Chicago Visit - No Gorges Here

Smedley and I just took our first couple of loops around Chicago...it seems brighter, more open, and cleaner than Manhattan. And all the miles and hours of riding in the Bronx and Queens made it easier to ride around Chicago and still enjoy the scenery.

The buildings here do not create those dark Manhattan canyons, and the buildings themselves seem to benefit from perhaps cleaner air and the bleaching effects of sun and wind; their stone is brighter, not as blackened. The street surface is in far better shape in general, and they seem cleaner. The central business district is easy to navigate on a motorcycle; this is the most important test of a great city, I think.

Chicago seems less congested because it is, in fact about twice as “uncongested.” New York City has about 8.5 million people living on about 309 square miles, for a density of 27,300 New Yorkers per square mile. Chicago has about 3.2 million people living on about 227 square miles, for a density of 14,000 people per square mile.

(Actually, NYC’s “canyons” should be called “gorges.” In the topographically sophisticated circles in which I usually run, an opening in the earth that is wider then deep is called a canyon, but one that is deeper than it is wide is called a gorge. But urban planners keep talking about avoiding NYC’s “canyon effect.” Maybe then should visit Arizona's Grand Gorge.)

Today I rode in on 290 (Congress), turned right on Michigan and rode south to 16th Street (near Soldier Field), then turned left (east) to Lake Shore Drive, then rode north to around Foster Avenue Beach, then headed west to Broadway, then rode south past Congress to the Museum of Science and Technology, then went back north on Lake Shore Drive to the Navy Pier – a circuit of about 12 miles I’d guess. Then I did it again.

(BTW, who ruined Soldiers Field? At least the architects and builders should have been under adult supervision. And the WWII German U-Boat is gone from in front of the Museum of Science and Technology. Someone told me that they have moved it to an underground exhibit hall…it’s now a “subterranean,” if true.)


Here is the urban density data I was using above:

Density#..City....Population....Sq.Mi....Pop/Sq.Mi.

1..New York........8,421,450...309...27,254
2..San Francisco.....832,600....47...17,715
3..Chicago.........3,201,600...227...14,104
4..Boston............660,100....48...13,752
5..Philadelphia.....1,823,900...135...13,510
6..Washington, DC.....698,050....61...11,443
7..Baltimore..........846,400....81...10,449
8..Los Angeles......4,007,750....469...8,545
9..Detroit..........1,182,200....139...8,505
10..Milwaukee..........722,200.....96...7,523


Source:
http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0027.html

Sorry about the ragged columns; this blog engine will not let me line them up right. I added the .....s to make the information easier to read.