What surprised you most about the cities you've visited?

[vanman]

Victoria BC: How urban and compact the core of the city is.

Quebec City: The amount of intact historic buildings. I was blown away.

Seattle: The very steep hills in the downtown core.

LA: How small the downtown core was. I know it is improving but it still has a long way to go. Conversely, the overall city outside of downtown felt very dense and urban, much less sprawly than I had imagined. Also the hills in this city are no joke.

NYC: How overwhelming the density in Manhattan was. Especially Midtown. Where I'm from it's always easy to find a natural landmark and orient yourself. In Manhattan it is just massive buildings in all directions for as far as the eye can see.

London: How vast the city was and the amount of skyscrapers under construction. I thought it would have had more of a lowrise feel but in reality there were skyscrapers rising like weeds everywhere.

Paris: The grittiness. Probably had a lot to do with the crap weather that I experienced while I was there. Also was much more cosmopolitan than I expected.

Amsterdam: The biking culture. What a great city. It's ridiculously easy and enjoyable to get around on a bicycle there.

Barcelona: The Gothic Quarter. Enough said.

HK: Was not prepared for the lush forested hills and sandy beaches. One of the most beautiful cities I've been too. The poor air quality is a shame though.

Shanghai: Was surprisingly clean and orderly. Probably because I spent most of my time around the Bund and Pudong however.

Hanoi: The crazy traffic. Also the tiny stools hahaha. Seemed like everywhere you looked no matter what time of day there were 100s of people sitting outside enjoying life on tiny stools.

Bangkok: Like others have mentioned, I also didn't expect it to be so modern and first world.

Kuala Lumpur: It was very spread out and car oriented. Also very cosmopolitan.

[initiald]

Originally Posted by vanman

HK: Was not prepared for the lush forested hills and sandy beaches. One of the most beautiful cities I've been too. The poor air quality is a shame though.

Yes for sure. Also, the mix of old and new, rich and poor. On one block is Louis Vuitton shop and the next block is an open air meat market and food vendors similar to the one in Kingston, Jamaica. It was stark in comparison to Tokyo where I had just come from where there is not so much of a wide range like that.

[wrab]

Originally Posted by photoLith

Ive visited almost every major city in Canada and the US. Nothing really was unexpected, but when I went to Detroit for the first time last November I was blown away with how nice the downtown was. Yes, the city is blown up in lots of parts and really dangerous hoods abound but I never expected the downtown to be so revitalized and nice. There was so much construction going on and tons of restorations to buildings downtown and in the closer neighborhoods to downtown.

Downtown Detroit has great bones. The Guardian Building's Art Deco lobby alone is worth the trek!

[StethJeff]

Most cities seem to fulfill their expectations but the ones that didnt and come to mind . . .

Barcelona: much more racially diverse than i expected.

Buenos Aires: dog poop. everywhere.

Calgary: big buildings, little city.

Chicago: it seems to be common knowledge now, especially on SSP, but the cleanliness of the loop was staggering.

Istanbul: just reminded me a lot of SF in a strange way.

Seattle: wasn't expecting downtown to be on a steep grade.

Taipei: the most intolerable heat i've ever experienced, but the absolute nicest urban population i've ever met, downright wonderful people.

[photoLith]

Originally Posted by wrab

Downtown Detroit has great bones. The Guardian Building's Art Deco lobby alone is worth the trek!

I was blown away by the lobby, freaking the most impressive Art Deco interior Ive ever seen.

Here's some photos I took of it when I went.

GET_0266 by photolitherland, on Flickr

GET_0256 by photolitherland, on Flickr

Detroit has the countries best Art Deco in my opinion, a higher density of Art Deco at least for a city of its size. Guess you can't really compare it to the Art Deco found in NYC. But I do think out of all Art Deco buildings in the US, the Guardian Building for sure has the most impressive lobby.


