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.
Manhattan and SF certainly are heavyweights in the downtown department but to say no other cities can compare is a bit of an overstatement, at least in SF's case. Manhattan is in a league all its own. SF trying to jump on Manhattans coattails would be akin to Tori Spelling standing next to Megan Fox and proclaiming that they are the two hottest girls in the room.
Chicagos downtown is 3x the size of SF, eventhough SF may appear more quaint and lively you have to take the sheer size and vibrancy of downtown Chicago into account. Boston and Philly both have close to 100,000 full time downtown residents which dwarfs SF. Boston + Phillys downtowns are also cultural + entertainment centers for regions that are the same size as The Bay area. Admittedly SF is more of a national + international tourist city than either Boston or Philadelphia
Center City Philly is extremely lively. Its liveliness may be more economically and racially diverse than SF and thus it may not register in what you categorize as a "destination". My guess is that you classify "lively" with $$$$ and may have a certain criteria of demographic in what qualifies for destination status.
Italian Market
Typical scene along Market Street
Rittenhouse Square
Broad Street
South Street
Walnut Street
I like the West Coast and the East Coast, they have so much stuff that are similar.
As far as ambience, yes. DT SF and DT Chicago along with Manhattan are the only downtowns in America I consider to be real destination downtowns. People gravitate there outside of M-F for purposes like shopping and entertainment in a way that I have never seen anywhere else. Sure some cities have little bar districts but they lack everything that is found in total in the above mentioned three.
I didnt say DT SF is bigger than DT Chicago. Im saying its better. The notion that SF lacks streetlife is quite absurd at best. Pound for Pound, SF is second to Manhattan in streetlife.
No, I think if we evaluate the whole package, retail, entertainment, hotels, bars, restaurants, pedestrian traffic, SF and Chicago are tied, but SF gets the edge from me because its more interesting to walk around
quite frankly. SF is also more memorable.
please, if you have the time, convince me that portland should be in a group of downtowns to the like of san fran, seattle, chicago, etc. i have a great deal of respect for the portland area; however, i just do not see the downtown being so overly rated. i'm familiar w/ the western culinary institute and its influence on the downtown restaurants, but what about the extensive problem w/ street people, panhandlers, beautiful architecture, and the like? just a fair assessment on balance. thus far, it seems we definitely have: nyc, chicago, sf, philly, boston, seattle...who else by consensus?
I consider Midtown and Downtown to be the 'Downtown' of NYC.
i'm sure i would be tarred and feathered, if i could be found by those that are offended by my statement; nonetheless, everyone that i know in manhatten, in the strictest sense, would ask, if someone declared they live in nyc, where that one lived in the city---meaning manhatten.
please, if you have the time, convince me that portland should be in a group of downtowns to the like of san fran, seattle, chicago, etc.
For one, the downtown waterfront is on par with the top 10 downtown waterfronts in the US. Particularly, the greenery along the waterfront (on both banks) and pedestrian trails (on both banks) AND the two pedestrian bridges which make pedestrians able to go up one bank, across a bridge, down the other bank, and back across a bridge. It is scenic, usable, natural, walkable, bikeable, picnicable, lounge-chairable, frisbee-throwable. It has the full usage that most people look for in a park. It is just awesome. You mention San Fran. San Fran's downtown waterfront is concrete and pier with a scant offering of green here and there. You can't really use it like most people use a park. Of course SF has Golden Gate Park for that, and it's one of the best in the nation, but Golden Gate Park isn't downtown. What IS downtown at SF's waterfront is nowhere near as great a park space as what is downtown at Portland's waterfront.
That's one BIG reason Portland should be in that list of downtowns. When you make your waterfront THAT usable and pedestrian friendly and naturally scenic, meaning incorporating significant greenery to enhance the scenery, you deserve to be in that list. I mean really- TWO pedestrian bridges where you can go round and round and round through greenery from bank to bank- who does that?
I just simply disagree with Miami's downtown being in the top 10. Outside of Bayside, it dies after 5 PM. The action is in Coconut Grove and Miami Beach. Not Downtown Miami.
I just simply disagree with Miami's downtown being in the top 10. Outside of Bayside, it dies after 5 PM. The action is in Coconut Grove and Miami Beach. Not Downtown Miami.
Maybe some folks aren't using late night activity as a measure of their favorite downtowns. I know for sure that I am not. And I don't have Miami in my top 10 either.
No, I think they equate vibrancy with vibrancy. Ive spent a lot of time in Philly, and love it, its gritty in an awesome way and has some cool areas.
But San Francisco's Downtown far eclipses Philly. Its way more dense, more crowded (especially during the daytime, when the city's population doubles), has more distinct sections, and feels more like a big city.
This, for instance, is normal foot traffic for certain areas of Market Street, and not during a "festival":
King of Prussia(8 miles west of Philly) which is the biggest retail mall in the country and a mid-atlantic/ northeast shopping destination takes some of the luster off of Center City Philly as an upscale shopping mecca but Center City does fabulously in other aspects. Culture,museums,restaurants,recreation,night life,history,office space.
SF certainly has the edge on philly concerning tourism/shopping/views but you seriously discredit the ambience of Center City Philly. My guess is that you visited Philly once, maybe caught some bad weather which may have had an impact on streetlife and your perception of what Center City entails.
Center City has approximately the same amount of office space as downtown SF. There are 100,000 college students within a couple miles of Center City and its has the third most populous downtown in the country. To tout SF's downtown district as vibrant and Philadelphia as gritty is absolutely ridiculous.
Dont let your west coast biasness cloud reality.No offense but what you dont know about Center City Philly could fill volumes.
I like the West Coast and the East Coast, they have so much stuff that are similar.
No... Actually they don't. SF is an anomaly as far as West Coast cities go.
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.
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.
thus far, it seems we definitely have: nyc, chicago, sf, philly, boston, seattle...who else by consensus?
