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.
Finally, a 'to-scale' map comparison that shows what some of us already knew, and you apparently cannot see... the Bay Area is a very limited ring of density, with population dropping to nearly zero just a couple miles outside of 'the ring'. The other metros cover much more area with a gradual drop-off in density. Greater Boston and SF Bay Area look about equal, an assessment quite a few people agree with.
Every time I take a bike ride, I'm reminded of how wrong you are. Love this City of Philly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
To Scale Maps showing the principal clusters of 5,000+ppsm of the following cities:
the Bay Area is a very limited ring of density, with population dropping to nearly zero just a couple miles outside of 'the ring'.
Yes, the fact that we have water and hills that leaves us narrow strips of land and valleys, that formula creates conditions for higher density overall over a wide area. I dont know what I am missing?
The Bay Area's 5000+map above could have been much larger but I cut it cause of space constraints on the page, otherwise:
Last edited by 18Montclair; 08-24-2011 at 12:10 PM..
Just the same tired old point, that your criteria exaggerate that 'big city' qualities of the Bay Area. It's the old bartender trick... if you want to make a drink look larger, pour it into a tall & narrow glass.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
Yes, the fact that we have water and hills that leaves us narrow strips of land and valleys, that formula creates conditions for higher density overall over a wide area. I dont know what I am missing?
The Bay Area's 5000+map above could have been much larger but I cut it cause of space containts on the page, otherwise:
Just the same tired old point, that your criteria exaggerate that 'big city' qualities of the Bay Area. It's the old bartender trick... if you want to make a drink look larger, pour it into a tall & narrow glass.
LOL...your the one suddenly trying to simultaneously extol the virtues of low density suburbia while delegitimizing higher density suburbia, but Im the one trying to make a drink look larger.
I agree with some SF posters that the adjacent/surrounding cities must be taken in to account for in some and I would even say most cities it feels like an extension of the city, that being said one has to understand also that the Northeast cities have adjacent suburbs that have their own city centers that would LOOK and maybe feel more urban by means of urban fabric by the set up and architecture, however this northeast trait takes away from the usual seamless blend that you find in other cities down south or out west, the main difference is you usually know in the northeast when you have entered in to a different city where as in others they just all blend.
To add to my previous post I do find that northeast burbs for the reason I have already stated have more charm and character.
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.