I guess after thinking about this topic again, a city that also really surprised me, mainly because I hadn't really been to a dense historic city since I was a little kid was the first time I went to St. Louis when I lived in Arkansas about 6 years ago. It was my first time really exploring a dense historic city in the US. Before that I hadn't really explored historically urban row house cities in depth, other than walking around NYC for a few hours years before that and then growing up in a Chicago suburb until the second grade. Anyways, I was blown away with how far out the urban fabric extended from the downtown. I hadn't really ever seen anything like it before. I grew up in Houston and Dallas, which don't have row houses anywhere really. I couldn't believe that such urbaness existed. I drove all over the city and explored it in depth for about a week. Soulard was incredible to see. Before that I had also never seen urban decay to such an extent, mainly on the north side of the city. This was around 2010 or 2011 or so. The height of hipsterdom, so that was fascinating as well. Didn't really see hipster culture until then either, as I went to college in a tiny Arkansas town from 2006-2011, so I missed the urban hipsterization going on in cities. I wonder how I would now view St. Louis after living in Pittsburgh and visiting many times all the other east coast cities, and revisiting Chicago. I probably wouldn't be as blown away the second time.

[Quixote]

Toronto: I didn't realize how huge its Indian population was and that it also had a sizable black population.

Barcelona: Basically a Spanish version of Paris (although a bit less grand) along the Mediterranean. I simply wasn't expecting Barcelona to so greatly exceed my expectations to the degree that it did. It's a top-5 European city in my book.

Istanbul: How huge it was and how much I ended up liking it. San Francisco on steroids.

Vancouver: How good and how much better the Cantonese cuisine was compared to LA. Hands down the best outside of Hong Kong.

Hong Kong: How clean, modern, and efficient the MTR was. Pound for pound the best metro system in the world. Also, pretty beaches.

Oslo: Expected it to be a nice, yet boring city like Helsinki. That wasn't the case.

[mhays]

Brussels was dirty.

Pittsburgh had vibrant, cohesive urban neighborhoods.

Minneapolis and St. Paul had mile after mile of nice old houses on tree-lined streets.

Rome seemed small because the hills created the illusion (to me) that things stop there.

Philadelphia was vibrant, cohesive (Center City and south), interesting, and extremely walkable with narrow streets.

Tokyo was relentlessly orderly and respectful.

[xzmattzx]

Phoenix: The architectural history. Visitors have to be prepared for a different architectural history; this isn't a place full of Neoclassical gems like Washington DC, Art Deco like Manhattan, or Colonial like Boston. It's mainly Modernist architecture, and it's spread out in different neighborhoods.
Pittsburgh: Oakland. I knew that most neighborhoods in Pittsburgh looked like things I would find in Coal Country, with small industrial buildings, rowhouses in ugly browns, olive greens, etc. But Oakland had the cultural amenities that reminded me of the National Mall.
Pittsburgh: The hills. Pittsburgh has hills like San Francisco. But San Francisco doesn't get snow every winter. I cannot figure out how people drive up or down a steep slope like this after a dusting of snow.
Miami: The neighborhoods. There are a lot of neighborhoods with interesting architecture and culture. Coconut Grove, Little Havana, MiMo, and more.
Santa Fe: The layers of history. So many historic buildings around each corner in such a little city. Literally across an alleyway from the oldest church in the United States is the oldest house in the United States (although it is not quite the oldest house in the US).
New Mexico: The East Coast history (also see Santa Fe). Sorry, I'm adding a state here because it is so significant to me. New Mexico has the pre-Columbian structures like the pueblos. Then you have buildings from the 1700s and even 1600s in Albuquerque and Santa Fe. Then you have a couple Civil War battle sites. New Mexico has the same rich history as states like the original 13 colonies, like Pennsylvania or Maryland.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by xzmattzx

Pittsburgh: The hills. Pittsburgh has hills like San Francisco. But San Francisco doesn't get snow every winter. I cannot figure out how people drive up or down a steep slope like this after a dusting of snow.

I lived in hilly snowy Halifax, Nova Scotia for many years. Everyone has all season or winter tires on by November. They make all the difference when it comes to traction in snow and/or ice.

Steepness and the amount of ice makes a big difference too. If it's just snow (not icy) and the hill isn't too steep it's usually navigable. If that's not the case, people avoid them till city crews have a chance to plow and de-ice. People develop skill driving in winter and are usually better at it than people down south (they always drive too fast).

That said, I did have a few close calls. One time I slid for a good 200 feet but came to a stop before hitting something.

