Which of these would you say is the most ‘similar’, for someone who has been to NYC and really enjoyed it?
Into interesting streets, walking around or taking public transport (no driving), interesting local food (budget not Michelin),all kinds of art from street art to galleries, historical buildings,bars.
I’m thinking either Chicago, Boston or Philadelphia.
What do you think? Which one, and why?
Thanks in advance for any useful comments!
7 comments
Philly. Why? Just had a 10 hour layover there on the way to Singapore and it ticks all your boxes.
Oh how dare I not say Chicago=downvotes
I’ve lived in Boston, Chicago, and NYC.
Chicago.
If you ever make it out West give Seattle a visit. It’s kinda like the NYC of the West Coast.
Probably Chicago, although personally I like Boston.
San Francisco is as close as you’ll get on the West Coast.
It’s like Manhattan. Just smaller, and hillier. Although a New Yorker would probably find many things to miss. (Sense of humor, for starters.)
Chicago, Boston, and Philly in that order.
Washington DC, although very distinct from New York has similar quality in interesting architecture, public transportation and cultural institutions.
Of your list though Chicago, Boston, Philly in that order.