Chicago is the REAL 2nd biggest city (Irving, Albany: apartment, neighborhood)

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by Rusty Nailz

Rio is located in mountain ranges and it's density is also way higher than Los Angeles and even Chicago's. I serioiusly doubt people familiar with LA and Chicago would say LA is a lot more urban than Chicago.

Has anyone said that?

We're talking about bigger.

[Veritas Vincit]

Yeah OP is saying Chicago is more walkable and more compact...which doesn't make it the 2nd biggest city.

Honestly, Chicago doesn't give me that much of a city vibe either. It goes from high rises to looking like outer borough NYC pretty quickly. It's lacking in the type of mid-rise housing that's typical of the grand cities of the world.

[Master Jay]

Blowm3, oh NO you di'int!

[MercedesBoy]

Ignorant post.

[Blowm3]

Chicago may have more of a big city vibe compared to LA, but Chicago has nowhere near the level of culture or expression LA has. And that is what attracts people to the city. To put into perspective, Chicagoans are extremely plain, perhaps even boring, maybe that is due to being located in the Midwest. This isn’t a bad thing however.

You leave the downtown area of Chicago and it looks like every other city in the rest belt. Just my opinion of what I observed as a native.

[CCS414]

Chicago is a much older city so development has to contend with a lot of right of way issues and utility relocation. This will inherently make development more compact and force the need for urban design.

[Rusty Nailz]

Western and Southern cities have annexed a lot in the last century. That explains a lot of the growth. Where most of the annexation Chicago did was early on. This probably explains why LA and Houston have a much more suburban vibe than Chicago does. Also explains a lot of the growth in population in cities like Houston. If Chicago annexed Evanston, Oak Park, Berwyn and Cicero we'd be close to 2nd city if not the 2nd.

[BigLake]

Originally Posted by Blowm3

Chicago may have more of a big city vibe compared to LA, but Chicago has nowhere near the level of culture or expression LA has. And that is what attracts people to the city. To put into perspective, Chicagoans are extremely plain, perhaps even boring, maybe that is due to being located in the Midwest. This isn’t a bad thing however.

You leave the downtown area of Chicago and it looks like every other city in the rest belt. Just my opinion of what I observed as a native.

^^^^ This is a reeeeealllly dumb post. Think. And then try again.

[Blowm3]

Originally Posted by BigLake

^^^^ This is a reeeeealllly dumb post. Think. And then try again.

I clearly hit a nerve. Truth hurts unfortunately.

[Ivory Lee Spurlock]

Chicago looks bigger because it has so many skyscrapers. Compared to LA, Phoenix, and Houston, Chicago is a much older city than those 3. By the time LA, (and especially Phoenix, and Houston) came on to the "big city" scene, - after the invention of indoor AC - the country was into the suburbanization boom rather than density, which has always been an East Coast mystery. If Chicago had came along around the same time as LA, Phoenix and Houston, Chcago's skyline would probably look like Houston or LA's skyline.