[xzmattzx]

I don't know how hilly is, but having been to Pittsburgh and San Francisco, Pittsburgh has all the steepness that San Francisco has. Here's the top of the hill that I linked to earlier. Here's the steepest street in Pittsburgh, also the steepest street in the United States. I'm not sure how you can even think you can be safe going downhill on either of these. But if Halifax is hilly like this, then I guess Canadians are the experts in driving in snow, so that's the place to get an understanding.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by xzmattzx

I don't know how hilly is, but having been to Pittsburgh and San Francisco, Pittsburgh has all the steepness that San Francisco has. Here's the top of the hill that I linked to earlier. Here's the steepest street in Pittsburgh, also the steepest street in the United States. I'm not sure how you can even think you can be safe going downhill on either of these. But if Halifax is hilly like this, then I guess Canadians are the experts in driving in snow, so that's the place to get an understanding.

Just nitpicking...but that's not really the steepest street in America. The steepest part of it has a grade of 37%, but SF has four streets that get equally as steep or steeper(scroll down for the updated list), ranging from 37% to 41% grade.

And yeah it must be hell dealing with those hills in Pittsburgh during the winter.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by xzmattzx

I don't know how hilly is, but having been to Pittsburgh and San Francisco, Pittsburgh has all the steepness that San Francisco has. Here's the top of the hill that I linked to earlier. Here's the steepest street in Pittsburgh, also the steepest street in the United States. I'm not sure how you can even think you can be safe going downhill on either of these. But if Halifax is hilly like this, then I guess Canadians are the experts in driving in snow, so that's the place to get an understanding.

Halifax does have hills like that but most Haligonians would avoid steep ones like that till the crews have gone through. Even with winter tires/chains, no ice just snow, you'd have to go really slow. I lived in a Halifax suburb with hills like that and even the City plows/salt trucks take things slowly.

Btw, this below would be considered a light dusting Down East. It's not really a snow storm unless you've got a good foot or two.

Prince Street, Halifax

Courtesy of scribble

Sackville Street, Halifax

Courtesy of CBC

[someone123]

It's true that almost all the land around Halifax is hilly. There are a lot of small hills, including downtown, and some streets have a grade above 20% (the worst ones are in the suburbs). Seattle reminds me a lot of Halifax as far as the layout and hilliness go. Pittsburgh seems pretty similar too, although I have never been there. My neighbours used to sometimes slide their van off of their driveway and landing sideways in trees partway down the cliff next to their house, and I remember times when bus service would be cancelled because they just couldn't make it up hills. Usually, when there is a snowstorm there, stuff just gets cancelled.

Halifax sometimes gets big snowstorms but its winters would not really be unfamiliar to somebody from Pittsburgh or Boston. They are pretty standard Northeastern type winters that are mostly around freezing with a mix of rain and snow. The southern Halifax suburbs get 110 cm of snow per year (40 inches), downtown gets around 150 cm (60 inches), and north of the there is more snow. Pittsburgh and Boston are about 100-110 cm (so also around 40 inches). Some Canadian cities are over 300 cm. If you want hilliness with lots of snow, Newfoundland is the place. Gander NL averages 450 cm of snow per year (nearly 15 feet).

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by StethJeff

Istanbul: just reminded me a lot of SF in a strange way.

I felt this too.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by tech12

Just nitpicking...but that's not really the steepest street in America. The steepest part of it has a grade of 37%, but SF has four streets that get equally as steep or steeper(scroll down for the updated list), ranging from 37% to 41% grade.

And yeah it must be hell dealing with those hills in Pittsburgh during the winter.

Well... yes it is. Canton St. in Pittsburgh is the most widely-accepted steepest. One could take portions (like that SF street study did) of Pittsburgh's streets and find steeper grades contained within their lengths as well.

The numbers you are posting are only for very short segments of SF's steepest streets.

From the articles you cite:

1. Bradford above Tompkins (41% grade)
2. Romolo between Vallejo and Fresno (37.5% grade)
3. Prentiss between Chapman and Powhattan (37% grade)
4. Nevada above Chapman (35% grade)
5. Baden above Mangels (34% grade)
6. Ripley between Peralta and Alabama (31.5% grade)
7. 24th between De Haro and Rhode Island (31.5% grade)
8. Filbert between Hyde and Leavenworth (31.5% grade)
9. 22nd between Vicksburg and Church (31.5% grade)
10. Broadway above Taylor (31% grade)



As you can see, these are ALL the steepest short SEGMENTS of SF streets. That's not the same thing as steepest street.

For instance, for SF's steepest street...

