes but only in the last five years has this been a thing. No family went for an urban vacation in Detroit in the 90's 00's, it was either Chicago or Toronto.

That being said Toronto is definitely notably closer to Detroit. A Chicago drive is usually like 5 hours, Toronto is usually about 4.

That's a fair point. I'd totally go to Detroit now for the urban experience though. It's come a long way. I went to grad school with guy who established a few real estate startups that since gone national up there and ran for county wide office.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

The hills drove me insane when i lived in kansas city, and rode a fixy everywhere, which is probably the hilliest urban core in the midwest behind cincy. In St. Louis the huge hills are in the suburbs, and the urban core is gently to aggressively rolling (with a few very steep areas) which is pleasant. I guess it's whatever you are used to, but i'd rather have the surrounding countryside and suburbs be hilly and the city gently rolling (not flat, per say).

I was pleasantly surprised to see hills in Kansas City when I visited. I guess I thought of Kansas as being flat as a pancake so I assumed KC would be the same, but it has some nice gentle hills scattered about. I don't need a city set in the mountains, and I actually think a city like Pittsburgh is a bit TOO hilly for my tastes, but generally speaking, there has to be some sort of topo to keep a city interesting for me. Cincy has a great balance between hills and flat lands, imo. Cleveland is generally flat, but has some nice hills on the east side which I think gives it some great character. Contrast that to Columbus, which is flat flat flat in all directions until you run into the Appalachian foothills an hour outside the city. Boring.

To answer the question of this thread, I would say my favorite city in the world is probably New York. Of all the cities I've been to, no where else quite matches the energy and hustle and bustle of NYC. The architecture, food, museums and entertainment, parks, waterways, diversity...

London comes closest to matching this feeling, but I find it harder to navigate, though the winding streets and little lanes add a ton of charm there. Paris is probably the most beautiful big city I've been to, and the culture and food is out of this world. But as a non-French speaker, I felt like I couldn't fully experience the city in the same way as NYC and London. I recently had the good fortune to visit Asia, and was very impressed with both Hong Kong and Singapore, but I still think NYC and London are my two favorites.

[suburbanite]

New York is almost entirely flat...

I'd say it maintains good boundaries between it's neighbourhoods though.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by suburbanite

New York is almost entirely flat...

It is? Have you been to the Bronx, Upper Manhattan, Staten Island, SW Brooklyn?

I will never understand the stereotype that the NYC area is flat. Pretty much the entire metro north of Manhattan is quite hilly/rocky. The entire north shore of LI is hilly. You can take a commuter train from Grand Central directly to the Appalachian Trail.

[Florida Guy]

Originally Posted by edale

I was pleasantly surprised to see hills in Kansas City when I visited. I guess I thought of Kansas as being flat as a pancake so I assumed KC would be the same, but it has some nice gentle hills scattered about. I don't need a city set in the mountains, and I actually think a city like Pittsburgh is a bit TOO hilly for my tastes, but generally speaking, there has to be some sort of topo to keep a city interesting for me. Cincy has a great balance between hills and flat lands, imo. Cleveland is generally flat, but has some nice hills on the east side which I think gives it some great character. Contrast that to Columbus, which is flat flat flat in all directions until you run into the Appalachian foothills an hour outside the city. Boring.

To answer the question of this thread, I would say my favorite city in the world is probably New York. Of all the cities I've been to, no where else quite matches the energy and hustle and bustle of NYC. The architecture, food, museums and entertainment, parks, waterways, diversity...

London comes closest to matching this feeling, but I find it harder to navigate, though the winding streets and little lanes add a ton of charm there. Paris is probably the most beautiful big city I've been to, and the culture and food is out of this world. But as a non-French speaker, I felt like I couldn't fully experience the city in the same way as NYC and London. I recently had the good fortune to visit Asia, and was very impressed with both Hong Kong and Singapore, but I still think NYC and London are my two favorites.

I have a friend that moved from Pittsburgh to Columbus. She loves Columbus and when I asked her why she liked it better than Pittsburgh she summed it up in two words "it's flat". The hills are what makes Pittsburgh attractive IMHO. To each their own.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by Crawford

It is? Have you been to the Bronx, Upper Manhattan, Staten Island, SW Brooklyn?

I will never understand the stereotype that the NYC area is flat. Pretty much the entire metro north of Manhattan is quite hilly/rocky. The entire north shore of LI is hilly. You can take a commuter train from Grand Central directly to the Appalachian Trail.

yeah, you can really see the geology of the region rise from manhattan (especially northern manhattan) itself, which i've always found very pleasant. you don't see huge rock outcroppings and cliffs in truly flat cities. nyc is much more geographically/geologically dynamic than most people presume.