"With an astonishing 41% grade, Bradford Street, in the hilly Bernal Heights neighborhood, is the city’s steepest (at least of those surveyed). Admittedly, this stretch is quite short: the majority of Bradford Street climbs steadily at about a 24% grade before exploding into a 30-foot stretch of 41% paved road."



Only 30ft at 41% grade... obviously very steep. But it's the length of a short driveway at that grade in front of that bluish house.

Certainly not the steepest street. Maybe steepest street section, but studies like the ones you cite have never been done on Pittsburgh's city streets, nor in all of the hundreds of surrounding in the metro. In winter, you simply don't go down them.

[muppet]

^

old clapboard houses (tick)

hilly (tick)

historic trams/ streetcars (tick)

city divided by a bay (tick)

multiple suspension bridges (tick)

mediterranean climate (tick)

nearby beaches (tick)

beacon of secular liberalness in a religious, conservative countryside (tick)

gay mecca (tick)

hippies (tick)

outdoorsy culture (tick)

tradition of protest (tick)

hotpants everywhere (tick).




-Seriously these cities should be twinned.



www.poshseven.com, http://ftnnews.com


www.condenast.co.uk, www.rwongphoto.com




www.sanfrancisco.net



www.dolphinclub.org




https://photos.travelblog.org

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by ozone

Having lived in Bangkok and travelled to Shanghai on several occasions I can not agree with your assertion that the two are very similar. The two cities are far different than they are alike. I love Bangkok, but I'm sorry to say I do not much care for Shanghai.

Admittedly I was only in Bangkok for a few days so my experience with the city isn't nearly as deep as yours, but I'd like to know what you thought was so different between them.

[pip]

Originally Posted by xzmattzx

I don't know how hilly is, but having been to Pittsburgh and San Francisco, Pittsburgh has all the steepness that San Francisco has. Here's the top of the hill that I linked to earlier. Here's the steepest street in Pittsburgh, also the steepest street in the United States. I'm not sure how you can even think you can be safe going downhill on either of these. But if Halifax is hilly like this, then I guess Canadians are the experts in driving in snow, so that's the place to get an understanding.

I clicked that link for the steepest street in Pittsburgh. I noticed a few blocks away there is a new train line going in?

[The North One]

San Francisco's hills are ridiculous, how the hell do people bike to work in that city? Unless you take paths to avoid them.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

Well... yes it is. Canton St. in Pittsburgh is the most widely-accepted steepest. One could take portions (like that SF street study did) of Pittsburgh's streets and find steeper grades contained within their lengths as well.

The numbers you are posting are only for very short segments of SF's steepest streets.

From the articles you cite:

1. Bradford above Tompkins (41% grade)
2. Romolo between Vallejo and Fresno (37.5% grade)
3. Prentiss between Chapman and Powhattan (37% grade)
4. Nevada above Chapman (35% grade)
5. Baden above Mangels (34% grade)
6. Ripley between Peralta and Alabama (31.5% grade)
7. 24th between De Haro and Rhode Island (31.5% grade)
8. Filbert between Hyde and Leavenworth (31.5% grade)
9. 22nd between Vicksburg and Church (31.5% grade)
10. Broadway above Taylor (31% grade)



As you can see, these are ALL the steepest short SEGMENTS of SF streets. That's not the same thing as steepest street.

For instance, for SF's steepest street...

"With an astonishing 41% grade, Bradford Street, in the hilly Bernal Heights neighborhood, is the city’s steepest (at least of those surveyed). Admittedly, this stretch is quite short: the majority of Bradford Street climbs steadily at about a 24% grade before exploding into a 30-foot stretch of 41% paved road."



Only 30ft at 41% grade... obviously very steep. But it's the length of a short driveway at that grade in front of that bluish house.

Certainly not the steepest street. Maybe steepest street section, but studies like the ones you cite have never been done on Pittsburgh's city streets, nor in all of the hundreds of surrounding in the metro. In winter, you simply don't go down them.

Yeah, and the part of canton ave that's at 37% grade is also a short segment ( 21' at 37% vs 30' at 41% in SF) and not the entire thing. I think the only reason it's not commonly known that SF has steeper streets, is because no one really cares about measuring street grades, and the commonly known stats for SF are out of date. It wasn't until several years ago that anyone even knew (or at least shared publicly) that SF has streets steeper than Canton ave.

Maybe Pittsburgh does have some even steeper streets, but no one's shared those stats as far as i know.